Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference
for Design Education Researchers
VOLUME I
Robin VandeZande
Erik Bohemia
Ingvild Digranes
CUMULUS Association / DRS SIG on Design Pedagogy /DESIGN-ED Coalition
Proceedings of
the 3rd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers
28–30 June 2015, Chicago, Il, USA
Volume 1
Editors
Robin Vande Zande
Erik Bohemia
Ingvild Digranes
Proceedings compiled by Laura Santamaria
Text review by Tiiu Poldma
Editorial arrangements by Erik Bohemia, Ingvild Digranes and Robin Vande Zande
©2015 Aalto University, DRS, Cumulus, DESIGN-ED and the Authors. All rights reserved
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers
ISBN 978-952-60-0069-5 (vol. 1–4)
Volume 1 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1200.7520
Volume 2 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5001.8409
Volume 3 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2904.6880
Volume 4 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2642.5440
Published by Aalto University
School of Arts, Design and Architecture
PO Box 31000, FI-00076 Aalto
Finland
Design Research Society
DRS Secretariat
email: admin@designresearchsociety.org
www.designresearchsociety.org
CUMULUS the International Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and Media
Cumulus Secretariat
Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture
PL 31000, 00076 Aalto, Finland
Secretary General Eija Salmi
Tel: +358 505 927060
email: eija.salmi@aalto.fi
www.cumulusassociation.org
DESIGN-ED Coalition
344 Crescent Avenue
Spotswood, NJ 08884
USA
www.design-ed.org
LEGAL NOTICE: The publisher is not responsible for the use which might be made of
the following information.
This conference proceedings version was produced on 26 June 2015
The DRS//CUMULUS// DESIGN-ED 2015 Chicago: the 3rd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers was hosted by The School of the Art Institute of
Chicago. The conference was organised by: DRS PedSIG, CUMULUS, DESIGN-ED, Oslo
and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Kent State University, SAIC and
Loughborough University.
Patrons of the Conference
Walter Massey, President of the School of the Art Institute
Michael Tovey, DRS PedSIG
Luisa Collina, Cumulus International Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and
Media
Conference Chair
Robin Vande Zande, Kent State University, USA
Conference co-Chairs
Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Ingvild Digranes, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
International Scientific Review Committee
Linda Keane, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, USA
Drea Howenstein, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, USA
Ingvild Digranes, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Alison Shreeve, Buckinghamshire New University, United Kingdom
Robin VandeZande, Kent State University, USA
Mike Tovey, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Liv Merete Nielsen, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Eddie Norman, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Janne Beate Reitan, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Ricardo Sosa, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Hilary Grierson, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Rande F Blank, University of the Arts, USA
Delane Ingalls Vanada, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Doris Wells-Papanek, Design Learning Network, USA
Yuan Lu, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
Nithikul Nimkulrat, Estonian Academy of Arts, Estonia
Linda Drew, Ravensbourne, United Kingdom
Kay Stables, Goldsmiths, University of London, United Kingdom
Jennifer Loy, Griffith University, Australia
Mark Evans, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Ming Cheung, University of Adelaide, Australia
Nancy Vanderboom-Lausch, College for Creative Studies, USA
Kevin Henry, Columbia College Chicago, USA
Teri Giobbia, West Virginia University, USA
David Spendlove, Manchester Institute of Education, United Kingdom
Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
International Review Board
Trygve Ask, Scandinavian Business Seating AS, Norway
Steen Ory Bendtzen, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Rande F Blank, University of the Arts, USA
Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Elivio Bonollo, University of Canberra, Australia
Kaisa Borg, University of Umeå, Sweden
Susan Braccia, AIM Academy, USA
Han Brezet, TU Delft, Netherlands
Hernan Casakin, Ariel University Center, Israel
Peter Childs, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
Stefano Chinosi, The Office of Ingenuity – Newton Public Schools, USA
Priscilla Chueng-Nainby, TU Delft, United Kingdom
Amy Cline, AIM Academy, USA
Alison Dale Crane, Blue Valley School District, USA
Alma Culen, University of Oslo, Norway
Nancy Alison de Freitas, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Christine De Lille, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Giovanni De Paoli, University of Montreal, Canada
Gaurang Desai, American University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
Ingvild Digranes, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Linda Drew, Ravensbourne, United Kingdom
Mark Evans, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Evren Akar, UTRLAB, Turkey
Nusa Fain, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Laila Belinda Fauske, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Biljana C. Fredriksen, Vestfold University College, Norway
Philippe Gauthier, University of Montreal, Canada
Aysar Ghassan, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Jacques Giard, Arizona State University, USA
Teri Giobbia, West Virginia University, USA
Carma R. Gorman, University of Texas at Austin, USA
Mark Allen Graham, Brigham Young University, USA
Colin M. Gray, Iowa State University, USA
Hilary Grierson, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Anthony Guido, The University of the Arts, USA
Tore Gulden, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Marte Sørebø Gulliksen, Telemark University College, Norway
Robert Harland, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Oriana Haselwanter, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Garreth Heidt, Perkiomen Valley School District, USA
Kevin Henry, Columbia College Chicago, USA
Monika Hestad, Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design, United Kingdom
Jan Willem Hoftijzer, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Drea Howenstein, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, USA
Berit Ingebrethsen, Telemark University College, Norway
Konstantinos Ioannidis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
Bill Ion, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Derek Jones, The Open University, United Kingdom
KwanMyung Kim, UNIST, Ulsan National Insitute of Sciences and Technology, South Korea
Michael K. Kim, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA
Ahmed Kovacevic, City University London, United Kingdom
Nicole Bieak Kreidler, La Roche College, USA
June Krinsky-Rudder, Revere High School, USA
Ksenija Kuzmina, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Teemu Leinonen, Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture, Finland
Gerry Leonidas, University of Reading, United Kingdom
Fern Lerner, independent researcher, USA
Andre Liem, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
Viveca Lindberg, University of Stockholm, Sweden
Peter Lloyd, University of Brighton, United Kingdom
Maria Cecilia Loschiavo dos Santos, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
Jennifer Loy, Griffith University, Australia
Yuan Lu, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
Ole Lund, Gjøvik University College, Norway
Eva Lutnæs, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Patricia Ann Maunder, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Graeme Stewart McConchie, Unitec Institute of Technology, New Zealand
Janet McDonnell, Central Saint Martins, United Kingdom
C.Thomas Mitchell, Indiana University, USA
Ravi Mokashi Punekar, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, India
Liv Merete Nielsen, Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway
Nithikul Nimkulrat, Estonian Academy of Arts, Estonia
Eddie Norman, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Jane Osmond, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Carlos Peralta, University of Brighton, United Kingdom
Tiiu R Poldma, University of Montreal, Canada
Mia Porko-Hudd, Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Janne Beate Reitan, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Mariana Rachel Roncoletta, Anhembi Morumbi University, Brazil
Aidan Rowe, University of Alberta, Canada
Bonnie Sadler Takach, University of Alberta, Canada
Norun Christine Sanderson, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Mike Santolupo, John Paul II Catholic Secondary School, Canada
Gaia Scagnetti, Pratt Institute, USA
Nicole Lotz, Open University, United Kingdom
Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarinen, Helsinki University, Finland
Hyunjae Shin, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Alison Shreeve, Buckinghamshire New University, United Kingdom
Beata Sirowy, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway
Astrid Skjerven, Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway
Liliana Soares, Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, Portugal
Ricardo Sosa, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
David Spendlove, University of Manchester, United Kingdom
Kay Stables, Goldsmiths, University of London, United Kingdom
John Stevens, Royal College of Art, United Kingdom
Pim Sudhikam, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
Kärt Summatavet, Aalto University, Finland-Estonia
Barbara Suplee, University of the Arts, USA
Yasuko Takayama, Shizuoka University of Art and Culture, Japan
Nanci Takeyama, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Juthamas Tangsantikul, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
Kevin Tavin, Aalto University, Finland
Michael Tovey, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Kurt Van Dexter, landscape architect/The Greene School, USA
Delane Ingalls Vanada, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Robin Vande Zande, Kent State University, USA
Nancy Vanderboom-Lausch, College for Creative Studies, USA
Johan Verbeke, KU Leuven, Belgium and Aarhus School of Architecture, Denmark
Andrew D. Watson, Fairfax County Public Schools, USA
Heidi Weber, Fachhochschule Vorarlberg - University of applied Science, Austria
Fabiane Wolff, UniRitter - Laureate International Universities, Brazil
Mithra Zahedi, University of Montreal, Canada
Nigel Zanker, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Table of Contents
Editorial
LearnxDesign2015=Design in Kindergarten Through Higher Education
Robin Vande Zande .............................................................................................................................. i
Introductions
A Perspective on the Learn X Design Conference from the DRS Special Interest Group in Design
Pedagogy
Michael Tovey ......................................................................................................................................v
Luisa Collina ........................................................................................................................................ ix
VOLUME 1
— CHAPTER 1. —
ACADEMIC AND VOCATIONAL CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
Prototyping Smart Devices: Teaching Interactive Electronics and Programming In Industrial Design
Silvan LINN .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Kelly GROSS....................................................................................................................................... 19
Designing the Discipline: the Role of the Curriculum in Shaping Students’ Conceptions of Graphic
Design
James CORAZZO ................................................................................................................................ 32
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Brooke CHORNYAK ........................................................................................................................... 45
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
Carolina ROJAS .................................................................................................................................. 57
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Alison SHREEVE and David GILLETT .................................................................................................. 80
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
Alke GRÖPPEL-WEGENER ................................................................................................................. 93
Whose Job Is It Anyway?
Fiona GRIEVE and Kim MEEK .......................................................................................................... 109
Research Meets Practice in Master’s Theses
Marja SELIGER................................................................................................................................. 131
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
Mark GRAHAM and Daniel BARNEY
142
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools in Industrial Design Education
in Turkey
Ilgim EROGLU and Cigdem KAYA .................................................................................................... 156
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Maarit MÄKELÄ and Teija LÖYTÖNEN............................................................................................. 168
— CHAPTER 2. —
DESIGN THINKING, MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN EDUCATION
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development For School Age Children
Aija FREIMANE ................................................................................................................................ 187
From Design Thinking to Art Thinking
Jessica JACOBS ................................................................................................................................ 200
Table of Contents
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Ying HU, Yinman GUO and Renke HE ...............................................................................................214
Educating By Design
Marcello MONTORE and Ana Lucia LUPINACCI ...............................................................................230
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum: A Framework For Shaping a Participatory, Human-Centered
Design Course
Pamela NAPIER and Terri WADA .....................................................................................................246
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Naz A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ .........................................................................................................................264
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-Making in Design Thinking
Delane INGALLS VANADA ................................................................................................................278
Hidden Value - Towards an Understanding of the Full Value and Impact of Engaging Students in
User-Led Research and Innovation Projects Between Universities and Companies
Mark BAILEY, Mersha AFTAB and Neil SMITH ..................................................................................290
What Problem Are We Solving? Encouraging Idea Generation and Effective Team Communication
Colin M. GRAY, Seda YILMAZ, Shanna R. DALY, Colleen M. SEIFERT and Richard GONZALEZ
308
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Katja THORING, Carmen LUIPPOLD , Roland M. MUELLER and Petra BADKE-SCHAUB ....................330
Architecture: Teaching the Future/Future of Teaching
Gemma BARTON .............................................................................................................................347
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Miguel NAVARRO-SANINT, Lina M. ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, Carolina ROJAS-CESPEDES and Annelie
FRANKE ............................................................................................................................................366
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Philip REITSPERGER, Monika HESTAD and John O’REILLY ................................................................382
Structuring the Irrational: Tactics in Methods
Philip D. PLOWRIGHT .......................................................................................................................397
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Caroline NORMAN
416
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
Monica WALCH TRACEY and Alisa HUTCHINSON ............................................................................430
Once Upon a Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
Andrew J. HUNSUCKER and Martin A. SIEGEL .................................................................................443
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Nina BJØRNSTAD and Monika HESTAD............................................................................................455
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
Mana TAHERI and Christoph MEINEL ..............................................................................................469
VOLUME 2
— CHAPTER 3. —
DESIGN EDUCATION TO IMPROVE LIFE AND THE WORLD
Design Thinking and the Internal: A Case Study
Meredith JAMES ..............................................................................................................................485
Empathy as Component of Brand Design
Nanci TAKEYAMA .............................................................................................................................500
From Engagement to Impact in Design Education
Cynthia LAWSON and Natacha POGGIO ..........................................................................................518
Teaching for Future Health Care Innovation
Kathrina DANKL ...............................................................................................................................535
Table of Contents
Bringing Holistic Design Education to Secondary Schools in Pakistan
Ayesha AHMED ............................................................................................................................... 548
Thoughtful Thinkers: Secondary Schoolers’ Learning about Design Thinking
Leila AFLATOONY and Ron WAKKARY ............................................................................................. 563
Getting in Touch With the Users
Laura ACKERMANN and Bernd STELZER ......................................................................................... 575
An Architecture of Experience
Joanna CROTCH .............................................................................................................................. 589
WonderBox: Storytelling and Emerging Technologies
Denielle EMANS and Basma HAMDY .............................................................................................. 604
Making Mindfulness Explicit in Design Education
Fernando ROJAS, Stuart ENGLISH, Robert YOUNG and Nick SPENCER ........................................... 623
No Sustainability Possible Without Emotion
Juan Albert ESTEVAN ...................................................................................................................... 638
Designing Financial Literacy: Research x Community
Aaron FRY, Carol OVERBY and Jennifer WILSON
655
Design as a New Futural Epistemology: Design Education Made Relevant for Climate Change and
Development
Håkan EDEHOLT .............................................................................................................................. 673
Universal Design in Architectural Education
Beth TAUKE, Megan BASNAK and Sue WEIDEMANN ...................................................................... 683
Pedagogical Encounters: Typography and Emotion
Ana Filomena CURRALO and Liliana SOARES .................................................................................. 698
A Pedagogical Prototype Focused on Designing Value
Peter S. MARTIN and Dana EL AHDAB ............................................................................................ 715
Empowering Designers Through Critical Theory
Kristin CALLAHAN............................................................................................................................ 735
Pictographic Storytelling for Social Engagement
Lisa FONTAINE ................................................................................................................................ 748
Carbon Footprinting for Design Education
Vicky LOFTHOUSE, Alan MANLEY and Mark SHAYLER..................................................................... 774
Restoring Hope Tote by Tote
Kate SCHAEFER ............................................................................................................................... 790
Future Scenario Building and Youths’ Civic Insights
Tore Andre RINGVOLD and Ingvild DIGRANES ................................................................................ 800
— CHAPTER 4. —
SYSTEMS THINKING AND ECOLOGICAL URBANISM
Integrating Fantasy Into the Creative Process
Raffaella PERRONE .......................................................................................................................... 819
Understanding the Design Project Draft Through Motion
Jose SILVA ....................................................................................................................................... 834
From Systems Thinking to Design Criteria: Synthesis Through Visualization
Engin KAPKIN and Dr. Sharon JOINES ............................................................................................. 847
Deconstruction as a Structured Ideation Tool for Designers
Daniel ECHEVERRI ........................................................................................................................... 870
Exploring Ecological Urbanism by Service Design – An Experimental Project of ‘Street Food’
Bo GAO ........................................................................................................................................... 882
Table of Contents
The Cityzens: A Serious Game for the Future
Stephan TRIMMEL ...........................................................................................................................897
Directions Towards Sustainability Through Higher Education
Theresa LOBO ..................................................................................................................................907
VOLUME 3
— CHAPTER 5. —
DESIGN INSPIRED BY NATURE (BIO-MIMICRY)
Using Nature to Inspire Design Values, Issues & Ethics
Jacquelyn MALCOLM and David SANCHEZ RUANO .........................................................................923
Integrating Art and Science in Placed-based Education
Deborah N. MILLS ............................................................................................................................940
Challenges in Teaching Architectural Morphogenesis
Adeline STALS, Catherine ELSEN, Sylvie JANCART and Frédéric DELVAUX ......................................954
Exploring Biomimicry in the Students’ Design Process
Miray BOĞA-AKYOL and Şebnem TİMUR-ÖĞÜT ..............................................................................970
— CHAPTER 6. —
DESIGN AS AN INTEGRATIVE TOOL FOR EDUCATION
Learning Through Design: Professional Development
Wendy Kay FRIEDMEYER .................................................................................................................991
Impacting Student Attitudes Towards Teamwork
Wendy HYNES ................................................................................................................................1002
Learning to Design Backwards
Michael R. GIBSON ........................................................................................................................1016
Design THIS Place: Built Environment Education
Linda KEANE and Mark KEANE.......................................................................................................1034
High-Performance Building Pedagogy
Julia DAY ........................................................................................................................................1057
Can a Smartphone Be a HomeLab?
Joël CHEVRIER, Laya MADANI and Ahmad BSIESY .........................................................................1072
Interpreting the Critique Through Visualization
Kathryn WEINSTEIN .......................................................................................................................1084
STEAM by Design
Linda KEANE and Mark KEANE.......................................................................................................1099
Creating Caribbean Stories Through Design
Lesley-Ann NOEL
1118
Human Centered Design at the Service of Educational Research
Patricia MANNS GANTZ and Alberto GONZÁLEZ RAMOS ..............................................................1132
— CHAPTER 7. —
MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN EDUCATION
Grounded Theory in Art and Design
Mike COMPTON and Sean BARRETT..............................................................................................1149
A Project-Based Approach to Learning: Comparative Study of Two Disciplines
Nuša FAIN, Beverly WAGNER and Nikola VUKAŠINOVIĆ................................................................1168
Table of Contents
The Affordances of Designing for the Learning Sciences
Lisa GROCOTT and Mai KOBORI .................................................................................................... 1180
Interact: A Multi-Disciplinary Design Course
David BOYCE, Joanna CROTCH and Rosa GODSMAN .................................................................... 1196
Social Creativity and Design Thinking in Transdisciplinary Design Education
Hyun-Kyung LEE and Soojin JUN ................................................................................................... 1211
Of Dreams and Representations: Storytelling and Design
Ozge MERZALI CELIKOGLU ............................................................................................................ 1227
An Initial Model for Generative Design Research: Bringing Together Generative Focus Group (GFG)
and Experience Reflection Modelling (ERM)
Yekta BAKIRLIOĞLU, Dilruba OĞUR, Çağla DOĞAN and Senem TURHAN ..................................... 1236
— CHAPTER 8. —
LOCAL AND GLOBAL CONNECTIONS TO DESIGN EDUCATION
Design Without Borders: A Multi-Everything Masters
John Simon STEVENS, Katrin MUELLER-RUSSO, Megumi FUJIKAWA, Peter R. N. CHILDS, Miles
PENNINGTON, Scott LUNDBERG, Steve DISKIN, Masa INAKAGE and Andrew BRAND ................. 1255
Dilemma and Countermeasures of Shenzhen Industrial Design Education
Fangliang WANG and Xiaobao YU ................................................................................................. 1267
Crossed Paths: Education, Creativity and Economics
Gisele Costa FERREIRA da SILVA ................................................................................................... 1276
Genius Loci and Design Concept
Nada EL-KHOURY .......................................................................................................................... 1287
Experiential Elements of High-To-Low-Context Cultures
Kelly M. MURDOCH-KITT and Denielle EMANS............................................................................. 1301
Research Training in a DESign+MAnagement Network
Andrew WHITCOMB and Andreas BENKER ................................................................................... 1319
Humanitarian Design For Refugee Camps: Solutions in Crisis Situations
Tiiu R POLDMA and Claude YACOUB ............................................................................................. 1333
VOLUME 4
— CHAPTER 9. —
DESIGN THINKING AND ENGINEERING
Fostering Creativity
Meaghan DEE................................................................................................................................ 1349
Today’s Students, Tomorrow’s Practitioners
Chris HEAPE .................................................................................................................................. 1362
Technological and Project Competencies for Design Engineers Driven by Nearable and Wearable
Systems
Marta GONZÁLEZ, Jessica FERNÁNDEZ and Javier PEÑA............................................................... 1381
Co-Designing Avatars for Children with Cancer
Ruth MATEUS-BERR, Barbara BRUNMAIR, Helmut HLAVACS, Fares KAYALI, Jens KUCZWARA, Anita
LAWITSCHKA, Susanne LEHNER, Daniel MARTINEK, Michael NEBEL, Konrad PETERS, Andrea
REITHOFER, Rebecca WÖLFLE, Marisa SILBERNAGL, Manuel SPRUNG ......................................... 1397
Table of Contents
— CHAPTER 10. —
VISUAL LITERACIES AND DESIGN THINKING
Studio Teaching in the Low-Precedent Context of Instructional Design
Elizabeth BOLING, Colin M. GRAY and Kennon M. SMITH .............................................................1417
Exploration of Rhetorical Appeals, Operations and Figures in UI/UX Design
Omar SOSA-TZEC, Martin A. SIEGEL and Paul BROWN ..................................................................1432
Learning to Draw Through Digital Modelling
Stephen TEMPLE ............................................................................................................................1454
Developing Visual Literacy in Design Students
Ricardo LOPEZ-LEON......................................................................................................................1465
— CHAPTER 11. —
VISUALIZATION IN DESIGN EDUCATION
Visualization as Assessment in Design Studio Courses
Eduardo HAMUY, Bruno PERELLI and Paola DE LA SOTTA .............................................................1481
Paying Attention to the Design Process: Critically Examining Personal Design Practice
Janet McDONNELL and Cynthia ATMAN........................................................................................1498
Processing Through Drawing: a Case Study of Ideation
Julia K. DAY and Bryan D. ORTHEL .................................................................................................1518
Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Curriculum Representation in Design Education Today
Iain AITCHISON, Emma DEWBERRY and Nicole LOTZ.....................................................................1536
Teaching Business Concepts Using Visual Narrative
Annabel SMITH, Robert A. YOUNG and Fiona RAESIDE-ELLIOT .....................................................1552
Time-Based Visual Narratives for Design Education
Dalsu ÖZGEN KOÇYILDIRIM, Aykut COŞKUN and Yekta BAKIRLIOĞLU ...........................................1569
Education and Design: Integrator Project in Editorial Design
Jan Raphael Reuter BRAUN, Davi Frederico do Amaral DENARDI and Elton Luiz GONÇALVES ......1585
— CHAPTER 12. —
PHILOSOPHY OF DESIGN EDUCATION
Reflection-in-Action and Motivated Reasoning
Derek JONES ..................................................................................................................................1599
[Un]Learning x Design from the Ground, Up
Zachary KAISER and Kiersten NASH ...............................................................................................1616
Social Comparison Theory and the Design Classroom
Barbara E. MARTINSON and Sauman CHU ....................................................................................1628
Social Engagement in Online Design Pedagogies
Nicole LOTZ, Georgy HOLDEN and Derek JONES ...........................................................................1645
Intuition as a Valid Form of Design Decision Making
Ariel GUERSENZVAIG .....................................................................................................................1669
Dialogue and PhD Design Supervision
Andrew MORRISON, Laurene VAUGHAN, Henry MAINSAH and Cheryl E. BALL ............................1701
Author Index – 1715
This page is intentionally left blank.
Editorial
LearnxDesign2015=Design in Kindergarten Through
Higher Education
Welcome to the conference proceedings ‘LearnXDesign2015’ a comprehensive
engagement of topics across themed design pedagogy and research. The papers delivered
at the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, co-organized by
DRS, CUMULUS, and DESIGN-ED, are the focus of these volumes.
The richness and variety of themes and subjects at the conference and the sheer
number made it impossible for the delegates in attendance to take in the full range of
presentations. The excellence of the presentations deserves to be shared, especially for
those who have missed the opportunity to participate in all sessions. These volumes offer
a chance for everyone to read the papers that capture the varied nature of the forums and
presentations.
The conference was graciously hosted by the School of the Art Institute in Chicago.
Highlighted at the heart of the conference were varied presentations and workshops. To
prepare for the conference, we asked design researchers to submit their work for
consideration. Scholars proposed 289 paper abstract, 31 workshop and 2 symposia
submissions. The International Scientific Review Committee invited 243 paper abstract
submissions to proceed into the next stage to submit as full papers. After double blind full
paper review by the International Review Board, 106 full papers were accepted to be
included in the conference proceedings with an additional 23 workshops and 1 symposia
delivered at the conference.
The high quality of papers are due to the International Scientific Review Board
members whose expertise and time was essential to the success of the conference paper
review process. The board was co-chaired by Dr. Erik Bohemia of the Institute for Design
Innovation, Loughborough University London, and Dr. Ingvild Digranes of the Oslo and
Akershus University College of Applied Sciences. The significance of the papers from this
conference foreshadow the fate of the field and show how design education has the
potential to be an instrumental part of the larger marketplace of ideas.
Subject threads organized the schedule of presentations. The delegates were able to
follow a single thread, attending sequential sessions or could mix sessions to suit. The
papers covered topics for elementary, secondary, and higher education. The subject
threads addressed the local and global multidimensional relations and interconnections of
design education and design thinking with such diverse topics as nature, society,
engineering, economics, media, and ecological urbanism. Academic and vocational
curriculum development was presented in many sessions in reference to design as an
integrative tool through a multidisciplinary philosophy to education. The most discussed
aspect during the three days was that design should be used to improve life and the world.
i
ROBIN VANDE ZANDE
As was emphasized at the 2nd conference in Oslo in 2013, this conference continued
the focus of the teaching of design to elementary through higher education as an essential
contributor in support for a better tomorrow. Every day we need to apply knowledge from
a variety of sources to resolve problems, manage relationships, and establish a quality
life. The interdisciplinary model of making connections within fields of study creates
relevance and context, and assists students in understanding relationships among
concepts. The goal of this conference was to contribute, on both theoretical and practical
levels, to the analysis of the potential of multidimensional relationships and interactions of
Education and Design to enlighten a citizenry that will strive to constructively problem
solve to make a better life and world.
A prime motivation in our opening keynote session was to inspire a dialogue about
design and the world. With representatives from 34 countries participating, a major theme
of the conference debate was that the global community must change in a very
fundamental way if it is to become stable. Why are these issues of concern for design
educators worldwide? If we are to have a better world, the general populace has to build
it, and if we are to be successful, everyone must take responsibility. Design thinking
through the design process of problem solving is an approach to rethinking certain
assumptions by looking at our everyday world with a new perspective, challenging what is
possible, and reconsidering our relationship to things familiar. Design education is
addressing the welfare of people and the environment, reflecting a renewed appreciation
of and respect for nature. Sustainability is taught to show that a less consumptive lifestyle,
respect for the environment and the interdependence of life, creating safe objects for
long-term use, and concentrating on communities and economic systems will help improve
our world. There is attention being given to designing for improving the physical and
emotional quality of life for everyone, referred to as universal design. Socially responsible
design reflects the growing awareness of our finite resources and factors that are
damaging to the environment as well as the realization that designed objects should have
flexibility in order to be accessible to all. Design education brings all of this to the
consciousness of students in order to show them ways to be empowered to do something
constructive to help.
I want to thank our scientific review members for their diligent work in reviewing a
large number of paper submissions. Many of our reviewers read multiple papers and wrote
comments to help guide the authors in revisions for improvement. This was time intensive
and could never have been accomplished without a great deal of help. The reviewers’
names are listed before the Table of Contents.
Post- conference a few of these papers will be published in special issues of the
following academic journals: Design and Technology Education, TRACEY, FORMakademisk,
and Curriculum and Instruction. The role of journals as an arena for design education
research is essential for the advancement of knowledge production within the field.
A heartfelt thanks to Joe Schwartz, trustee of DESIGN-ED, for putting so many of the
conference pieces in place. Thanks are also due to leaders of the School of the Art
Institute: Professor of Architecture and Environmental Design, Linda Keane; Dean of
Continuing Studies, Rob Bondgen; assistants Brandon Labash and Zachary Thomas Sayers;,
and Professor of Art, Design, and Education, Drea Howenstein, for their tremendous
support in hosting this conference. Our gratitude also to SAIC students for their valuable
contributions.
ii
Editorial
We are also grateful to our supporters and sponsors: Autodesk, Stratasys, Morgan
Manufacturing, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, The Chicago Cruise Line, and The
Public Society branding firm, as well as other supporting partners. The trustees of DESIGNED are pleased to have partnered with DRS and CUMULUS to have collaboratively provided
this platform for a community of scholars and practitioners to join together in advancing
design education. We look forward to a future of working together to create new
conferences bi-annually.
Although we might be successful in providing the ‘flavor’ of the 2015 Conference in
these volumes, we know that much evades us. We cannot, for instance, capture those
enthusiastic conversations that followed presentations and spilled into the hallways and
receptions. We are unable to produce the ‘community’ spirit where a group of individuals
explored new ideas and cultivated collaboration during and after the event. We cannot
invoke those unpredictable moments of sharing stories and asking questions; the chance
to challenge and be challenged, and where learning together fueled motivation.
However, the foundation of the conference came from the papers that exist in the
pages of these conference proceedings. The papers provide a major avenue to
communicate research results and ideas to one another. The real success lies in the
opportunity afforded design educators and researchers from all over the world, whether in
attendance at the conference or not, to share topics of mutual interest, to learn from each
other, and to collaborate in order to better prepare our students to contribute in a positive
manner to this rapidly changing world.
Robin Vande Zande
Associate Professor of Art Education, Kent State University
Chair of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers
iii
This page is intentionally left blank.
Introduction
Introductions
A Perspective on the Learn X Design Conference from
the DRS Special Interest Group in Design Pedagogy
Michael Tovey
Leader DRS SIG in Design Pedagogy
The Design Research Society is a multi-disciplinary learned society for the design
research community worldwide. The DRS was founded in 1966 and facilitates an
international design research network in around 40 countries. It has three main aims. It
focuses on recognising design as a creative act, common to many disciplines. It has the
intention of understanding research and its relationship with education and practice. Then
there is the overall aim of advancing the theory and practice of design. The membership of
DRS is international.
The Society’s Special Interest Group in Design Pedagogy is one of nine in the society. It
aims to bring together design researchers, teachers and practitioners, and others
responsible for the delivery of design education, and to clarify and develop the role of
design research in providing the theoretical underpinning for design education. These aims
are not directed simply at one type of design education, but are intended to include all
ages. However as the current membership of DRS is predominantly from universities
inevitably there is some emphasis on design education at that level.
The first DRS/CUMULUS Symposium was held in Paris in 2011. Its overarching aim was
to explore how innovation in education is informed by and is informing design research.
The symposium focused on design education, innovation in general education through
design, and on innovation in business and engineering education through design
integration. It was successful and it marked the point at which the Design Pedagogy Special
Interest Group became could be said to be established as an effective force in design
research.
The second DRS/CUMULUS conference was held in Oslo in May 2013. The theme of the
conference was ‘Design Learning for Tomorrow – Design Education from Kindergarten to
PhD’ Its theme of design was large and ambitious. The conference was intended to be an
international springboard for sharing ideas and concepts about contemporary design
education research. It was open to different facets of contemporary approaches to such
research in any aspect and discipline of design education. With several hundred
participants it was a great success and has led to several journal publications.
This is the third DRS/CUMULUS conference. Entitled Learn x Design, and held in
Chicago in 2015, it has an ambitious range of topics from theoretical research to practical
application. The assumption is that at a career level, the intention in the study of design is
v
MICHAEL TOVEY
to create a well-crafted, aesthetic fit of form to function, materials, and tools. We can
interpret each designed product in terms of a narrative about the culture from which it
evolved, about the person who produced it, and the values and practices of both. Design
academics who have engaged in scholarship and research to develop theories and
principles about learning have the opportunity to present their work at the event. For
many the classroom can be a laboratory in which they test and validate new approaches
and thus extend policy and practice. The conference is international and it aspires to be a
springboard for sharing ideas and concepts about contemporary design education research
and the teaching of design. The range and quality of the papers provides evidence of the
vitality of research and scholarship in design pedagogy.
Other research societies have similar strands of research in design education. The
Design Society has an annual international conference in Engineering and Product Design
Education, and International Association of Societies of Design Research includes a strand
dedicated to design pedagogy research.
It is quite appropriate that design academics should engage in investigations which are
intended to extend our understanding and capability of the discipline. Design academics
do almost all of the design research which leads to academic publications. Design
practitioners get on with designing, and leave design research to the academic community.
One of the key questions addressed in the book Design Pedagogy1 is whether or not
there are links between design research and design teaching. The clear conclusion is that
there are such links, and maybe they could be closer. The strand running through the
chapters is that design research does support design teaching, and they show a number of
ways in which this is the case. This is a good reason for undertaking design research. If
there is a close link with design teaching, particularly if design research supports effective
design teaching, then that will gives design academics good reasons for doing such
research.
Although design research is wide ranging in the approaches employed, and design is a
holistic discipline which can overlap many areas, its research is in some ways limited. In a
science such as physics the research is fundamental and if its research stops then
effectively the discipline comes to a halt. Without physics research there is no physics. We
cannot claim that design is like that. For if academic design research were to stop then
design would continue, more or less regardless. Designers would continue designing
things, and probably the world would notice very little difference. It could be argued that
design research is not central to design practice.
Although in much design practice there is a stage which is labelled as ‘research’ it
usually consists of the process of information gathering to provide the starting point for
designing, to inform the evaluative framework, and the context for the design. And these
are crucial parts of the process and essential to its success. But this is not what we mean
by design research in an academic context. In a university design research is an activity
which is directed to exploring and understanding the nature of design, its processes and
methods. It has more rigorous academic ambitions than the data gathering part of the
design process and it is expected to conform to conventional standards of academic
scholarship.
1
Tovey, M (2015), ‘Design Pedagogy – Developments In Art and Design Education’, Gower, Farnham,
England, and Burlington, USA.
vi
Introduction
Universities and colleges which provide design courses have a long tradition of
recruiting designers from design practice. However the tendency now is to regard the
possession of conventional academic qualifications as a necessary pre-requisite for holding
a full time academic position. Good practical experience as a designer is desirable but a
PhD is often essential. In the context of the design discipline the clear implication is that to
create a body of work for a PhD in design then you must undertake design research.
It is notable that many of the key insights of design research have in fact come from
academic studies involving students. This was particularly true in the early days of such
research. An example is the identification of the solution led approach as a key ingredient
in the process2. However the problem in studies involving students is that they are only
novice designers, and so any conclusions are not as powerful as those based on
professional designers.
The area of design research where this conclusion does not apply is research into
design education. Self-evidently research based on design students has relevance to the
process of teaching design. To this extent design pedagogic research can be seen as
possessing particular authority. It functions crucially to enable us to understand design
students better, and thus to enable design education to be improved. Where the research
is into pedagogy which has a design practice focus then it also allows us to understand
more deeply what is needed in preparation for the professional practice of design.
Design education research has taken a number of directions, focusing on the designer,
the design context and the design interface, each of which provides a useful agenda for
developing such research1. Many see the end goal as that of achieving design programmes
which are directed towards equipping graduates for entry to the community of
professional practice. This in itself justifies the engagement of practitioners in the process.
Various teaching strategies can accommodate these approaches. The studio, tutorial,
library and crit. are the traditional components, but using them effectively depends on the
approach being informed by a deep understanding of the designerly way of knowing. The
design education research reported on in this recent compilation of activity of the Design
Pedagogy Special Interest Group of DRS shows some of the ways in which this can be
achieved. The papers of the Learn X Design conference show much more extensively what
is possible
2
Lawson, B (1980) ‘How Designers Think’, Architectural Press, London, England.
vii
This page is intentionally left blank.
Luisa Collina
President, Cumulus Internationational Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and
Media
Full Professor, Politecnico di Milano
The international association Cumulus was set up 25 years ago to promote knowledge
exchange and sharing among universities and colleges of design, art and the media. This is
both an aim to achieve by involving increasing numbers of students and teaching staff, and
means of raising overall standards of professional training, to the benefit of all. Over the
years, as it has grown and became more recognizable as an international interlocutor,
Cumulus has also assumed a role of orientation with regard to certain issues of general
interest. From the Kyoto Design Declaration (2008) onwards all members of the Cumulus
network have committed to promoting lifestyles, values, and educational models centring
on environmental sustainability and human-centred development. In particular, the
association members have pledged ‘to commit themselves to the ideals of sustainable
development’ and ‘to seek collaboration with educational and cultural institutions,
companies, governments and government agencies, design and other professional
associations and NGOs to promote the ideals of and share their knowledge about
sustainable development.’
Exchange, sharing and the promotion of sustainable development by spreading the
culture of design underpin the collaboration between Cumulus and the Design Research
Society that has given rise to the International Conferences for Design Education
Researchers, of which the conference this year is the third. These biennial encounters
carry on the idea of design as a cross-disciplinary activity that cuts across various
professional fields and right through the formative years from infancy to adulthood. From
an educational point of view, design does not address only future professional designers,
but can also accompany numerous courses of study at all levels.
Cumulus, as an association focused on education, and the Design Research Society, as a
research organisation, jointly promote the idea that design is a way of thinking, of
developing creativity, of helping to tackle and solve problems, and that its teaching
contributes to creating more aware and responsible citizens, producers and consumers.
However, research, experimentation, pilot cases, assessment and validation activities,
moments of reflection and sharing are required to achieve these aims. In such a
framework, the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers DESIGN-ED
‘LearnXDesign’ constitutes an extraordinary opportunity for growth in this direction. For
this, I would like to thank all those who, on behalf of the Design Research Society, have
made this event possible with their constant, daily commitment and great professionalism.
I am certain the results will be of exceptional interest.
ix
This page is intentionally left blank.
Volume 1.
— Chapter 1. —
Academic and Vocational
Curriculum Development
This page is intentionally left blank.
Prototyping Smart Devices: Teaching Interactive
Electronics and Programming In Industrial Design
Silvan LINN
San Francisco State University
silvan@sfsu.edu
Abstract: Many products today derive much of their user interaction from a
combination of microelectronics, software and network connectivity. Ongoing
industry trends suggest that ‘smart’ products will become even more widespread
across many different specialties in industrial design in the future. A designer
with experience in these fields can enhance their design process by developing
accurate, functional design prototypes that support better user testing.
However, design students may have little to no prior background in electronics,
making the introduction of such topics a challenge. Topics in electronics and
programming can be successfully introduced to design students by framing the
content around a familiar design process methodology. Inspiration can be found
in the tools and techniques adopted by the ‘Maker’ movement, which encourage
rapid development of functional prototypes through synthesis of knowledge and
repeated iteration – highly similar to the design process of conceptualization,
user testing and refinement. The paper discusses the aforementioned trends;
proposes a theoretical background and structure of a course in Smart Product
Design for industrial design students; presents two case studies of running the
class at San Francisco State University as a 5-week intensive program; and
constructs a framework for teaching similar courses at other higher education
institutions.
Keywords: Smart products; design process; industrial design education; maker
movement
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
SILVAN LINN
Introduction
The nature of industrial design is changing. Interactive electronic and software
elements are becoming increasingly prevalent across all categories of products, in many
cases forming the core of the user-product interaction. Industrial designers who
understand how to work with these technologies can use them to enhance their design
process. We created a course titled ‘Prototyping Smart Devices’ targeted at the specific
needs of industrial design students to help them learn to develop functional electronic
prototypes of their designs. The course was test-run twice in the summer session with a
total registration of 16 students. These students were surveyed about their experiences,
confirming that the course is generally successful and indicating new directions for further
improvement. Based on the results of our case studies, we propose a general framework
for teaching similar content in other university-level industrial design programs.
Importance of Functional Prototypes
As experts in the human-machine interface, industrial designers have always worked
with the juncture between technology and the human being. The design profession is one
major method through which the scientist’s research and the engineer’s technology are
made accessible, comfortable, and usable to the everyday person.
Advances in electronics, particularly the miniaturization and mass production of various
types of environmental sensors and improvements in battery technology, have created a
new category of products under the umbrella term of the ‘Internet of Things’. This concept
proposes an ongoing shift in the user experience of the Internet ‘from a network of
interconnected computers to a network of interconnected objects’ (Koreshoff, Leong, &
Robertson, 2013, p. 363). In other words, products that have traditionally had no or only
very simple electronic features (e.g.: dishwashers, light bulbs3) will begin to incorporate
new functionalities such as internet connectivity, environmental sensors, data processing,
and user feedback channels. It thus becomes important that practicing industrial designers
have an ability to develop these interactive electronic devices, or smart products, as fluidly
and seamlessly as any other product of their design process.
In order to be successful in this area, designers need to have an understanding of the
underlying concepts. Aprile and van der Helm (2011, p. 1) describe interactive products as
‘products that contain computer technology as a coupling layer between the controls (user
interface) and the mechanism triggering some desired function.’ In other words, the smart
product requires a set of electronic input and output systems, and uses programmed
computer logic to tie the two together.
A working knowledge of the methods used to develop electronic circuits and computer
programs would have several immediate benefits to designers. For instance, experience
constructing battery-powered devices would give insight into the design trade-offs
between battery life, physical size, and product performance. Designers with a deeper
technical understanding of a product under development may also be able to
communicate better with engineering teams, and an awareness of the state of the art in
3
Many current concepts are related to the ‘smart home’ and focus on internet control and
automation of home appliances. See for instance Metz (2012).
4
Prototyping Smart Devices
interactive electronics could improve innovation. More importantly, though, a designer
with the appropriate skills could construct a fully functional prototype of a smart product
in service of their design process. These prototypes, used directly by target users through
focus groups or other user testing methods, could help validate a design concept with
higher fidelity than ‘Wizard of Oz’ testing4 or paper interface prototyping methods.
Functional interactive prototypes could also allow data to be automatically gathered
during test cycles, then stored for later analysis to improve subsequent iterations 5. In the
past, building these prototypes involved a background in engineering, a great deal of
experience, and significant cost. Recently, though, developments in hobbyist products like
Arduino6 – a system of free software and inexpensive electronic hardware that allows
users to easily build and program interactive electronic projects – have made it possible for
people with little technical experience to create working electronic devices on their own
after a few dozen hours of learning and at a cost of under $100 USD.
Having established that industrial design students can benefit from learning these skills,
several questions arise. How does one teach a complex technical topic to students whose
may not have prior knowledge of this field? What aspects of the vast fields of
programming and electronics are the most relevant to industrial design? How can we
ensure that students quickly develop a useful skill-set that can directly enhance their
design process?
Theoretical Background
Design process
Industrial design requires a general understanding of a wide range of different fields. A
practicing designer may work on a toy design one day, a medical product the next, and
kitchen appliances the day after. Donald Norman discusses the resulting importance of
designers seeing themselves as generalists (Norman, 2011), holding a broad understanding
of a variety of fields related to not only their practice, but the specific product under
development. He suggests that one of the designer’s key strengths is their ability to
synthesize these disparate bodies of knowledge on a high level, creating unconventional
and creative solutions – but also admits that this broadness may result in designers having
a relatively poor understanding of the technical details:
The designer utilizes great representational skills along with a human-centered point of
view. No other discipline trains its practitioners with this particular combination of
skills. This unique point of view coupled with the specialized craft training in thinking
and drawing is what leads to the power of great design … still, designers are mostly
unschooled in the content areas in which they work. (Norman, 2011)
4 Wizard
of Oz testing: in which the functionality of a product in user testing is simulated by a ‘man
behind the curtain’ watching the user’s behaviour and triggering appropriate actions covertly or
overtly.
5 Naturally the proposed product’s functionality would be tested with an engineering-grade
prototype before production. The key benefit to giving designers the tools to prototype realistically is
that it can take place at a much earlier phase and far more frequently in the process.
6 Arduino is explained further in the Course Structure section that follows. See also www.arduino.cc
5
SILVAN LINN
While acknowledging the difficulty of the task, Norman suggests that designers would
benefit from a deeper understanding of the technical details 7 of the products they are
developing, if this can be achieved without compromising the freedom and innovation of
the design process – using technology in service of design, rather than the other way
around. This succinctly expresses a major part of our rationale for developing the course.
Arguably the most valuable single skill taught in industrial design programs is the
design process itself. The specific structure of the process varies according to the situation,
but generally always includes phases of problem-definition, conceptual development,
testing, and repeated iteration for refinement. Within this structure there is great freedom
for creative development. Hill (1998), discussing the value of teaching complex technical
concepts through an experiential design process8, notes the necessity of exploration: ‘The
confidence to explore, discover and take risks becomes critical when we understand that in
creation and invention, there are always states of order and disorder’ (p. 216), and ‘…these
processes are not linear, systematic or predictable with one right answer’ (p. 205). So,
regardless of the specific content of the proposed course, it is likely to benefit from being
structured according to the design process – both because design students already
understand it as a frame of reference, and because the very nature of the process is
valuable in technical education.
Maker movements
While the design process is formalized by professional designers, its key methodologies
are seen in numerous other creative endeavours. One particularly notable direction that
combines open-ended problem solving, experiential learning, and an emphasis on
knowledge synthesis is the ‘Maker’ movement: a community centred around a modern reinterpretation of do-it-yourself practice, with heavier emphasis on the integration of high
technology9 into the experience. It is likely that the techniques used by Makers would
could be used to help integrate high technology into a design curriculum.
The general Maker ethos encourages breadth of experience and exploration of many
different areas for inspiration – ‘people take a little bit from here and a little bit from
there, and the resulting mash up leads to some pretty exciting creations’ (Dougherty, 2012,
p. 12). Upon running into trouble, people are encouraged to take advantage of the
enormous online community of Makers for support – being a generalist and relying on the
expertise of specialists, as Norman might put it. The movement is highly informal and
decentralized, and Makers are encouraged to not worry about the end goals of the
7 As
a specialist in the user experience and former executive at Apple, Inc., Norman frequently
suggests topics in electronic, mechanical and computer engineering, but the general lesson applies to
many specific technical fields.
8 The value of learning through experimentation is well-established. Dewey wrote in 1938 of how
students build their understanding of a subject through comparison with their prior experiences
(Dewey, 2007). The design process is a specific applied example, where the designer creates
improvements to a product based on their evaluation of prior versions.
9 This can be direct integration, e.g. a sewing club starting to use computer-controlled embroidery
machines, or it can be indirect, e.g. maintenance and expansion of a sub-community through social
networking websites.
6
Prototyping Smart Devices
process, but simply make something. Dale Dougherty, founding editor of Make magazine,
describes one of his inspirations – early garage-bound Silicon Valley hackers:
…those makers in the early days of the computer industry were essentially playing with
technology. They didn’t know what they wanted computers to do and they didn’t have
particular goals in mind. They learned by making things and taking them apart and
putting them back together again, and by trying many different things…(Dougherty,
2012, p. 12)
A related development worth studying is the growth of ‘Makerspaces 10‘ – shared
community workshops filled with prototyping equipment and designed to support the
types of projects a Maker might undertake. While these have existed since at least the
mid-1990s both independently11 and in academic settings12, increased public awareness
can be attributed significantly to the prominence of the Maker movement. A Makerspace
can be seen as the movement’s counterpart to a formal electronics lab or machine shop;
by embracing the creative disorder of a studio environment, and attempting to bring many
individuals with disparate backgrounds together in the same place, an environment that
fosters exploration and inquisition is created.
Existing Curricula
The teaching of topics in electronics and computer programming to designers has been
examined from a variety of perspectives. Of course keenly interested design students may
choose to study these fields on their own, through elective courses, a degree minor, or
simply by self-teaching. Introductory courses within a computer science or electrical
engineering department, however, usually aim primarily to provide technically-minded
students with a strong theoretical foundation for further study, and so may not result in
immediately practical knowledge that the design student can apply in their process.
As such, a number of other strategies have been proposed and executed. Aprile and
van der Helm describe a course titled Interactive Technology Design, a part of the graduate
Interaction Design program at TU Delft (Aprile & van der Helm, 2011). This course takes
place over twenty weeks and emphasizes multiple phases of prototyping using various
tools like Arduino. It is targeted at graduate students of interaction design, not
undergraduate industrial designers, but provides a useful structure for the required
gradual build-up of technical knowledge.
Some courses targeted at designers emphasize one specific element of smart-product
design. Hu and Alers (2010) discuss AdMoVeo, a robotics platform intended to teach
industrial design students about computer programming. Their course teaches Processing
– a graphics-oriented programming language developed for designers and artists (Reas &
Fry, 2014) – but the authors recognized that the students would benefit from ‘[bringing]
their creations alive in the physical world’ (Hu & Alers, 2010, p. 412). To this end, the
authors developed a wheeled robot and taught students to write code controlling its
behaviour. While this does give students an introduction to the electronic complexity of a
smart product, it limits their ability to develop new products of their own.
10 See
also ‘hackerspace’ – historically a more common term.
E.g. Berlin’s c-base, http://www.c-base.de/
12 E.g. the Georgia Tech Invention Studio, http://inventionstudio.gatech.edu/
11
7
SILVAN LINN
Finally, it has also been demonstrated that many of the new computer programming or
electronic development tools designed primarily for non-technical users are suitable for
use in more advanced situations. For instance, Jamieson (2010) describes the successful
use of the Arduino platform in a course in embedded system design within in an
electrical/computer engineering department. This suggests that design students learning
with similar tools are unlikely to find their knowledge constrained should they choose to
continue their study beyond the course.
Challenges
Teaching industrial design students about smart product development is not without
its challenges. Arguably the greatest hurdles to overcome are in the theoretical
underpinnings of programming and electronics. Computer science and electrical
engineering courses usually rely on the students having a strong grounding in universitylevel mathematics and physics; design students may not have this background, and setting
such courses as prerequisites is not usually reasonable. This limits the depth to which some
topics may be covered, and has particularly strong implications for the student’s ability to
understand unusual errors (debugging).
Some experience with math and physics is essential. Fortunately, many design
programs encourage or require students to have experience with at least high-school-level
algebra and basic electrical physics. With proper selection of the software and hardware
tools used in the course, this is likely sufficient to gain a useful high-level understanding of
the principles at work.
A related challenge in the course design is attaining a balance between ease of access
and overall flexibility. Spending more time on fundamental concepts might allow the
student to develop more elegant solutions in the end, but focusing too much on low-level
material without immediate hands-on reinforcement risks compromising the freedom to
experiment and quickly iterate that is so critical to the design process and the Maker
ethos. So a balance must be struck at all levels and with all topics, never forgetting that the
ultimate goal is for the student to have a functional skillset at the end of the course.
Finally, a major potential problem could be simply giving the students enough time.
Practicing concepts through repeated experimentation works well, but the process is slow.
A hands-on course of this type is likely to be more effective if spread out over a longer
period of time.
Course Structure
The course we developed is titled Prototyping Smart Devices (PSD) and is part of the
Department of Design and Industry at San Francisco State University (DAI, SFSU). It is an
elective course intended for design students in their final year of study, but is open to any
design student at the junior level and above. In this section we discuss the hardware and
software tools used in the course, the laboratory infrastructure, teaching methodologies,
and course deliverables.
8
Prototyping Smart Devices
Learning Outcomes
The main learning outcome of the course is for students to learn the skills of electronic
product prototyping, and to demonstrate these skills through the construction of a
prototype device. The technical aspects of the course cover, generally:
electronic circuit design and logic
computer program structure, data flow, and control
basic use of Arduino (uploading code, features, etc.)
interfacing with environmental sensors and input devices
processing real-world data and reacting to changes
controlling electronic output devices, low and high power
researching and understanding electronic components
Ideally, by the end of the course, students should have a solid foundation in the
methods of working with most common prototyping components, and enough experience
to successfully seek out solutions to new technical questions and continue learning on
their own. They should be able to use electronic prototyping as just another tool in their
set of design process skills.
The design-driven aspects of the course emphasize the utility of the tools in service of
the design process. By the end of the course, students should understand how an
electronic prototype can be useful to their process, how to properly conceptualize and
break down an interaction for logical construction, how to integrate the electronic
prototype with more traditional techniques, and how to present it effectively in the
context of a design portfolio.
Tools
In nearly all cases, the electronic core of a smart product is a microcontroller – a small,
efficient, low-power computer ‘system-on-a-chip’ that can be programmed with custom
code and embedded into its target device for independent operation. Looking to existing
literature and the Maker community, we find that a wide variety of microcontroller
development systems13 might be suitable for study at the intended level. After evaluation,
the Arduino platform was determined to be the best for use in Prototyping Smart Devices.
Arduino consists of both a free software toolchain 14 and a set of standardized
microcontroller boards, the most common model (the UNO as of this writing) priced
around USD $30. Designed specifically to help people without a technical background get
started with microcontroller development, the Arduino has become an great success and a
frequently-referenced cornerstone of the Maker movement (Honey & Kanter, 2013;
Torrone, 2011), with well over 700,000 official boards produced and likely a large number
of unofficial ‘Arduino-compatible’ clones in circulation as well (Medea, 2013).
13
In addition to the range of different Arduino boards, other microcontroller options are given an
overview in the course, as they each have advantages and disadvantages in certain situations. Some
of the more prominent examples: BASIC Stamp, Parallax PICAXE, Raspberry Pi, BeagleBone Black, TI
Launchpad, discrete AVR.
14 Toolchain: the set of programs that need to be used in sequence to build a computer program.
With microcontrollers, this includes at least a code editor, a compiler, and an uploader; Arduino
integrates them all into a single interface.
9
SILVAN LINN
Arduino balances accessibility with enough flexibility to give students room to grow at
the end of the course, and enjoys ample support beyond the classroom. The first ‘hello
world’ program can be written in minutes, but the language students learn is C, one of the
most widely used worldwide. If learners become lost, an extensive online community
abounds with code examples and project tutorials, and active online discussion forums
provide solutions to troublesome questions and bugs.
On its own, the Arduino board is limited to blinking a single light-emitting diode; its
flexibility comes from connecting it to other electronic components. Students in PSD used
a kit of additional parts that was customized to the class, but generally similar to the
Arduino starter kits available from various suppliers15. Customizations emphasized tangible
inputs and outputs – plenty of LEDs, sound generators, motors and other physical
actuators, and sensors suited for measuring physical forces (force-sensitive resistors, bend
sensors) and environmental status (temperature, light, etc.) For their final project, all
students were also required to source, purchase and integrate at least one component not
included in the kit of parts; these ranged from small liquid-crystal displays to powerful
heating units.
It should be noted that sometimes students wish to incorporate a working graphical
computer interface in their projects. For these purposes PSD recommends Processing 16, an
open-source language that can be easily integrated with an Arduino project. While a
motivated student could learn both languages simultaneously, there are enough
potentially confusing differences between Processing and Arduino code that Processing is
not directly included in the curriculum.
The course is held in an electronics/CAD lab equipped with workbenches, soldering
stations, multimeters, oscilloscopes, and other electronic tools. The lab has computers
with Arduino software preinstalled, but students are encouraged to bring and use their
own laptops if possible. The Department of Design and Industry also has a well-appointed
rapid prototyping lab equipped with laser cutters, 3D printers and other rapid
manufacturing technology, and traditional wood and metal shops with the expected
equipment. Since PSD is an advanced elective course, most of the students have
experience working in these facilities and use them to construct any physical aspects of
their prototypes.
As would be expected, PSD relies heavily on digital learning technology, and all
examples of code, circuit diagrams, handouts, etc. are hosted on a class website. No
textbooks are specifically required for the course, though Arduino Cookbook (Margolis,
2011) and Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists (Reas &
Fry, 2014) are recommended for interested students.
Teaching Methodology
In the first three weeks, the class covers important topics in electronics and
programming. Both fields are discussed simultaneously as appropriate to the content. For
instance, in the first class students are introduced to the concept of a microcontroller and
a programming language, and the structure of an Arduino program is demonstrated
through a very simple (nine lines of code) example that makes a single LED blink on and
15
16
e.g. the official Arduino kit: http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoStarterKit
See http://www.processing.org or (Reas & Fry, 2014).
10
Prototyping Smart Devices
off. To build the LED circuit, students need to understand voltage, current, resistance and
polarity, so this is covered/reviewed at the same time 17. The students build this circuit as
an in-class exercise.
As a homework assignment, students are then asked to build another circuit that blinks
three LEDs instead of one. This does not require any new knowledge – just a logical
rearrangement of the circuit and code. Students upload their code to the class website and
bring the assembled circuit to the next meeting. There are a number of ways for even this
very simple assignment to be completed, so the next day there is some discussion of the
different methods people may have used prior to starting the next topic.
In keeping with the intention of the course to help designers build a ‘toolbox’ of useful
smart-product prototyping techniques, students are encouraged to document every line of
the program with internal comments, and keep the program as their first ‘tool.’ This
program would be useful if a project required a blinking indicator light or similar element.
Coverage of technical aspects of the course proceeds in this manner, with new topics
and small homework assignments being introduced on a regular basis, interspersed with
review sections. Each small exercise contributes something to the student’s toolbox. For
instance, a product under development might call for a mechanical valve to be actuated
when a sensor detects rainwater; the designer can easily combine an ‘actuate a motor’
code fragment with a ‘read from analog sensor’ element and assemble the first version of
the program in a matter of minutes. This is not ideal coding practice, and a program
assembled this way will likely show inefficiencies and have some bugs if tested thoroughly
– but as the goal is to make something that works well enough for testing and
demonstration, then quickly move on and iterate to another design, this is not believed to
be a significant drawback.
As students develop their skills and build toolsets, the exercises shift from simple
reinforcements of a concept to demonstrations of their ability to quickly synthesize their
knowledge. Students are always encouraged to include as many of their tools as possible in
a given demonstration – to reiterate the Maker ethos, showing the class ‘what can you do
with what you know?’ (Dougherty, 2012, p. 12). With each exercise, some students are
selected to demonstrate their construction for the class to enhance communal learning
and expose various alternative strategies of accomplishing the same goal.
After twelve classes (48 instructional hours), the course shifts to an open studio format.
This decision was made to give students enough of a foundation for experimentation and
further independent study, while still leaving the final two weeks mostly open for in-depth
development of final projects. Students are given free rein of the Design and Industry lab
facilities to finish developing their projects into functional prototypes. Some students may
choose to produce accurate physical models for their prototypes, while others leave their
design as a bare circuit with a mocked up installation; either is considered acceptable,
though the accurate appearance model results in a better portfolio piece and thus is
encouraged. While working in the open studio, the students are able to easily exchange
information and strategies, learning from each other’s experiences, and the instructors can
be more available to help address difficult problems.
17
The DAI industrial design program requires a 100-level physics course as part of the core
curriculum, so it is expected that students already have some familiarity with these concepts.
11
SILVAN LINN
Figure 1
A student project under development. This was a speed-controlled bicycle lighting system.
A magnetic sensor mounted on the frame would read the passing of a magnet on the rear
wheel, then the Arduino board would calculate a velocity and map it to a color for the
light. Here it is set to map between blue (low speed) and red (high). Note the graphic
circuit diagram underneath the custom circuit board being assembled (red, center).
Deliverables
One third of the final grade is based on the small exercises distributed throughout the
course – there are approximately 10 of these.
The remainder of the grade is for a single final project, developed concurrently with the
exercises. This is structured as an industrial design project and follows the established
design process: identify a need, study the user, conceptualize solutions, construct
prototypes, test prototypes and iterate as needed. The process as a whole is broken into a
several stages of deliverables.
I DENTIFY PROBLEM
Students generate a list of potential design problems that they feel might be
addressable through an interactive electronic product. For instance ‘alarm clocks wake up
both members of a couple – I want to develop a solution that only wakes up one at a time.’
Some students bring in design problems from other classes, while others identify new ones
through their own research or lived experience. Each student comes up with at least three
potential ideas which are discussed in a group setting. The instructor helps determine
which ideas are likely to be successful given the course timeframe and the proposal’s
complexity.
12
Prototyping Smart Devices
D EVELOP USE CYCLE
Students storyboard the planned use cycle/interaction of their product from the
perspective of the user. Students do not propose technical solutions at this time; the main
goal is to break the human-machine interaction down into conceptual components,
understanding what the desired experience is on a moment-by-moment basis.
I DENTIFY TECHNICAL ELEMENTS
This takes place about halfway through the course, when students have a general idea
of what tools and strategies are required for the most common types of interactivity. Each
step of the storyboard is framed according to what inputs the device is receiving, what
data processing might be going on, and what outputs are being produced. Students also
lay out a general list of required electronic parts.
D EVELOP TECHNICAL ELEMENTS
The students construct each required component of the interaction individually, using
code and circuits from their toolbox where possible. For example, a student might start
with the input system, broken down further into individual sensor elements, creating a
method of gathering data from them one at a time. When that is working reliably, they
would move on to develop and test the output functionality, getting individual motors and
LEDs behaving as expected on their own. The key is to maintain repeated small iterations
with testing at each phase: try something, see if it works, then either debug or move on to
the next element.
S YSTEM INTEGRATION
When all of the elements are working, students integrate them into a single program.
This phase usually involves a great deal of returning to the individual elements and finetuning – it is never a totally linear process. Repeated adjustments and refinements are
encouraged in the name of experiential learning, though in the interest of time students
are discouraged from adding new features at this point in the process – they are reminded
that there is always the potential for a later ‘version 1.1.’
F INAL PRESENTATION
On the final day of the class, students formally present their projects, and the entire
class provides critique and commentary. The main requirements are a demonstration of
the functional prototype, a 5-10 minute verbal presentation, and a digital documentation
booklet summarizing the entire design process in 5-8 pages. Students use the digital
booklet as a graphic aid in the presentation. The booklet is expected to be graphically wellformatted and attractively laid out so that it is suitable for inclusion in a portfolio of work;
all of the students in PSD already have experience producing this sort of deliverable.
13
SILVAN LINN
Figure 2
A student project. Titled ‘Weather Butterfly’, this is a wall-hanging piece designed to let
the student know in an elegant format what the weather would be like at different parts
of her bicycle commute. The product cycles through a pre-defined set of geographical
waypoints, looks up the current weather, and alters butterfly’s body color according to
the local temperature while flapping the wings at different rates according to the wind
speed.
Case Studies and Analysis
Prototyping Smart Devices has been run twice to date, both times as an elective in the
summer session. Due to restrictions of the summer schedule, PSD is structured as a fiveweek intensive program, running four hours a day, four days per week for a total of 80
instructional hours18. Class enrolment was in line with expectations for an advanced topics
seminar – six students in the first session, and ten in the second.
In order to help evaluate the course’s effectiveness, we used an online questionnaire to
survey students about their experience after the course’s conclusion. Respondents were
asked about their prior knowledge of electronics and programming; their relative comfort
level with the topics before and after taking the class; why they decided to take the class;
what aspects they found most valuable and most difficult; and whether they planned to (or
had already started) applying the techniques in their future design projects. Of the sixteen
that had been enrolled, ten chose to respond. This is a small sample, but respondents
elaborated on their answers in most cases and returned some rewardingly actionable
information.
When asked to rate their ‘level of comfort’ with the material – i.e., their personal
feeling of how capable they were in either electronics or programming – all students
18
A more usual schedule for a course of this type would be three hours per day, twice a week over
15 instructional weeks, for a total of 90 hours.
14
Prototyping Smart Devices
indicated an improvement after taking PSD. On a 1-5 scale, 1 being low and 5 being high,
students indicated an average of 2.1 points of improvement in their comfort level working
with electronic components, and 1.5 points with computer programming. Clearly ‘level of
comfort’ is a very subjective descriptor, and the fact that all students claimed at least one
point of improvement in both areas only suggests that they learned anything at all. A more
important analysis is the difference between the two areas: students generally felt more
improvement in their electronics knowledge than in their programming ability. This could
be due to a variety of different factors. Perhaps our industrial design students are
inherently more comfortable with hands-on activities like assembling circuits than the
abstract reasoning required in programming. Perhaps the university-level physics course
they are all required to take provided them with a good foundation in electronics, and a
mathematics course on the same level would be beneficial. Or perhaps the course is simply
not correctly balanced in its current form. Regardless of the reason, it suggests that future
iterations should reinforce programming topics more strongly.
When asked what part of the course was the most difficult, five of ten students
specifically cited aspects of programming (‘thinking like a programmer,’ ‘wrapping my head
around how code translated to actual action in the physical world’) as the most difficult,
two cited aspects of electronics, two found the volume of information to be problematic,
and one cited the abstractness of the concepts. This is roughly in line with the difference in
perceived improvement. While statements like ‘thinking like a programmer’ are vexing to
decode, the general consensus seemed to be that the intangibility of the topic was a major
part of the problem. In future versions of the course we plan to experiment with methods
of making the concepts more concrete.
Additionally, 40% of the students mentioned the timescale as a challenge to their
learning in some way, e.g. ‘we had a very limited time and a lot had to be covered.’ This
difficulty was anticipated from the beginning. Hopefully it can be addressed by running the
course in the normal 15-week academic session, giving students plenty of time to let the
information sink in.
The areas that respondents reported as the most valuable were encouraging, indicating
success at achieving many of the desired learning outcomes. Students found that they
were able to ‘[appreciate] programming in everyday things like the ticket machine at the
BART [metro] station’ – certainly a valuable insight for a student of industrial design. One
respondent said that ‘the atmosphere of the class let me fail and learn from my mistakes
instead of being anxious,’ and another felt that ‘the next day in class when everyone
showed what they did for the homework was really awesome due to the fact that
everyone came up with something different’. Achieving this friendly Makerspace-like
creative environment was an important early goal of the course. One student said that
seeing her project come to life for the first time gave her the sense that ‘something
mysterious and magical has occurred right under [her] nose.’ Another said that taking the
course ‘sparked a much greater interest in electronics which actually lead to my current
employment’ – a definite success.
Finally, a number of months after the course had ended, seven of the ten surveyed said
that they had continued developing their programming and electronics skills beyond the
course, going on to apply the techniques in their school design work or personal projects –
and all of the respondents said that they believed they would take advantage of the
15
SILVAN LINN
knowledge in their future careers, with one ‘probably’ and nine unequivocal
‘yes/definitely/absolutely.’
Framework
We found that the implementation of Prototyping Smart Devices was generally
successful. All institutions have particular program goals, resources and restrictions,
though, and what worked well at SFSU may be less suitable at a different institution. With
this in mind, we have isolated what we believe are the four most important requirements
of teaching programming and electronics to design students, and propose a four-part
general framework for successfully including smart product prototyping in any industrial
design curriculum.
R EINFORCE THE DESIGN PROCESS AT ALL TIMES
Ultimately, a strong foundation in the use of the design process is one of the most
important outcomes of a design school education. All of the courses a student takes, core
and elective, should reinforce this model, ensuring that the content is presented in a
manner that is easily synthesized into a student’s process. When teaching programming
and electronics the emphasis should be on iteration and repeated refinement through
small changes, and regular collaborative reviews and discussions should be held to
promote interchange of ideas.
E MPHASIZE MODULARITY AND FLEXIBILITY
The design process should be rapid, free and creative. If the designer needs to rebuild
everything from the ground up every time he or she makes a new iteration of the design,
the process will suffer. Instructors should emphasize the importance of reusing code and
developing a ‘toolbox’ of useful programs and code fragments that can be quickly
assembled into a prototype. This organization helps make prototyping quicker and more
flexible, even before students have memorized enough information to create new
programs from scratch.
F OCUS ON THE USER EXPERIENCE
Smart prototypes in design are a means of developing a better product, not an end to
themselves. All interaction should be storyboarded and the focus should always be on
achieving enough functionality to demonstrate, test or study some aspect of the product
interaction. As skills are developed, it can be tempting to continue adding new features as
the ideas come up – but these are better saved for version 1.1, or ideally only when user
testing indicates that they are needed.
G IVE PLENTY OF TIME FOR PLAY
The experiential design process is effective, easily applied, and often exciting, but it
takes time. We found that five weeks is not enough time to have students truly become
facile with the content, irrespective of the actual instructional hours. Other researchers
attempting to teach programming to design students on a similar timescale have found
similar results (Park, 2013). The longer that students can be allowed to explore and
experiment, the better the outcome.
16
Prototyping Smart Devices
Concluding Remarks
Industrial design students can benefit from using flexible electronics and programming
tools that facilitate the development of functional prototypes. This gives them insight into
the development of smart products as well as a better understanding of the technologies
that are used in the industry. As one method of addressing this need, we have presented
the development of Prototyping Smart Devices, an experimental elective course offered in
the Design and Industry program at San Francisco State University. Based on the
theoretical background of the design process and the rapidly growing Maker movement,
our course is tailored specifically to industrial design students, emphasizing the
development of a skillset that would allow them to create working prototypes of proposed
interactive electronic products. The course was structured as a hybrid lab/studio class,
taking lessons from the successful creative experimentation seen in Makerspaces, and
using the Arduino platform as the primary tool. We prototyped the course twice in the
summer session, surveyed the enrolled students, and collected useful data about the
effectiveness of such a program for students of industrial design. Finally, based on both
theoretical development and the actual experimental outcomes of the course, we have
proposed a general framework for creating and running courses with similar goals in other
university-level product or industrial design programs.
Acknowledgements: Thanks to Dr. Hsiao-Yun Chu, and to the students of
Prototyping Smart Devices whose work is displayed in this paper.
References
Aprile, W. A., & van der Helm, A. (2011). Interactive technology design at the Delft
University of Technology - a course about how to design interactive products. In DS 69:
Proceedings of E&PDE 2011, the 13th International Conference on Engineering and
Product Design Education, London, UK, 08.-09.09. 2011.
Dewey, J. (2007). Experience And Education. Simon and Schuster.
Dougherty, D. (2012). The maker movement. Innovations, 7(3), 11–14.
Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life contexts: An alternative for design in
technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(3),
203–220.
Honey, M., & Kanter, D. E. (2013). Design, Make, Play: Growing the Next Generation of
STEM Innovators. Routledge.
Hu, J., & Alers, S. (2010). AdMoVeo: Created For Teaching Creative Programming. In
Workshop Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education
(ICCE 2010) (pp. 361–365).
Jamieson, P. (2010). Arduino for teaching embedded systems. are computer scientists and
engineering educators missing the boat? Proceedings of the 2011 International
Conference on Frontiers in Education: Computer Science and Computer Engineering,
289–294.
Koreshoff, T. L., Leong, T. W., & Robertson, T. (2013). Approaching a Human-centred
Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction
17
SILVAN LINN
Conference: Augmentation, Application, Innovation, Collaboration (pp. 363–366). New
York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2541016.2541093
Margolis, M. (2011). Arduino Cookbook (Second Edition). Sebastopol, Calif: O’Reilly Media.
Medea. (2013, April 5). Arduino FAQ – With David Cuartielles | MEDEA. Retrieved from
http://medea.mah.se/2013/04/arduino-faq/
Metz, R. (2012, October 16). Is Your Dishwasher Really Yearning for the Internet? Retrieved
February 23, 2015, from http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429588/is-yourdishwasher-really-yearning-for-the-internet/
Norman, D. (2011, June 21). The Design Dilemma: Dismay vs. Delight. Retrieved February
17, 2015, from http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/the_design_dilemma_.html
Park, J. (2013). Programming Sketches: a bricolage approach to teaching computer
programming in design education. Proceedings of DRS // CUMULUS 2013, 1, 143–154.
Reas, C., & Fry, B. (2014). Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and
Artists (second edition). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Torrone, P. (2011, February 10). Why the Arduino Won and Why It’s Here to Stay.
Retrieved from http://makezine.com/2011/02/10/why-the-arduino-won-and-why-itshere-to-stay/
18
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Kelly GROSS
School of the Art Institute of Chicago, Northern Illinois University
kellygross@photobykg.com
Abstract: Empathy and diverse viewpoints are essential for designing a material
world that includes all people, regardless of disability. Concepts such as universal
design and design for disability have been largely instigated by designers with
disabilities. Designers of varying ability are a vital part of the design community,
because they may recognize problems that the ableige may not, due to the
different ways in which we interact with our environment. Therefore, it is vital
that design educators encourage participation of students with disabilities and
address issues of disability as part of the curriculum. How can design education
become more inclusive and relevant to all students? Design education is an interdisciplinary arts field incorporating skills in written language, mathematics, and
engineering. What are the unique challenges that design educators face in
working with students with dis/abilities? This paper examines the possibilities
that occur by including persons with differing abilities within the field of design
and issues of disability as part of design education curriculum.
Keywords: Universal Design, Dis/ability, Design Education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
KELLY GROSS
Beyond Universal Design
For centuries much of the disabled population has been hidden from mainstream
society in poor-houses, jails, and institutionalization. In 1975, PL 94-142, The Education for
All Handicapped Children Act, was passed, guaranteeing the availability of ‘free and
appropriate public education’ for all students with disabilities (Rosenberg, Westling &
McLeskey, 2005, p. 33). This legislative change granted access to public education for
millions of children who had previously been excluded and paved the way for many
children to remain in their communities, rather than be institutionalized. The Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990) further solidified the place of persons with disability in
United States society by barring discrimination based on disability, requiring employers to
provide reasonable accommodations, and implementing accessibility guidelines for public
spaces. As a result more Americans with disabilities are educated and participate in society
than ever before. According to U.S. Census data, one in five Americans or 19% of the
population has a disability. Approximately 8 million people have difficulty seeing, 7.6
million have difficulty hearing, and 30.6 million have difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Americans with disabilities make up a significant portion of the population, yet often
struggle to fully participate in society (Brault, 2012).
However, employment remains a problematic area for persons with disabilities. Only
32 percent of working-age people with disabilities were employed on average from 20102012, compared to over 72 percent of people without disabilities (U.S. Dept. of Labor,
2012). Students with disabilities are less likely to complete postsecondary education and
pursue academic majors in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
(National Science Foundation, 2002, 2006; SRI International, n.d.) than their nondisabled
peers (Blaser, Burgstahler, & Braitmayar, 2012). Many fields related to STEM are design
fields including: architecture, graphic design, industrial design, landscape architecture, and
web design. The issue of representation of persons with disability in the field of design is
significant, because the lack of breadth of viewpoints and life experience of professionals
can continue to perpetuate design that caters to the ableige (dominant able-bodied class).
One goal of the disability rights movement has been to improve the quality of life for
persons with disability through the transformation of social and physical environments.
Instead of focusing on ‘fixing’ persons with disabilities, scholars have argued that we
should rethink our viewpoint, interaction, and environments to meet the needs of all
people (Andrus, 2006; Blandy, 1991; Pullin, 2009). Kemp (2002) argued that the oppression
of disabled persons through a physical world that has been designed for individuals with
certain able-bodied capabilities can be solved through the application of universal design.
Universal design, design for all, and inclusive design are terms that describe a philosophy
of design that is accessible to all people without the need for adaption. The term universal
design describes the concept of designing all products and the built environment to be
aesthetic and usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of their age,
ability, or status in life. This approach moves beyond accommodations as described in the
ADA (1990) by seeking to blend issues of aesthetics into the consideration of design,
making products and spaces that are universally appealing. Ronald Mace defined universal
design as ‘the concept of designing all products and the built environment to be aesthetic
and usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of their age, ability, or
status in life’ (1997, n.p.).
20
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Companies that have embraced universal design practice for products appeal not only to
persons of differing ability, but also to the general population and have found immense
success in the marketplace (Pullin, 2009). The OXO Good Grips products were originally
designed to meet the needs of individuals with arthritis and were developed based on the
concept of universal design. For OXO, this means ‘designing products for young and old,
male and female, left-and right-handed and many with special needs’ that are beneficial to
end users while also a sensible business model’ (2015). Apple products such as the ipad
that appeal to a variety of users due to ease of use and ability to make visual and auditory
accommodations are also designed using universal design principles. According to Apple
(2015) ‘every device not only has accessible features — but accessible principles — built
right in.’ Through the creation of products and spaces that incorporate universal design
philosophies, designers can enable all persons to participate fully in society and challenge
views and assumptions on what it means to be disabled.
While universal design principles can greatly reduce the barriers in our physical and social
world, it does not always solve issues that are unique to certain populations. Design for
disability, as described by Pullin (2009), must also be considered. Design for disability
addresses the specific needs of individuals with a disability and can encompass universal
design principles to blend issues of aesthetic and function. However, not everyone needs a
wheelchair, prosthesis, or hearing aid and therefore design for disability is not created for
all, but rather specific populations. Pullin points out many products for persons with
disabilities, such as wheelchairs or hearing aids, are created by engineers, medical
technicians, and computer scientists. Why are professionals in the field of design not also
developing solutions for persons with disability? Though universal design is an established
part of the lexicon and projects addressing issues of universal design are often
incorporated, design education needs to directly address design for disability as part of
curriculum and pedagogy. Design educators also need to recognize the importance of
encouraging more students with disabilities to participate in the design profession.
The focus of this paper is to argue for an increased emphasis in thinking about disability as
part of design education. Throughout this paper, the importance of empathy and diverse
viewpoints will be highlighted. In order to inform curriculum and pedagogical approaches,
the first part of this paper examines the intersection of current practice in the field of
design and issues of disability. Several product design examples will be presented to
illustrate the difference between universal design and design for disability. Additionally,
designers with disabilities will be discussed in order to highlight the importance of multiple
viewpoints. The second part of the paper examines the implications for design education.
According to Hermon and Prentice (2003), ‘a fundamental feature of art and design
education is the promotion and encouragement of alternative and highly personal ways of
responding to experience’ (p. 270). Design educators need to determine how to help
students with disabilities successfully pursue study in fields of design in order to create
greater empathy and diversity within the field. Suggestions for educators cover the topics
of a shift in thinking about designing for persons with disabilities, identifying potential
problem areas for students with disabilities in design education, and providing
accommodations for students with disabilities.
21
KELLY GROSS
Current Practice in the Field of Design
Design for Disability
In design meets disability, Pullin (2009) discusses current products that are designed to
meet the needs of a diverse population. According to Pullin, the ‘priority for design for
disability has traditionally been to enable, while also attracting as little attention as
possible’ (p. 15). This can be seen in the nature of many prosthesis such as hearing aids
that use miniaturization and naturalized coloring to create a sense of discretion or
normalcy. By making the product as discreet as possible, the designers are placing value on
the form (or lack thereof) over the function of the product, and ignoring principles of
universal design. Additionally, many products such as wheelchairs are designed without
regard to age or culture (Pullin). Would a child use a wheelchair in the same ways as an
adult? Universal design principles, when applied appropriately, can help to change our
understanding of differing abilities, but may not be applicable for specific needs related to
disability. Unlike universal design, that takes into consideration a wide spectrum of
abilities; design for disability aims to solve a particular problem for persons with disability.
Design for disability requires a level of empathy and awareness of problems that the
ableige may not naturally possess or recognize. The following are two examples of design
for disability that illustrate the benefits of empathy and varying viewpoints in the design
process.
Popova (2009) described the work of designer Twan Verdonck, who created the
bozoels (see references for link). The bozoels are a series of animal-like toys designed for
persons with mental impairments and Alzheimer’s disease and incorporate stimulation
through one or more of the four senses: touch, smell, hearing, and/or sight. Furthermore
the production of each unique boezel is completed by individuals with mental impairments
in a day care centre in the Netherlands. Many elderly people and people with mental
impairments live somewhat isolated lives in group homes or away from family. In his work,
Verdonck exhibits a high level of empathy by recognizing the need for interaction and
stimuli that this population does not receive on a daily basis. Verdonck (2015) states ‘My
project is a metaphor and example for how we could deal with social care, industry,
design, and art’. Examples of the boezel have been purchased for inclusion in the
permanent collection of the Museum of Modern Art.
The flex-foot cheetah prosthesis (also known as the blade runner) was designed by a
medical engineer, Van Phillips, who had lost his leg below the knee and wanted a new
better prosthesis. Unlike other prostheses that aim to mimic ‘normal’ or natural
appearance, the carbon prosthesis was designed with function as the priority. The well
known athlete, Oscar Pistorius, who uses this device, was initially banned from
international running events, as early studies suggested the blades provided an unfair
advantage (CNN, 2014). Later studies contradicted these findings, and the ruling was
eventually overturned, allowing Pistorius to compete in the 2012 Olympic Games (‘London
2012 Paralympic’, 2012). Today the flex-foot cheetah is used by amputee athletes around
the world. The traditional balance between form and function remains a constant
challenge for designers. The flex-foot cheetah is an example of design that valued function,
yet led to undeniable beautiful and intriguing form. Additionally, it is important to
acknowledge that the need for a better functioning prosthesis was not recognized by an
22
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
able-bodied designer or engineer, but rather an amputee who could physically experience
the limitations of current designs.
As the field of design and society as a whole have become more aware of the needs of
diverse individuals, approaches to design have changed to become more inclusive and
empathetic. The continued implementation of universal design principles seen in product
and architectural designs are reflections of the shifting social perspectives and legislation
that relate to persons with disability. Both the boezels and the flex-foot cheetah are
examples of design for disability. Yet, some products, such as the boezel or OXO Good
Grips, that were initially designed for specific populations have been found to be
universally appealing and can be said to embrace the philosophy of universal design as
well. These products were designed using an empathetic approach that started with a user
with different abilities in mind. In large part these concepts of universal design and design
for disability have been created and advocated by designers, artists, and architects with
disabilities. The inclusion of persons with disabilities in the design field is vital to
broadening our understanding of how people of varying abilities interact with our material
world.
Designers with Disabilities
One mantra of the disability rights movement has been ‘Nothing about us, without us’
(Kemp, 2002). Postmodern practices are based upon the premise that there is no ‘absolute
truth’ as defined by modernism, rationalism, and behaviorism, instead such practices
recognize forms of knowledge characterized by multiple perspectives and cultural diversity
(Popovich, 2006). A postmodern perspective recognizes that ‘Knowledge about the needs
of people with disabilities comes much more reliably from people with disabilities
themselves’ (Kemp, p. 3). While, Pullin (2009) recognizes that a greater diversity of
designers is needed to address disability, he also claims that design for individuals with
disabilities need not come from persons with disabilities. However, designers with
disability are critical to the field, because they may recognize the opportunity for new and
better designs due to their differing abilities. In the case of flex-foot cheetah prosthesis, it
was an amputee that recognized the limitations of current products and designed a more
efficient, beautiful product that led to amputees being able to be competitive on an
inclusive world stage. There have been countless designers, architects, artists, and activists
that have advocated for disability rights and inclusion through their work.
Ronald Mace was an architect, who used a wheelchair due to a debilitating case of
polio as a child (Ostroff, Limont, & Hunter, 2002). When Mace was a child, doctors urged
his family to institutionalize him, but his family chose to support him through his education
despite the many obstacles he faced (Ostroff, Limont, & Hunter). As someone who used a
wheelchair, Mace could not live in a college dormitory or access the architectural studios
on campus. Instead he lived with his mother in a rented mobile home that was retrofitted
to fit his needs. After becoming a licensed architect, Mace went on to found the Barrier
Free Environments (BFE) company, advise the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development on creating accessible mobile homes, and create the term ‘universal design.’
Many of the changes in architectural code and requirements put in place by the ADA were
a result of Mace’s advocacy and publications in the field of architecture (Ostroff, Limont, &
Hunter). Mace was awarded the distinguished service award by President Clinton and the
American Institute of Architects awarded him their two highest awards noting ‘He has used
23
KELLY GROSS
his gifts to insist that no one is free unless we accord each other with dignity and celebrate
as one our common humanity’ (Ostroff, Limon, & Hunter, p. 20). No doubt, the personal
experience of being disabled, by the lack of access to social and educational spaces,
influenced Mace to imagine a new way for all people to interact with spaces.
Carmen Papalia is a blind social practice artist whose work has addressed blind access
to museums. Papalia (2013) described the ways in which museum visitors can expect to
engage with art in a museum. ‘You can look at art, read the wall text next to it, and learn
something about it’ (para 6). But how accessible is this? Instead, Papalia suggests that
museums need to redesign the ways in which visitors access art by incorporating principles
of universal design and a sense of play. Suggestions by Papalia to adapt the museum
environment include lowering paintings so they are inches from the ground, promoting
crouching and crawling, enlarging wall texts so people can more easily read them,
coordinating tours led by guide dogs; and making objects touchable. These suggestions
would create a museum environment that promotes equal access and experience.
Mace and Papalia’s activism is one of direct confrontation of the social normative as
created by the ableige. When persons with disabilities participate in the design process,
the results are products, spaces, and solutions that are more inclusive and insightful for
persons of differing needs. The field of design must recognize the important contributions
of professionals with disabilities and examine how to encourage more persons of varying
abilities to enter the field. The challenge for the field of design education lies in twofold.
First design educators need to find better ways to incorporate issues of disability, universal
design, and design for disability to make all designers aware of these issues and develop
empathetic approaches. Secondly, design educators must encourage and enable the
participation of persons of varying disabilities in design fields. In order to truly impact both
of these areas, there needs to be an increase in training regarding design education and
disability, so that more persons of varying abilities enter design majors.
Design for Disability in K-16 Education
Unlike many other countries, the United States’ K-12 system rarely incorporates or
explicitly teaches design education as part of the curricula (Lozner, 2013). The recent
National Art Education Association Conference in New Orleans highlighted the growing
awareness of addressing design education as part of art education. Some high schools
offer courses in fashion design and increasingly media arts. Few, if any programs exist in
the United States to train pre-service teachers in design education (although Pratt and
Northern Illinois University offer degrees in art and design education). Therefore, many K12 art teachers, who incorporate design thinking as part of their curricula or teach a design
based course, often have little formal training in design education. K-12 educators who
lead STEAM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) and/or robotics
programs often have no training in arts and design education, coming from science
backgrounds. Although both art educators and science educators are trained in working
with students with special needs, their training is most likely based in accommodating and
modifying curriculum content in the visual arts or science areas. Additionally, while
practitioners in the field of design are trained in issues of ergonomics, accessibility, and
universal design, many K-12 educators who end up teaching design related courses have
little experience with these topics. The lack of specified training in design education is
24
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
particularly problematic when considering issues of disability, because educators may not
be prepared to accommodate students with disabilities in design based courses or
incorporate issues of disability and access as part of the curriculum content.
In higher education, a different problem emerges. Most faculty who teach design courses
at the university level hold a Masters in Arts or Masters in Fine Arts Degrees. While design
education faculty are highly knowledgeable about subject specific content, they often have
little training in education. Whereas K-12 educators in the United States are required to
take courses to familiarize themselves with various disabilities and learn how to
accommodate students in their specified content area, university faculty may have no
training in how to appropriately accommodate or modify pedagogy and curriculum for
students with disabilities. The second part of this paper provides information on how K-12
and higher educators can effectively work with students with disabilities in the classroom
and ways in which disability issues can be incorporated in design curriculum.
Troubleshooting Problems and Providing Accommodations in
the Design Curriculum
Pullin (2009) poses the question in regards to designing for disability ‘Might valuable
new directions emerge only by adopting quite different approaches?’ (p. 41). Boys (2014)
challenges the design field to see disability as a ‘generative, creative, and radical approach’
to design education. Persons with physical disabilities can bring a fundamentally different
perspective to design due to the challenged they face in the material landscape
(McDonagh & Thomas, 2010). While all designers can address issues of disability, and more
can be done to educate design students about these issues, the issue of underrepresentation of persons with disabilities in the workforce remains problematic. Research
by Blaser, Burgstahler, and Braitmaya (2012) suggests students with disabilities are eager
to learn about academic and career options in design fields, but need more knowledge
about potential accommodations and a greater understanding of how designers with
disabilities are successful and impactful in their work. Students with differing abilities need
to be provided with the appropriate support, so that they can enter design fields and add
new perspectives when solving problems.
One way in which teachers attempt to address issues of universal design in the
classroom for students with special needs is through the use of accommodations and
modifications. Accommodations are the changes in practice that provide a ‘differential
boost’ but continue to hold students to the same standard as their peer group (Harrison et
al., 2013). Examples of accommodations could include providing a calculator for students
to perform mathematical calculations or allowing a student with physical limitations to
design a model through computer software and have it 3D printed. Modifications are
changes to practice that alter, lower, or reduce expectations to compensate for disability.
This usually involves changing the complexity of a project through differences in
conceptual expectations, skill expectations, or both. Best practices in special education
encourage the use of accommodations above modifications whenever appropriate.
Modifying curriculum often leads to changes in expectations, alternative testing, and can
limit future opportunities for students. Resources such as Gerber and Guay (2006) that
address accommodations and modifications in the art room can be applied in design
education. For example students with vision issues may have difficulty seeing images
25
KELLY GROSS
projected from far away and may benefit from having copies of art images and directions
at their work area (Geber & Guay).
Some of the general areas that design educators should consider as potentially
problematic are not all that different from other subjects. For students with physical
differences, educators need to evaluate the physical demands and limitations of the
classroom. For a student in a wheelchair: are the desks made to roll under; is the material
at an accessible height? For a student with a hearing problem: is there a significant amount
of background noise, how might lectures be amplified? These sorts of issues can usually be
easily accommodated through small changes in the physical environment and making a
classroom more universally accessible for all students. However, the lack of training in
design education means that many educators may be unaware of appropriate
accommodations in regards to design curriculum and pedagogy.
Design education and fields of design often incorporate core-subject area skills beyond
those necessary in some visual arts classes. Design fields such as architecture, product
design, and fashion require strong mathematical skills including measurement, geometry,
proportion, fractions, and mathematically calculations. Other fields such as landscape
architecture, architecture, and industrial design require extensive knowledge and
application of science areas such as natural sciences, physics, engineering, and many more.
Finally, many careers in design require advanced technical skills on computers including
the knowledge and ability to manipulate graphic software. Art educators who are working
on design projects may be unfamiliar with appropriate accommodations for areas in
mathematics, science, or computers. STEAM educators working with students disabilities
may be unfamiliar with appropriate accommodations in regards to fine and gross motor
skill accommodations. The following are some suggestions for working with students with
disabilities in the field of design.
Students who have learning disabilities may struggle with tasks related to mathematics
and may require extra support and accommodations as determined by IEPs (Individual
Education Plans). Common accommodations for students with learning disabilities in
regards to mathematics include providing breaks, breaking material into small chunks,
shorter tasks, the use of calculators, and providing tables of math facts or conversion
charts. Students with cognitive disabilities may have trouble transferring and applying
information from other subject areas, requiring extra modelling and reinforcement.
Students with cognitive disabilities or autism spectrum disorder often have difficulty with
abstract concepts and need concrete examples, specific instructions, and extra assistance
to develop conceptual thinking. For students who have difficulties with fine motor skills:
grips for pencils and paintbrushes, modified scissors, and computer graphic programs can
greatly increase participation and improve craftsmanship. However, every student is
different and ideally design educators can work closely with a student’s teacher of record
(the teacher responsible for an IEP) or counsellor to implement appropriate
accommodations.
Design is a very visual and tactile subject area. Students are engaged in real-life
application of problems. This differs greatly from a field that is mainly theoretical (such as
mathematics) or language based (such as law). Students with disabilities may find success
in the design classroom because of the visual, tactile, and concrete nature of the design
process. Additionally the studio environment can be an ideal place for some students with
disabilities to learn. This is due to the collaborative and small nature of most studios.
26
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Students who have difficulty with attention issues may find environment of a studio, to be
more structured and supportive than a large lecture class. Additionally, students with
auditory processing difficulties and learning disabilities related to written language may
find the highly visual nature of the studio environment a means of accommodation.
Therefore, students should be given every opportunity to succeed and not limited by our
assumptions of their capabilities.
One of the foundations of special education services is the assumption that students
with special needs have deficits, and educators have often focused on what students
cannot do. Daniels wrote that ‘primary defects such as sensory, organic, or neurological
impairments have an impact on the development of perceptual and higher cognitive
functions’ (2009, p. 58). This focus on what skills student lack, or how they are different, is
the basis for the deficit paradigm. The deficit paradigm tries to remediate impairments in a
way that is removed from real-life contexts (Armstrong, 2009). Oliver (1996) suggested
that people with disability experience disability as a social restriction. Others have
suggested that disability is a focus on the environmental and social barriers which can
exclude people with perceived impairments or deficits from mainstreamed society (Barnes,
1998). Poplin (2008) suggests that if we instead placed more emphasis on strength and
abilities it would lead to increased self-esteem for persons labeled as disabled. One
approach that focuses on ability is Amarti Sen’s capability approach. Sen (1993) defined
capability as ‘a person’s ability to do valuable acts or reach valuable states of being; [it]
represents the alternative combinations of things a person is able to do or be’ (p. 30). By
choosing to look beyond someone’s perceived disability, rather than recognizing their
differing abilities, we acknowledge the breadth and depth of human experience. Design
educators need to examine and build upon the unique strengths, perspectives, and
knowledge of students and designers with disabilities. Through creating diverse and
inclusive educational practices we can positively support persons of differing abilities to
enter the field of design.
Design for Disability and Social Justice
In order for designers to create accessible products and spaces, design education needs
to work to increase empathy in all design students through the implementation of
curricula and pedagogy that acknowledge and confront issues of disability. By
incorporating issues of disability as part of the design curriculum, design educators
challenge the social normative and encourage shifts in thinking who and what we design
for. Research by Bigelow (2012) found that students do not implicitly consider universal
design principles when designing products, even when these products are to be used by a
diverse user group. Instead, Bigelow suggested that educators need to incorporate
universal design and issues of varying ability in the curriculum, ideally with the
involvement of disability professionals and individuals with disabilities. By doing so, design
educators are helping to develop empathy in design students, which is key to creating
successful products (McDonagh & Thomas, 2010). Design educators should consider
posing problems that address differing needs and abilities and challenge students to make
this part of their everyday thinking in the design process.
The fashion industry is becoming more aware of a diverse consumer base. Recently,
Jamie Brewer, an actress with Down Syndrome walked in a New York Fashion Show (2014).
Additionally, there is an increasing recognition in the fashion and advertising industries of
27
KELLY GROSS
plus size models. How as design educators do we encourage fashion design students to
think about inclusive/universal design? Ideas for fashion programs to consider addressing
are the creation of clothing for persons in wheelchairs, Little people, and people who are
missing a limb. Do fashion designers consider issues such as the ability to easily dress in
certain styles regardless of fine motor control? A universal approach to design could make
dressing in clothing easier for not only those with disabilities, but also young children and
the elderly, who struggle with fine motor skills. A design for disability approach could
explore garments designed to reveal their colour and pattern through texture instead of
vision for those with visual impairments.
One example of an approach that has successfully addressed issues of accessibility in K12 design classes is the use of 3-D printers to create solutions for persons with varying
physical differences. In a New Jersey high school, an advanced design student noticed that
a fellow classmate was having trouble opening her locker because of her prosthesis; so she
designed and created a modified handle, making the locker accessible (Edwards, 2014).
The design process included the participation and input of the students with a prosthesis in
the development of prototypes, testing, redesign, and final printing of handle using the
school’s 3-D printers (Edwards). A similar class project for eighth graders involved the
redesign of a mouth grip and attached pencil that was used by a student with limited
physical control in their school (Suffrin, 2014). Able-bodied students may be unaware of
the assumptions and difficulties that students of differing abilities face. If we fail to address
these issues, design educators continue to perpetuate socially prevailing attitudes about
dis/ability. Additionally, when able-bodied students are asked to design and create
accommodations for students who have differing abilities, they can develop both empathy
and awareness of difficulties and challenges faced by their classmates.
McDonagh and Thomas (2010) led a project with undergraduate industrial design
majors and fellow university students with physical disabilities to redesign products used in
daily living (hygene, cooking, communicating, etc) to make them more accessible. In this
project, the design students and students with disabilities worked together to co-create
knowledge from which the design students developed products. Through this project,
students were forced to go outside their personal comfort zones and work with a
population that is not normally considered by the design community (McDonagh &
Thomas). The researchers concluded that one of the keys in the developing empathy in
design is through qualitative research models that include a collection of visual, textual,
and verbal data while also involving the user of differing ability in the design process.
These projects highlight the importance of not just designing for a person with a
disability, but with a person with a disability. No longer should the user passively wait for
the designer to solve the problem, but rather persons with disabilities should participate in
the research and creation of design solutions. Through this qualitative process, student
designers develop greater empathy and education becomes more socially inclusive.
McDonagh and Thomas (2010) argue that the goal should be for designers to ‘reduce (if
not demolish) social barriers that are excluding people with disabilities from the creative
process, and create methods and opportunities for design by people with disabilities’ (pp.
194-195).
28
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Conclusion
The philosophy of universal design has transformed the ways in which we think about
our spaces, products, and people. Rather than perceiving someone with a disability as
unable to participate, we now perceive our material world as limiting people from full
participation. Successful examples of universal design often comes as a result of when
designers start with design for disability and exhibit empathy in understanding how people
interact with our products and spaces.
There is no doubt that many designers with disabilities have helped changed societal
attitudes regarding access and inclusion. Designers with disabilities recognize problems or
find solutions that the ableige may not, and should be considered an essential part of the
field. Mace (1997), created the concept of universal design which has become a ubiquitous
approach in everything from architecture to curriculum design in schools. Without Van
Phillips, the flex foot cheetah product would not have existed, and amputee runners would
be much less competitive on the world stage. Design educators must recognize that in
order for design to be forward thinking, generative, and inclusive, students with disabilities
must be encouraged to enter the design profession. In order for these changes to happen
it must start at the K-12 level. Through the inclusion of students with disabilities and
curriculum that addresses issues of disability, students will develop greater empathy for
disability issues. In higher education, design educators need to actively recruit and
accommodate students with disabilities.
Moving forward, all design educators need to consider the importance of addressing
issues of varying abilities. Information about universal design and design for disability,
examples of products and spaces that incorporate these concepts, and designers who
identify as disabled should be incorporated into the curriculum. Furthermore, design
students should be given opportunities to explore and apply these concepts through
projects with engaging qualitative research incorporating persons of varying abilities.
Through these approaches design educators can increase awareness and empathy in
future professionals in regards to the needs of a diverse population. By educating future
designers on issues of universal design and encouraging students of varying abilities to
enter design professions, design educators can affect social and physical change to
promote universal access for all people.
References
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 328 (1990).
Andrus, L. (2006). Chapter 11 in Gerber, B. and Guay, R. (Ed.) Reaching and teaching
students with special needs through art. New York, NY: National Art Education
Association.
Apple. (2015). A wide range of features for a wide range of needs. Retrieved from:
https://www.apple.com/accessibility/ios/
Armstrong, C. L. (1994) Designing assessment in art. Reston, Va.: National Art Education
Association.
Bigelow, K. E. (2012). Designing for success: Developing engineers who consider universal
design principles. Journal of Postsecondary Education And Disability, 25(3), 211-225.
29
KELLY GROSS
Blandy, D. (1994). Assuming responsibility: Disability rights and the preparation of art
educators. Studies In Art Education, 35(3), 179-187.
Blaser, B., Burgstahler, S., & Braitmayer, K. (2012). ‘AccessDesign’: A two-day workshop for
students with disabilities exploring design careers. Journal of Postsecondary Education
And Disability, 25(2), 197-202.
Boys, J. (2014). Doing disability differently. The Architectural Review, 236(1411), 30-31,4.
Brault, M. (2012). American with disabilities: 2010 household economic studies. U.S.
Census Bureau. Retrieved from: http://census.gov.
Edwards, T. (2014). NJ students design 3d printed handle to enable a disabled classmate to
open her locker. 3D Design. Retrieved from: http://3dprint.com/33514/school-locker3d-printing-hack/
Eisenhauer, J. (2007). Just Looking and Staring Back: Challenging Ableism through Disability
Performance Art. Studies In Art Education: A Journal Of Issues And Research In Art
Education, 49(1), 7-22.
Gerber, B. & Guay, R. (2006). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through
art. New York, NY: National Art Education Association.
Harrison, J. R., Bunford, N., Evans, S. W., & Owens, J. S. (2013). Educational
accommodations for students with behavioral challenges: A systematic review of the
literature. Review Of Educational Research, 83(4), 551-597.
Hermon, A., & Prentice, R. (2003). Positively different: Art and design in special education.
International Journal of Art and Design Education, 22(3), 268-280.
Hunter, A. D. & Johns, B. H. (2007). Students with emotional and/or behavior disorders. In
B. Gerber & D. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through
art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Kemp, J. (2002). Foreward. In E. Ostroff, M. Limont, & D. Hunter (Eds.), Building a world fit
for people designers with disabilities at work (pp. 2-3). Boston, MA: Adaptive
Environments Center.
London 2012 Paralympic games, Oscar Pistorius’ blades – an annotated graphic. (2012,
August). Engineering and Technology Magazine. Retrieved from:
https://engtechmag.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/london-2012-paralympic-gamesoscar-pistorius-blades-an-annotated-graphic/
Mace, R. (1997). About. Retrieved from:
http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_us/usronmace.htm
Oscar Pistorius Fast Facts (2014, October). CNN. Retrieved from:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/06/world/africa/oscar-pistorius-fast-facts/
Ostroff, E., Limont, M., & Hunter, D. (Eds.). (2002). Building a world fit for people designers
with disabilities at work. Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments Center.
OXO. (2015). Our roots. Retrieved from: https://www.oxo.com/OurRoots.aspx
Papalia, C. (2013). A new model for access in the museum. Disability Studies Quarterly.
33(3). Retrieved from: http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3757/3280
Popovich, K. (2006). Designing and implementing ‘exemplary content, curriculum, and
assessment in art education’. Art Education, 59(6), 33-39
Pullin, G. (2006). Design meets disability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
U.S. Dept of Labor. (2012). Nearly 1 in 5 people have a disability in the U.S. Census Bureau
Reports. Retrieved from:
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/miscellaneous/cb12-134.html
30
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Rosenberg, M., Westling, D., McLeskey, J. (2005). Special education for today’s teachers.
Boston, MA: Pearson.
Suffrin, J. (2014). Eighth-Graders create device for disabled student using 3D design
software and 3D printing. THE Journal: Transforming education through technology.
Verdonck, T. (2015). The boezels. Retrieved from:
http://www.twanverdonck.com/twanverdonckdesign/pigodivo%20elementen/pigodivo
/index3.htm
31
Designing the Discipline: the Role of the Curriculum
in Shaping Students’ Conceptions of Graphic Design
James CORAZZO
Sheffield Hallam University
j.corazzo@shu.ac.uk
Abstract: The graphic design curriculum in UK higher education is becoming an
increasingly complex and contested space. Calls to reconsider the curriculum in
response to a changing context for practice in the post-industrial age are
occurring simultaneously with an increasing emphasis on academic education
leading to work. This paper will examine how the recontextualisation of
disciplinary knowledge practices in the curriculum is a place of contestation
between academic and vocational dimensions. The implications of this
contestation is considered in three ways. Firstly, as means to examine the role of
graphic design in higher education, secondly, to consider the ways contestation
is reproduced in students’ conceptions of the discipline and thirdly, to explore the
role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions. A phenomenographic
analysis of interviews conducted with students revealed five qualitatively
different conceptions of graphic design ranging from; the application of skills; to
a means to create change. Limited conceptions of graphic design may reduce a
student’s ability to access the full range of possibilities the curriculum offers and
this is considered in relation to the notion of ‘powerful knowledge’. The paper
suggests an explicit mapping of the contestation between academic and
vocational dimensions is required.
Keywords: Curriculum, Engagement, Graphic Design, Phenomenography
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
Introduction
The goal of this paper is to examine the recontextualisation of disciplinary knowledge
practices in the graphic design curriculum. It will show this is a space of contestation
between graphic design’s academic and vocational dimensions. And it will explore the
implications of this contestation on students’ conceptions of graphic design. The paper
begins by outlining a series of significant calls to rethink the graphic design curriculum
from academics, the creative industries and the consequences of the changing structure of
UK higher education. Using Basil Bernstein’s theoretical framework of the pedagogic
device, it will consider graphic design as a professional knowledge curriculum in higher
education and how this impacts on the reproduction of knowledge in the curriculum. In
the second part, the paper will report on a series of interviews conducted with graphic
design students. A phenomenographic approach is used to explore students’ conceptions
of graphic design. It will examine the ways the curricula contestation outlined in part 1
may be reproduced in students’ conceptions of the discipline and this will be considered in
light of Bernstein’s notion of powerful knowledge. The implications of this study are that
an explicit mapping of the contestation between the academic and vocational dimensions
of the discipline is required if all students are to be given access to the pedagogic rights
that underline Bernstein’s notion of powerful knowledge.
The Graphic Design Curriculum and the Changing Context of
Graphic Design Practice
Over the past 10 years, calls to rethink graphic design curricula have become noticeably
louder (for examples see: Davis 2008 & 2012, Grefe 2007, AIGA 2008, Frascara 2008,
Winkler 2009, Icograda 2011, Friedman 2012, Frascara and Guillermina 2012). Although
these calls range widely in their prescriptions, they all share the idea there has been a
profound change in the context for graphic design practice and educators need to respond
to this. As Davis (2012) argues, the standard models of graphic design defined as ‘segments
of practice’ – branding, advertising, editorial – have become progressively irrelevant in the
post-industrial age. Increasingly, complex problems can no longer be simplified by
designers, only managed by interdisciplinary teams of experts (Davis 2012). Likewise the
artifacts of practice – packaging, book design, motion – are also changing and in the
process recasting the designers role from maker and crafter of physical artifacts to
developer of ‘tools and systems through which others create their own experiences’ (Davis
2012:114). These changes demand ‘analytic and synthetic planning skills that can’t be
developed through the practice of contemporary design professions alone.’ (Friedman
2012:150). Instead, designers need to learn about ‘the interlocking complexities of human
and social behavior’ through the study of ‘behavioral sciences, technology, and business’
(Norman 2010). Emphasis is also being placed on the social function of design
communication. This ‘decorporation’ as it’s been called, stresses the need for designers to
focus on ‘humanness, cultural sensitivity, empathy, intuition’ to develop alternative
perspectives on solving design communication problems (Grefe 2007). Frascara &
Guillermina (2012) go further, and to some extent challenge the place of intuition, when
they argue for a greater focus on ‘user-centered, evidence-based and results-oriented‘
approaches to graphic design (2012: 40). Winkler (2009) argues the essential function of a
33
JAMES CORAZZO
designer is to enable citizens of a knowledge society to be ‘empowered’ by useful
information when making critical decisions.
Each of these arguments coalesce to establish a changing practice context that is,
nothing short of transformational. However, it is not well served by the prevailing 20 th
century craft-based model of design education with a focus on issues of form and mass
production (Davis 2012). A notion summarized by Friedman:
The difference between design education today and design education over the past
century is that designers must now strategize the tools they shape … [w]here design
once relied on craft guild traditions functioning in slow evolutionary patterns based on
common sense, trial-and-error and experience, we now use models, simulations,
decision theory and systems thinking in the post-industrial age.
(Friedman 2012: 148)
The Graphic Design Curriculum and the Creative Industry
A noticeably different perspective on the issue of curriculum change is presented in he
Design Blueprint Report (2011) commissioned by the Design Council and presented to the
UK Government as a vision for UK design education in the 21st century:
Many design courses started life in polytechnics and graduated into the university
domain with the wider transformation in the Seventies. We are not suggesting the loss
of university design courses. Indeed the teaching of design in an academic environment
has been invaluable for its development, with beneficial effects on the wider institution
within which it sits and this should be protected. However the loss of any vocational
pathway is lamentable, especially as design is, at heart, an applied discipline.
(Pryce & Whitaker 2011:12)
The extract implies design education in higher education is endangering what is held
sacred in graphic design, namely professional practice. By undertaking extraneous
theorizing it has become removed from ‘actual’ practice. Furthermore, this extract
reinforces the assumption that the primary mandate and definitive source of legitimacy for
graphic design, as a discipline in higher education, is professional practice. This assumption
fuels the creative industries continued dissatisfaction with design education and it appears
frequently in the design press with titles like ‘Six Reasons Design Education is Failing the
Creative Industry’ (www.creativebloq.com 2014). Invariably, such articles feature a range
of professional practitioners offering ‘solutions’ to the ‘problems’ of design education: is
design education failing its students? How big is the gulf between education and industry?
and are graduates equipped to hit the real world running?
The Graphic Design Curriculum and changes to the higher
education sector
The graphic design curriculum is also having to adapt as a result of significant changes
to the UK Higher Education sector. These changes have shifted the financial burden from
the state to the individual and resulted in significantly higher fees for students studying
‘non-priority subjects’. Consequently, the perception higher education is an ‘investment’,
intended to produce favourable graduate employment outcomes for the individual is
intensified (Tomlinson 2012)
34
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
These funding changes have led to an increasingly marketised higher education sector
with a greater focus on performance indicators and league tables. Employment outcomes,
measured in the DLHE survey (Destination of Leavers in Higher Education), have become
part of the ‘Key Information Sets’ each degree course is now required to publish to help
potential students make ‘informed choices’ about where to study (KIS includes pass rates,
results from satisfaction surveys, employment figures and contact hours). As a direct
consequence universities are increasingly demonstrating the effectiveness of their ‘offer’
with a strong focus on graduate employment outcomes and employability.
Of course graphic design education in the UK has always had a relationship with
professional practice, indeed it would be churlish not to concede that students often
choose to do degree in graphic design with the intent to practice professionally. However,
the graphic design curriculum is being asked to serve many masters: a (disgruntled) graphic
design profession, the fee paying student (or investor), the institution (by meeting
appropriate indicators of employment and satisfaction success), the market (in the form of
published league tables) and to consider calls (from design academics and practitioners) to
substantially rethink an outmoded model of design education to accommodate a changing
context for practice. The latter itself a contested field of proposals including: design for
social good, interdisciplinarity, advanced research skills, knowledge and application of
scientific, business, social and human approaches and the appropriation of critical art
practices with a focus on authoritorial and inquiry based practice.
For any discipline, what constitutes legitimate disciplinary knowledge practices and
how they should be recontextualised and delivered in a curriculum is a ‘site of struggle
between academics, institutions, disciplinary and professional bodies and the employment
field, as well as government agencies’ (Ashwin 2012:96). We will now explore the origins of
this struggle in graphic design from a structural perspective. To do this we will be using the
work of Basil Bernstein whose key interest was the sociology of specialised knowledge.
Simultaneously facing two ways – the discipline of
graphic design
Bernstein’s ‘pedagogic device’ was developed as a theoretical framework and a set of
conceptual tools to analyse how disciplinary knowledge practices were produced and
transformed into the curriculum. The pedagogic device connects how knowledge is
structured, organised, transmitted and acquired and how this shapes ways of being,
becoming and thinking for students and academics (Ashwin 2012).
One of Bernstein’s useful insights was on the different ways disciplinary knowledge
practices are recontextualised in the curriculum. We will focus on the two kinds useful to
this paper: singulars and regions. For Bernstein, a singular is: ‘a discourse which has
appropriated a space to give itself a unique name. So for example physics, chemistry,
sociology, psychology…’ (Bernstein 2000:9). Singulars have developed ‘a specialised
discrete discourse with its own intellectual field of text, practices, rules of entry,
examinations and licenses to practice’ (Bernstein 2000: 52). What is perhaps crucial to
remark about a singular is the fields of knowledge production (where new knowledge is
35
JAMES CORAZZO
generated) is often the University. Singulars are ‘insulated’ from the discourse of other
disciplines and face inwards and are in contrast to what Bernstein calls regions.
Regions recontextualise singulars in relation to one another, where ‘singulars are
intrinsic to the production of knowledge in the intellectual field. Regions are the interface
between the field of the production of knowledge and any field of practice’ Bernstein
(2000:9). This observation is central to understanding the contested curriculum in graphic
design. Like other professional knowledge curriculums, the discipline of graphic design
simultaneously faces two ways: towards fields of practice (professional practice) and
towards the field of production of knowledge (which we could consider the site of
research, theory, history and academia) (Young 2012). Regions, or professional knowledge
curriculums, always:
… express a tension between the demands of disciplines that are constantly searching
for new, more general, knowledge and the demands of fields of practice, which
constantly face new, often more complex, practical problems.
Young and Muller (2014:15)
Bernstein’s framework makes visible a key challenge for educators of professional
knowledge curriculums – negotiating the space between the academic dimension
(theoretical knowledge) and the vocational dimension (practical knowledge). This,
according to Bernstein, presents two particular challenges. Firstly:
regions become increasingly dependent on the requirements of the external fields of
practice to which they are linked and, that, especially in the case of ‘contemporary’
regions like business studies, tourism, or journalism, commercial considerations are
likely to become increasingly dominant not only in shaping the content, but also in
determining the pace and directions of change. (Young and Beck 2005: 189)
Secondly, regions also impact on the production of identities. Identities produced by
regions ‘are more likely to face outwards to fields of practice’ (Bernstein 2000: 55). Both of
these challenges are evident in key studies of how students learn graphic design. Logan’s
(2006) study established that discourse and metaphor were fundamental to learning
graphic design. This was inculcated through the student’s immersion in a studio culture
and discourse informed by professional practice:
[p]edagogical and professional discourses and practices thus worked together to
constitute the knowledge repertoire in graphic design and to confirm shared views
about the nature of graphic design knowing …. [t]hese features were sufficiently
strongly marked to suggest that educational and professional respondents could be
conceived of as co-partners in the specialized knowledge community of graphic design,
inhabiting overlapping ‘circles’ of competence. (Logan 2006: 341)
Important though these observations were, the study only offered a single definition of
practice that led directly (for those students able to develop the appropriate ‘knowledge
repertoire’) to professional practice. In Logan’s study the form of graphic design evoked in
the curriculum is linked precisely to ‘the requirements of the external fields of practice’. A
form of graphic design education Winkler takes to task:
36
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
There is a closed cycle of design education that replicates the most common design
practice—and feeds into practice that seeks awards based on incremental change
supported by professional organization and trade journals—that feeds back to
education forms for imitation (Winkler 2009:254)
Bernstein‘s concern for the production of specialised disciplinary identities in higher
education were that they should give access to three ‘pedagogic rights’. The first right is
individual enhancement ‘the right to the means of critical understanding and to new
possibilities’ (2000:xx). This right gives way to the confidence to act. The second is the right
to social inclusion and to be able to operate with ‘culturally, socially, individually,
intellectually’ with a right to belong. The third is the right to participation ‘in procedures
whereby order is constructed, maintained and changed.’ (2000:xxi). If we follow this, then
our concern as educators is with providing students ‘equitable access to powerful
curriculum knowledge… capable of taking them beyond their experiences’ (Rata and
Barrett 2014:3) and to enable students to ‘adopt or reject the values of the discipline,
judge or challenge quality and create new knowledge’ (Giloi 2014:235). The kind of
‘powerful knowledge’ that Winkler (2009), Davies (2012), Friedman (2012) and Frascara
and Guillermina (2012) are advocating in the graphic design curriculum goes beyond
‘design discourses that (although embedded in a formal learning situation) are derived
from practice’ (Logan 2012:10). Such discourses do not fully encompass the intellectual
and conceptual growth required to understand graphic design’s social, economic and
cultural contexts (Winkler 2009).
Students’ conceptions of graphic design: a
phenomenographic approach.
The focus of this paper now turns to the specialised disciplinary identities developed on
an undergraduate graphic design programme. It begins with an outline of the methodology
used:
Methodology
This study uses a phenomenographic approach to examine graphic design students’
conceptions of the discipline. The central concern of phenomenography is to make sense
of how people handle situations or phenomena by understanding and describing how they
experience them. This approach assumes people experience a given phenomena in a
‘limited number of qualitatively different ways’ (Marton and Booth 1997:112). The
qualitatively different ways are known as the ‘variation’ of experience. It is the variation
that makes phenomenography useful for educational research because identifying
variation in how students experience phenomena (education) can lead to important
change:
these capabilities can, as a rule, be hierarchally ordered. Some capabilities can, from a
point of view adopted in each case, be seen as more advanced, more complex, or more
powerful than other capabilities. Differences between them are educationally critical
differences, and changes between them we consider to be the most important kind of
learning. (Marton and Booth 1997: 111)
37
JAMES CORAZZO
Interviews were conducted with eight students from an undergraduate graphic design
programme in a UK University. In keeping with the phenomenographic method students
were approached purposively to maximise variation (Akerlind 2003). Of the eight students,
there were two first years, three second year and three were final year students. Each
interview lasted for 45–60 minutes and were recorded and transcribed. They concentrated
on gathering students’ accounts of how they approached a single (Self-selected) design
project. The interviews focused on the processes they deployed, the role of tutors and how
they made sense of these activities in relation to their conceptions of graphic design. By
focusing on the concrete activity of a project, the interviews sought to uncover the
students’ intentions and the meanings various activities held for them.
Data analysis
Phenomenographic analysis seeks to develop a hierarchal and empirically situated
series of categories of description. A category of description is a way to describe how
something (a given phenomena) is experienced or conceptualised. In keeping with most
phenomenographic approaches, categories are hierarchally and logically constructed. For
example, a category of description at level 4 will also contain an awareness of categories at
levels 1, 2 and 3. So a conception that graphic design is about communicating ideas, may
also contain an awareness that graphic design requires the application of skills and
techniques. However, a category of description at level 3 will not contain an awareness of
higher levels (4 and 5).
It should also be noted that the categories of description have been constituted
between the researcher and the data. A different researcher may find a different set of
conceptions from the same data (Marton and Booth 1997).
Finally, categories have been derived from pooling the data as a whole therefore, no
category is derived from a single transcript. In the results section that follows participant
quotes are used to offer an illustration of each category, but more often than not, these
quotes will only offer a partial, rather than complete view.
Results
Phenomenographic analysis led to five qualitatively different conceptions of the
discipline of graphic design:
1. Graphic design is the application of a range of skills and techniques in the production
of ‘graphic artefacts’.
2. Graphic design is creatively and personally responding to a problem/brief in the
production of ‘graphic artefacts’
3. Graphic Design is producing outcomes in response to the needs of others
(client/audience)
4. Graphic Design is the communication of concepts on behalf of others (or sometimes
self)
5. Graphic design offers the possibility to change, challenge, propose and question
through the design of interactions.
I will now go on to discuss the category of descriptions in more detail:
38
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
1. Graphic Design is the application of a range of skills and techniques in the production
of ‘graphic’ artefacts.
Student’s adopting these conceptions emphasised the acquisition of graphic design
skills and techniques. They focused on skills that would result in the production of typical
graphic artefacts such as ‘logos’ and ‘identities’, for example, gaining knowledge of
specialist software and technical processes such as grids. The purpose of education
therefore, was to prepare them for being a graphic designer, and the curriculum was
understood by frequent reference to what they believed a professional graphic designer
does: use software, apply skills and produce graphic artefacts. The self in relation to the
discipline was constituted in a transactional way – they studied graphic design in order to
gain skills and techniques that would enable them to make graphic artefacts.
we did this vox pop thing where we went around the Uni and asked people [about
graphic design] and they just said something like 'Oh it's design but with graphics' or
'It's drawings' or 'a colouring in subject' and I like it because it's not just a colouring in
subject but there's also the technology side of it where people use like Illustrator and
Photoshop which I love. So I came into the course thinking I can learn loads on
Illustrator, it's like I'm good at that kind of digital side of things and that's what I enjoy
so I just wanted to learn more about it (Year 1 student)
So to me that was the, that was definitely the graphic side that I haven't really touched
upon, because we did the layout and having every page the same and getting the, yes
just the layout base, working on an actual grid, going down to the grid, that to me was
new and I think that that's graphic designing. (Year 1 student)
2. Graphic design is about creatively and personally responding to a problem/brief in
the production of ‘graphic artefacts’
Student’s adopting these conceptions focused on describing graphic design as working
to a brief or within a set of restrictions. Accounts of professional practice were used to
justify this position: ‘you can’t just do what you want’. Distinctions were made with fine art
‘where you do what you want without purpose’. There was the sense that responding to a
brief or problem imbued the artefact and the activity of graphic design with purpose unlike
fine art that was ‘just’ about personal expression. However, there was still room for them
to put their own ‘twist’ or ‘style on it’ and produce, through the application of creativity
and personal insight, a graphic artefact.
Whereas in Graphics you're set a brief so you follow a structure and you have, say the
outcome is to publicise for a book or like, there's a purpose to it and you're given an
instruction and then you follow it. To me that's better because if it was as open as Fine
Art I wouldn't know where to start and it's already, say they give you this brief on, to do
the book publicity for this book, like I'd, that's still in itself really open and you could do
anything within that, so I think having that starting point for me is really important
compared to Fine Art say. (Year 1)
3. Graphic Design is producing outcomes in response to the needs of others
(client/audience)
Student’s adopting this conception of graphic design focused on designing messages
for specific audiences. They recognized the need to research and interpret the needs of
39
JAMES CORAZZO
clients and audiences. They discussed approaches that gave them some insight into these
needs. Creativity, skills and techniques were deployed to meet the needs. Accounts in this
category invoked fine art in order to explain how a graphic designer responds to a problem
within a set of limitations (as described in the second category) but it also included a
relational dimension: the act of graphic design is understood as something that is done
with the needs of others in mind.
Well kind of if you think in terms of Fine Art, quite often it's just the artist's voice,
whereas as a graphic designer has to consider the tone of the voice of the client and
the tone of voice of, say even if they're doing like an editorial illustration or something
they have to consider the tone of the voice of the newspaper or, they're basically
visually communicating something that maybe their client isn't able to so they have to
grasp something that, and they have to communicate and convey something to an
audience that the client is intending to, if that makes sense. (Year 3 student)
To be honest there's always, I feel, like a fine line between Art and then Graphic Design
and understanding that difference is still something I'm trying to figure out myself.
There's very, there's quite a few similarities but right now I'd say it's more for the
purpose, more, very orientated around a brief, around specifications, around an
audience and what they want. (Year 2 student)
4. Graphic Design is about the communication of concepts on behalf of others (or
sometimes self)
Students adopting this conception of graphic design focused on its communicative role.
This was foregrounded in favour of the visual and frequent reference was made to ‘not just
making things look good’. In these accounts communication included synthesising and
distilling information into forms that would make it accessible to specific audiences.
Communication can be variously undertaken on behalf of a client, to meet needs but also
for the self in the communicating of an idea or a body of work. In these accounts, the
reference to professional practice is reduced and graphic design’s broader place in the
world is considered.
it's just sort of visualising ideas but I think it's about simplifying things so a broader
audience can get something out of a message or a meaning. That's what it is to me. So
it's removing complication really just for the betterment of people who need to use the
product. (Year 2 student)
Well, like I say, for me it's just simplification and accessibility and just using it for good. I
can't stand people that do stuff because it looks pretty, I don't see a point in that, it's
like we do visual communication, there's Fine Art and things like that for that. There's a
lot of power to Graphic Design and that's sort of what it is for me, it's to help people to
communicate but do it in a simply and accessible way. (Year 2 student)
5. Graphic design offers the possibility to change, challenge, propose and question
through the design of interactions.
Student’s adopting this conception of graphic design focused on the discipline’s
capacity to initiate change, question norms and think otherwise. Graphic design is
described as a process to investigate and question that leads to opportunities for
interaction. In these accounts the transformational capacity of the discipline is
40
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
foregrounded and the self is positioned in relation to the world as an ‘agent of change’
through graphic design.
I would say that it [impact of this project] has made me think more about graphic
designers as a thinker rather than a doer, so thinking about the idea rather than the
outcome and the fact that we're not limited to what we can do. We can change
anything, so you could actually change the bus if you wanted to, you could change the
way people interact with almost anything just through design, which I don't think many
people know. (Year 2 student)
Having outlined the five qualitatively different and hierarchally arranged categories of
description that emerged from the phenomenographic analysis I will summarise the
variation in students’ conceptions of graphic design. At the lower end the focus on
technical application marked it out from all others categories. In the second category of
description the focus was on the notion of creatively responding to a brief. The third
category of description conceives graphic design around needs and the fourth category of
description is differentiated by the focus on how the communicative function of graphic
design could meet the needs of others or the self. The highest category of description
focused on designs capacity for change through interaction. What was also evident
between each category of description was the way students’ positioned themselves in
relation to the discipline. In the first and second categories the student is positioned in a
transactional way and projects enable the acquisition of ‘graphic design’ skills. In the third
and fourth categories of description the student is positioned in a relational way and
projects enable them to respond to and consider the needs of others. In the fifth category
of description the student is positioned in a transformational way and the project enables
them to engage with the world as an agent of transformation.
Discussion
The discussion will now address two questions at the heart of this paper. Firstly, what
are the implications of the variation in students’ conceptions of graphic design? Secondly,
what can be inferred about the role of the curriculum in shaping this variation? However, it
should be noted although the course on which the students were studying had recently
changed its curriculum significantly, the empirical component of the study does not
analyse the curriculum content and therefore we cannot draw any direct causality. It
should also be noted the hierarchal variation in conceptions are not directly indicative of
the level of study. In other words, students in year 3 didn't automatically correspond with
conceptions in the highest category.
As we saw earlier, Bernstein’s pedagogic device enables a macro level examination of
how disciplinary knowledge practices are recontextualised in the curriculum and it also
enables us to explore how disciplinary knowledge practices are situated at the micro level
of teaching and learning interactions (Ashwin 2012).
In Bernstein’s pedagogic device the students knowledge code generates principles for
distinguishing between contexts (recognition rules) and principles for the creation of
legitimate texts (realisation rules). In other words, these rules govern a student’s ability to
distinguish between the different contexts of graphic design practice and to make
41
JAMES CORAZZO
appropriate and legitimate forms of practice (text) as a result. To illustrate this further, I
will draw on two different accounts of a project discussed during the interviews.
The project asked students to set their own research agenda and develop a selfinitiated brief. For one participant, this project enabled them to realize ‘we can change
anything… you could change the way people interact with almost anything just through
design’. Here their orientation to knowledge (code), built on the conception of graphic
design as transformational, resulted in recognition rules that enabled them to distinguish
and successfully operate in the context of a self-initiated brief. However, another
participant struggled to reconcile the demands of an ‘inauthentic’ project: ‘I've been
taught how to do it myself on the module but then it's not, I've learnt that that's not how it
is in reality, in practice.’ In this case the recognition rules were governed by an orientation
to knowledge built on a conception of graphic design defined by professional practice. This
echoes Bernstein’s speculation that regions could lead to the production of identities that
face outwards. It also supports Reid and Davies findings that ‘students forward projection
into the world of professional work, the perception of the profession, has an important
interaction with the ways in which they go about learning.’ (2003:6)
The categories of description that emerged from the interviews would indicate that a
student’s capability of recognising the differing contexts of practice would diminish in the
lower categories of description. Furthermore, if we return to the discussion on powerful
knowledge and the pedagogic rights associated with this (Bernstein 2000) only the highest
category of description: the possibility to change, challenge, propose and question through
the design of interactions appears to enable access ‘to the means of critical understanding
and to new possibilities … [to participate] … in procedures whereby order is constructed,
maintained and changed.’ (Bernstein 2000:xxi). If such a range in variation in conceptions
of graphic design exists across a cohort then access to pedagogic rights for all may be
questionable.
What does this tell us about the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design? The specialised disciplinary identities (glimpsed through the
phenomenographic study) are, according to Bernstein, projected in two ways: firstly,
through the classification of disciplinary knowledge practices and secondly, through the
framing of the curriculum. For Bernstein, classification regulates what counts as legitimate
knowledge and it can range from strong to weak. Generally, in regions, classification is
weak. This means the struggle for what disciplinary knowledge practices are
recontextualised in the curriculum is likely to be greater and open to constant change. As
we have already established, the borders between academic and professional practice are
not strongly maintained and this was evident in Logan’s 2006 study where the singular
definition of practice appeared to be dictated by the profession. The weak classification of
graphic design also suggests that where academic and vocational dimensions of practice
are recontextualised in the curriculum the contestation is likely to be implicit.
For Bernstein framing regulates how a discipline is taught and how students are given
access. Like classification, framing can be weak or strong. With Graphic design the framing
should be considered weak. I want to suggest that framing remains weak, in part, because
professional practice (projected through trade magazines and countless blogs) as well as
the existence of graphic artefacts in the world is constantly projecting versions of what
graphic design is that in turn, interacts with how students learn graphic design and the
development of specialised disciplinary identities.
42
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
Conclusion
The variation in students’ conceptions of the discipline of graphic design, from the
application of skills; to a means to create change, points to a larger challenge for design
educators who, we have seen, have to negotiate multiple and conflicting demands on the
curriculum.
The challenge for educators is to pay attention to the recontextualisation of disciplinary
knowledge practices into the curriculum in two specific ways. Firstly, it requires a
commitment to operate and make explicit the gap, made visible by Bernstein, between the
academic and vocational dimensions of the discipline. This is the pedagogic framing of
disciplinary knowledge practices to enable students to develop the orientations to
knowledge that will permit them to distinguish different contexts of practice. It may
require stronger pedagogic framing and entail a different set of pedagogic strategies.
Secondly, caution should be applied where students’ conceptions of graphic design are
in the lower category. A curriculum that may appear significantly distinct from their
perceptions of professional practice and designed to expose them to increasingly complex
aspects of the discipline could become, in the eyes of students, increasingly abstract and
irrelevant.
To encourage all students to be asking critical questions of the modes and values of the
very profession they are entering, particularly as the mandate for graphic design in higher
education arises largely from professional practice, represents a significant challenge. Yet
to simultaneously undertake and critique professional practice by recognising graphic
design in a broader context might act as a bridgehead to a form of practice that expands
the conceptual and intellectual methodologies of graphic design practice. Future
specialized disciplinary identities for graphic design should not be those projected only by
professional practice, rather it is the success with which the curriculum can give access to a
range of identities that matters.
References
AIGA (2008) ‘Designer of 2015 trends’ [Online] Available from
aiga.org/content.cfm/designer-of-2015-trends [Accessed 15 January 2015]
Åkerlind, G. (2003) ‘Growing and Developing as a University Teacher: Variation in
Meaning’, Studies in Higher Education, 28:4, pp.375–390,
Ashwin, P. (2012) Analysing Teaching-Learning Interactions in Higher Education:
Accounting for Structure and Agency, London: Continuum
Beck, J and Young, M. (2005) ‘The assault on the professions and the restructuring of
academic and professional identities: a Bernsteinian analysis’ in British Journal of
Sociology of Education 26:2 pp.183-197
Bennett, A., Kennedy, R., Vulpinari, O. (2011) (eds.) ‘Icograda: Design Manifesto’ [Online]
Available from www.ico-d.org/resources/design-education-manifesto [Accessed 1
February 2015]
Bernstein, B. (2000) Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. London: Rowman &
Littlefields.
43
JAMES CORAZZO
Cadle, B. (2011) ‘Are we there yet? Graphic Design’s Next Destination’ proceedings of Sixth
International Design Education Forum of Southern Africa
Creativebloq (2014) ‘Six Reasons Why Design Education is Failing’ [Online] Available from
www.creativebloq.com/graphic-design/6-reasons-design-education-failing-creativeindustry-111413422 [Accessed 1 February 2015]
Davis, M. 2008. Toto, I get the feeling that we‘re not in Kansas anymore... Address to AIGA
Boston. 4 April 2008.
Davis, M. (2012) ‘Leveraging Graduate Education for a More Relevant Future’ in Visible
Language Vol. 46 (1) pp.110—121
Frascara, J. Guillermina, N. (2012) ‘What’s Missing in Design Education Today?’ in Visible
Language Vol. 46 (1) pp.36—53
Friedman, K. (2012) ‘Models of Design: Envisioning a Future Design Education’ in Visible
Language Vol. 46 (1) pp.132—151
Giloi, S. (2014) ‘Design Assessment: a Socially Responsible Practice or Subjective
Judgement?’ proceedings of ‘Design with the other 90%’: Cumulus Johannesburg
Conference, Greenside Design Center and the University of Johannesburg.
Grefé, R. (2007) ‘2015: A design odyssey’. [Online] Available from
www.designtaxi.com/article.php?article_id=351 [Accessed 15 January 2015]
Logan, C. (2006) ‘Circles of practice: educational and professional graphic design’ in The
Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 18 (6) pp.331—343
Logan, C. (2012) ‘Verbalizing the Visual: Researching and Interpreting Design Contexts’ in
Altitude: An e-journal of emerging humanities work, Volume 10, pp.1–15
Marton, F. & Booth, S. (1997) Learning and Awareness, Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mclean, M., Abbas, A. & Ashwin, P. (2013) ‘A Bernsteinian View of Learning and Teaching
Undergraduate Sociology-based Social Science’ in Enhancing Learning in the Social
Sciences. 5, 2, pp. 32–44
Norman, D. (2010). ‘Why Design Education Must Change’ [Online] Available from
www.core77.com/blog/columns/why_design_education_must_change_17993.asp
[Accessed 15 January 2015]
Pryce, V. & Baroness Whitaker. (2011). Restarting Britain: Design Education and Growth.
London: Design Commission. Available at www.policyconnect.org. [2 March 2013]
Reid, Anna and Davies, Allan (2003) ‘Teachers’ and students’ conceptions of the
professional world.’ CLTAD, University of the Arts London.
Tomlinson, M. (2012) ‘Graduate Employability: A Review of Conceptual and Empirical
Themes’ in Higher Education Policy, 25, pp.407–431
Winkler, D (2009) ‘Failure? Is it time to slay the design-dragon?’ in Visible Language Vol. 43
(2) pp. 253—273
Young, M. and Muller, J. (2014) (eds.) Knowledge, Expertise and the Professions, London:
Routledge
44
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Brooke CHORNYAK
Virginia Commonwealth University
bchornyak@vcu.edu
Abstract: This paper presents a case study of a junior level design studio where
food is an entry into systems thinking. In the design classroom, food systems are
a familiar and inclusive concept that provides a set of conditions that require
students to integrate social, economic and environmental phenomena into
comprehensive solutions. Consequently, the study of food as a design problem
can extend beyond a basic identification of nutrition and personal preferences of
taste and flavor into inquiries on accessibility, environmental sustainability, and
political power. Graphic design has traditionally defined and understood the
term ‘systems’ as visual communication structures. However, today’s complex
problems need designers to employ a more comprehensive and shared
understanding of systems thinking for multidisciplinary work environments. At
the semester's end, students gained an understanding of the local, national and
global food system they are a part of through research methods such as concept
mapping, field research, ethnographic studies, and written critical evaluations to
name a few. Working with complex problems for the students reinforces the
necessity for design practitioners to be skilled in systems thinking, and further
substantiates the need for a multi-disciplinary collaborative approach that is
research oriented.
Keywords: systems thinking, food, graphic design, education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
BROOKE CHORNYAK
Learning Within Complex Systems
This paper presents a case study on a Graphic Design studio class, which learns to
comprehend and design within complex systems through the topic of food. For students to
understand a complex system they study and learn how relationships between parts give
rise to the collective behaviors of a system, and how the system interacts and forms
relationships with its environment (Bar-Yam, 2002, p.2). Design educators are in powerful
positions to provide learning environments that privilege problem solving that involves
complex systems over simplistic ones. Modern problems, for example, a healthy and
sustainable food system, involve economic, political and environmental factors that are
more complex rather than complicated (Brown, Harris, & Russell, 2010). The complexities
are a result of each problem’s unique circumstances, the innumerable possible solutions,
changing individual values, and mindsets. In the classroom these conditions that require
systems thinking can help prepare students to address our current and emerging global
challenges.
Sustenance is not only a common need for survival but also a complex issue for many
individuals (Maslow, 1943). When considering the human food system one has to
acknowledge social equity, human and environmental health, economic disparity and
cultural sustainability. These interconnected systems have numerous successes as well as
current and advancing failures. For instance, between now and 2050, the earth's
population will have increased to the point that more food will need to be produced in the
next 40 years than in the previous 10,000 years combined (World Economic and Social
Survey 2011). This increased demand must be met in the face of increasingly unstable
energy supplies and climate patterns. Nevertheless, only increasing the planets food
production won’t solve other issues such as our current diet and health problems. The
Center for Disease Control and Prevention reported more than one-third of adults and
almost 17% of youth were obese in 2009–2010. Results of obesity lead to increased
medical care and costs, obesity-related conditions include heart disease, stroke, type 2
diabetes and certain types of cancer (Ogden, Carroll, Kit, & Flegal, 2012). Other puzzling
and contradictory concerns involve food waste and food security. Surprisingly, in the
United States today 40% of the food produced goes uneaten (Gunders, 2012). However, an
estimated 50 million Americans do not have access to enough food (Coleman-Jensen,
Christian, & Singh, 2014). These problems are a few of the many unique and
interconnected complications the design students in this food systems class are challenged
to consider.
Historically, the Graphic Design discipline has traditionally defined and understood the
term ‘systems’ as visual communication structures for example, brand identities with a
range of visually consistent components (Davis, 2012, pg.216). Emphasis is placed on
creating objects, and systems thinking is used only as formal vocabulary establishing a
recognizable visual identity across a range of platforms, websites, printed matter, and
signage. However, the design discipline is evolving with the introduction of new
technology, social and business needs affecting the desired outcomes of products and
services. Considering how recently ‘new technologies shift our attention from the
arrangement of content to the facilitation of behaviors and mediation of experiences in
the environment itself’ (Davis, 2012, p.217). This occurrence is a radical shift, one that
alters how the discipline approaches how and what we do. The development of useful and
46
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
desirable design work, which facilitates behaviors and the mediation of experiences in the
environment, involves designers investigating and acknowledging the social, economic and
environmental phenomena their work might impact. What is beneficial and evident about
food as a topic is that numerous other systems effect or are in symbiotic relationships with
it.
The projects given in this class exposed the students to systems thinking and a
scaffolded learning experience (Hogan & Pressley, 1997). This means that each project or
problem given re-organized similar content dealing with our food system according to
different points of entry. The students were immersed in complex problem solving from
the beginning of the class and encouraged to discern the nature of things through
comparisons under varied conditions or parameters. For example, students entered the
food system through having to create concept maps. Then again they looked at the food
system as it interacts with small and large-scale points of distribution, such as the grocery
store, corner store and the community farmers’ market. Finally, they designed for their
areas local food system working with a farm and such issues as environmental and human
health systems, community building and cooking. What this approach encourages is an
understanding of the scales at which design functions, as well as the use of appropriate
methods for each problem.
Teaching systems thinking takes a comprehensible method to prepare design students
for emerging avenues of interdisciplinary practice and research that we as educators have
yet to imagine. This method trains and sharpens the designer’s system mind, a capacity to
see things in terms of how they relate to each other. A key aspect of design thinking,
studied by researchers such as Nigel Cross, Donald Schon and Bryan Lawson, appears to be
common across practitioners in their ability to take a broad 'systems approach' to the
problem, rather than accepting narrow problem criteria. An industrial designer, for
example, thinks about a car in terms of all its parts working together to make it go. In
contrast, most Engineers do not think in systems terms, they are concerned about
designing a good piece-part, like a clutch. A systems minds thinks not only about the
vehicle and its components, but also the roadways, fuel stations, environmental impacts,
and the travel experience (Cross, 2011).
Phase One: Visualizing Our Food System With
Concept Mapping
Students began the study by conducting significant research to define ‘a food system’,
from origin to the dinner table. This constrained task was designed to introduce the group
to an abstract problem, however one that had concrete outcomes. Groups of five
individuals were created to divide and focus their research. Class time was spent sharing
knowledge they gathered individually with the group and the rest of the class as a means
to create a democratic classroom. Democratic classrooms establish heuristic skills and
acknowledge the collective wisdom of the classroom. The professor takes on the role of
facilitator or guide during the process.
The class was given a short lecture and reading on concept mapping according to
Novak and Gowin’s work on the subject (1984). Then their research investigations were
synthesized and made into group concept maps over a two-week period. These maps were
periodically refined throughout the semester as their knowledge grew and became
47
BROOKE CHORNYAK
Figure 1
Students making preliminary maps
reference points for future projects. For collaborative research, visualizations are
powerful tools that capture and illuminate the intricacies of the creative process. Creating
visual representations or mapping research also makes this work tangible, and accessible
as a sharable tool for working together. Maps can be studied and interpreted, to locate
points of intervention for their work: where they could alter or improve the system as they
envisioned it. Students can also use these tools to recognize gaps in their individual or
group knowledge and begin to form critical opinions about the topic (Novak, Gowin, &
Kahle, 1984).
Figure 2
An example of a first digital iteration of the students’ food system map
48
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Figure 3
An example of a refined iteration of the students’ food system map
Phase Two: Using Human Centered Design Methods
to Empathize with Others
The second project required the students to craft solutions supporting the sale and
consumption of local foods to consumers they identified through initial inquiries. The
project parameters constrained the design problem by selecting the location, a list of
possible audiences and a one-day workshop on design methods for understanding their
chosen group. The group was first required to start with the following questions; what are
the successes and challenges of the farmers’ market and how might design enhance or
solve these issues? How might the farmers’ markets be turned into a hub for learning and
connecting with your community? Next students were tasked with identifying an audience
from the following list, children, adults with young children, young adults, low-income
individuals, athletes, young professionals, seniors and new immigrants. Once an audience
was identified, ethnographic research was carried out that included crafting surveys,
behavioral mapping, thick descriptions, and video recordings and diaries (Geertz, 1973).
The students were taught the ethnographic research methods commonly used in design in
a one-day workshop prior to starting the project. This type of information gathering helped
generate solutions for outcomes that did not necessarily involve formal design objects, but
49
BROOKE CHORNYAK
rather flexible tool kits, educational events, and space planning. Requiring the class to take
on an audience outside their own age group also helps teach the importance of research. It
was through this work that the students were able to see the specific issues their audience
was facing rather than making assumptions as to the needs and desires of these
individuals. For the final product the research informed the design of a system of two
objects.
Solutions generated ranged in outcomes, from teaching games for children to multi
lingual wayfinding and signs for new Korean immigrants. The student who chose to engage
children in the farmers’ market experience observed the lack of interaction between the
vendors and children. She crafted a smartphone educational app designed to teach
children about where food comes from and how to locate the certified child fun zones at
sponsored booths. Promotion for the app came from vendors who wished to be involved.
These vendors had the option of utilizing different forms of signage like banners,
tablecloths, and signs to advertise their own booth as a kid approved zone and
simultaneously showcase the app. In creating this app the student had to consider the
child, his or her parents as well as the vendors. She capitalized on using the smart phone, a
technology already prevalent in the lives of young children and parents.
Another student identified the need for more promotion and democratization of the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program at the market. She chose to redesign the
Richmond area farmers’ markets wooden currency, Farm Cash. This currency is exchanged
by charging individuals debit, credit and SNAP EBT cards. To distinguish the SNAP program
Farm Cash from the debit card version the student devised wooden tokens with small
ridges carved in the ends. The ridges are subtle so that SNAP users will not be
uncomfortable or embarrassed using government assistance. Distinguishing The SNAP
participants was necessary because they get twice the buying power per dollar and only
food and seeds can be purchased. A different student also chose to work with SNAP
participants, and the ‘Farm to Family’ Bus, a mobile Richmond, VA area famer’s market.
She found that finding a way to communicate and educate SNAP participants was a
difficult endeavor because of time constraints. Many of the individuals the student
interviewed had two jobs and little time to shop for food at a farmers’ market as well as
the assumption that farmers’ markets were more expensive than the local grocery store.
To reach lower-income families she proposed to create digital flyers to be mailed via the
SNAP organization. This was designed to first educate and initiate an interest in the ‘Farm
to Family’ bus. The flyers contained information on using SNAP cards on the bus, healthy
quick recipes and seasonal offerings. Also within her system she included a website and
application to track the Farm to Family bus for quick and easy access. This allowed families
to easily track the mobile market and food drop-off times. The primary focus of her work
was conveying the message that the bus offered more flexibility than imagined and all
families had entry into this market, even SNAP members.
50
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Figure 4
Wooden tokens titled Farm Cash for the famers’ market currency. For the SNAP program
participants the wooden tokens had small ridges carved in the ends.
Learning objectives for the farmers’ market project were what Wiggins and McTighe
cite as six facets of understanding, arranged hierarchically in terms of student
accomplishment (1998). First students identify what they don’t know, this is accomplished
through defining a researchable question. Secondly they develop empathy about the
problem and this is realized through ethnographic research and dialogue with others.
Thirdly, the student’s form a perspective on the issue, asking what information did I find
and how does that shape my work? Then they apply their research and perspective into
tangible outcomes, interpreting what was made and the desired outcomes to explain it to
others. The students made presentations of their research and it’s outcomes to the chair
of the graphic design department.
51
BROOKE CHORNYAK
Phase Three: Self-Directed Design Research for a
Small-Scale Farm
For the semester’s final assignment students were asked to demonstrate the ability to
frame and design for a self-selected food problem within yet another context. In that
process, they had to independently acknowledge diverse stakeholders as well as defend
the inclusion and exclusion of various factors from the problems’ parameters without the
pre-selected constraints from the professor. Victory, a local community sponsored
agriculture farm was in transition with new owners who sought to enrich their
involvement in the community. Alistair Harris, the owner, renamed the business Origins
Farm and was the primary contact for the class project. The farm is small, family-run and
located in Hanover, Virginia. Artisanal produce is grown on their six acres of land, handharvested, tended to daily by Alistair and a small team. The produce is sold at several of
the Richmond area farmers’ markets, restaurants and small organic grocery stores. Each
season, more than 50 different vegetables are grown. Alistair asked the class to generate
work around the following problems. In what ways can design translate the importance of
small farms and their connections to communities? How can design educate individuals
about the ‘system of health’ involved in supporting a small farm? How can design assist in
creating a community focused on growing and sharing foods?
Students formed groups of three and were asked to use the tools and methods learned
from previous projects to conduct research, synthesize their findings into actionable tasks
and finally make a proposal to Origins Farm. Two 3-hour tours and volunteer sessions were
arranged with Alistair and the students. In the first session the students were able to gain a
sense for the work involved in farming and the produced grown. In the second session the
students had time for one-on-one questioning and discussions with Alistair before
finalizing their proposals.
When the students reframed the given question, they often chose to examine issues
they as young adults could identify with. One group chose to develop a greater presence of
Origins Farm on the VCU campus, thus connecting the farm to the VCU community of
students. They conducted surveys and in-person interviews with a wide population of the
VCU faculty, staff and students. They found convenience, accessibility and price to be
limiting concern for students not on the school meal plans. Through this research tool they
were able to identify key conditions of the student body, such as convenience, cost and
customization of the farms potential products they wanted to sell on the VCU campus.
Their solution proposed was a once-weekly salad cart made with Origins Farm’s produce.
However, Origins Farm didn’t have the equipment or means to start a food service
business. The students outlined a budget for setting up a commercial kitchen and permits
necessary for producing salads but found it placed their budget above the intended
amount. A proposal was put forward to find a potential collaborative partnership with a
local catering company, to produce the weekly salads. This partnership would allow both
companies to profit and provided them with a convenient and quick, local food product. In
addition the other work proposed by the group included marketing and relationship
building events to target students with an initiative to eat healthy, quickly and budget
friendly. During the first month of opening the salad cart, young basil plants grown by the
farmers would be given along with instructions for growth and use. This act might
encourage individuals to consider their own food production system. Within this project
52
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
the group indicated their ability to frame their issue within two different yet connected
systems and arrive at a collaborative proposal.
Figure 5
The class learning about farming and food growth at Origins Farm, Hanover, VA.
Figure 6
The once-weekly salad cart made with Origins Farm’s produce and promotional materials.
53
BROOKE CHORNYAK
This next group constructed work around the following inquiry, how can design
educate individuals about the ‘system of health’ involved in supporting a small farm? They
began their work interviewing other students and found that many of this population had
a strong desire to have an interactive learning experience growing their own food. They
capitalized on that wish and proposed a hypothetical cross-disciplinary class called Learn to
Grow. This class would teach sustainable organic farming and problem solving to students.
In the inaugural semester students would have to organize a mini-farm on campus, and
work along side Origins Farm to learn, cultivate and distribute the outcomes of the farm.
Throughout the creation of the class, the group repeatedly had to manage many systems
including town and campus policy on land use when they wanted to reserve a plot of green
space owned by the city. Other systems involved were, production needs involving soil,
water, sunlight to name a few. They also were required to write proposals for the class to
be included in the VCU School of the Arts interdisciplinary curriculum, and schedule faculty
from the Biology, Arts and Design colleges’ involvement. In the planning stage of the
project, care and maintenance during the summer session were also considered.
Figure 7
A promotional poster advertising the call for volunteers at Origins Farm.
Not all students chose to address their peer group. The students were given Origin
Farm’s mission statement as well as business goals. The farm expressed a desire to reach a
broader income base in their CSA program. These student groups created a proposal to
subvert the current economic system built on exchanging goods for cash and create a
bartering system. Their idea extended the CSA membership where people could earn
54
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
credits for produce through work. They organized an online volunteer sign up that allowed
workers to earn their credits. They proposed designing a smart phone application that kept
track of points earned and spend. Attracting this new audience for the CSA was done
through both online and print materials such as large posters, stickers, stencil graphics,
bumper stickers, and magnets.
Though most proposals were not implemented some of the more simple interventions
were. A group of students created a project that helped college students to consider how
their food choices were impacting not only their healthy but also the local food system.
Most college students don’t have much money, time and are relatively new to shopping
for food and cooking. The class created a quick solution, which involved a once-a-week
farmers’ market in Richmond that takes place adjacent to the VCU campus and in a
neighbourhood where many students live. They proposed to Origins to offer a $10 box
complete with a simple recipe and all the ingredients necessary. The veggie box was
advertised school wide via social media and the campus paper. Origin’s farm implemented
this box to not only students but also staff and faculty at VCU and has had much success
with sales.
Conclusion
For students, food systems are a familiar and inclusive concept. Food provides a set of
conditions that requires students to consider far beyond the basic identification of
nutrition and personal preferences on taste and flavour. The content forces them to
examine and acknowledge phenomena such as accessibility, environmental sustainability,
and political power. All individuals have a unique relationship with food and no matter
what your relationship is the act of buying, cooking, eating and enjoying food is universal.
Each student came to the class with their own customs and knowledge to share with the
group, thus engendering familiarity and trust (Tye, 2010). What this research has
demonstrated is that food is a facilitator of conversation. As a topic food naturally invites
us to join in on the conversation because we all have individual experiences, knowledge,
likes and dislikes. Students found that much of this class involved collaboration or
conducting research with strangers, yet many were willing to share their own food
experiences, knowledge and preferences.
To help successfully stage these inquiries in the classroom the students were given a
scaffolded learning experience, where each project re-organized similar content according
to different points of entry. Consequently, they were able to build their knowledge of food,
design research methods and systems thinking with each project. These junior level
students had little to no exposure to the design research process. Nevertheless, the course
was approached through a carefully scaffolded structure that builds to independence in
process and method selection. At the semester's end, students gained an understanding of
both the local, national and global food system, many other systems, as well as basic
design research methods. Working with complex problems reinforces the necessity for
design practitioners skilled in a systems thinking method, and further substantiates the
need for a multi-disciplinary collaborative approach.
55
BROOKE CHORNYAK
References
Bar-Yam, Yaneer. (2002). General Features of Complex Systems. Encyclopedia of Life
Support Systems Oxford, UK: EOLSS UNESCO Publishers
Brown, V. A., Harris, J. A., Russell, J. Y. (2010). Tackling wicked problems: Through the
transdisciplinary imagination. V. A. Brown, J. A. Harris, & J. Y. Russell (Eds.). New York,
NY: Earthscan.
Coleman-Jensen, A., Christian, G., Singh, A. (2014). Household food security in the United
States in 2013. Economic Research Report no. ERR-173 (pp.41). USDA.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. New York,
NY: Berg.
Davis, M. (2012). Graphic design theory. London, England: Thames & Hudson.
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The
interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
Gunders, D. (2012). Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm
to fork to landfill. NRDC Issue Paper. National Resources Defense Council.
Harris, P., Lyon, D., McLaughlin, S. (2005). The meaning of food. Guilford, CT: The Globe
Pequot Press.
Hogan, K., Pressley, M. (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and
issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Larkin, M. (2002). Using scaffolded instruction to optimize learning. Retrieved from
http://www.vtaide.com/png/ERIC/Scaffolding.htm.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396.
Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm
Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., Kahle, J. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Kit, B. K., Flegal, K. M. (2012). Prevalence of obesity in the
United States, 2009–2010. NCHS Data Brief, 82. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for
Health Statistics.
Tye, D. (2010). Baking as biography: Life stories in recipes. Montreal: McGill - Queen’s
University Press.
Wiggins, G. P., McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
World economic and social survey 2011: The great green technological transformation.
(2011) New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
56
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From
Replication to Spontaneity
Carolina ROJAS
University of Los Andes
c.rojas209@uniandes.edu.co
Abstract: This article presents pedagogical exercises and guidelines for the work
of illustration that are based on important referents and extensive practical
experimentation. The trajectories of the creative and visual universes evidence
how certain dynamic processes allow for inquiry into diverse ideological and
tactical fields, which expands the possibilities for generating ideas. After
reviewing referents in related fields, such as arts and design; deepening strategic
mechanisms based on the replication, appropriation, and decontextualization of
images; and translating these images into illustrative and visual language, some
teaching methods were established. These methods comprise the concrete bases
on which to enable students to find their own paths for learning and contribute
to the overall ability of a work to illustrate and generate, in reflexive, automatic,
and spontaneous ways, the possibility of multiple representations with precise
objectives for communication or visual recreation. In the end, this study provides
a valuable set of tools for teaching and learning the art of illustration.
Keywords: appropriation; arts and design; illustration; pedagogy
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
CAROLINA ROJAS
Introduction
In considering the importance of illustration and the complexity of creative processes,
extensive academic research was performed about work in this field, a task that explored
and tested methodologies to establish ideal guidelines that include the didactic tools with
the most impact on such processes. The exercise of creating visual representations for
different media has attracted increased attention over time; this exercise, which has
partially standardized due to its exploration in different environments, is constantly
evolving.
Illustration is the creation of images or visual pieces with the explicit intent to
communicate; although drawing is its structural foundation, the difference between the
two disciplines is clear. According to Terence Dalley, there are specific parameters that
define each of the disciplines: Illustration and drawing can never be completely separated;
illustration is based on traditional artistic techniques. Generally, illustration is considered
an art within a commercial context (Dalley, 1982).
Thus, illustration is defined by specific functional guidelines. The diverse types of
illustrated printed media all provide opportunities to document, recreate, and visualize
ideas. Currently, the possible applications of illustration are multiplying and may serve
editorial, literary, publicity, and scientific functions in worlds that include the cinema,
fiction, and animation. Hence, research on teaching and practicing illustration aims to
explore and identify the tools necessary to enhance learning and strengthen the
development and advancement of communicative expression.
The aim of this article, after inquiring into diverse ideological and strategic fields, is to
share some significant aspects of this investigation by referencing determinants in areas
such as arts and design, and the processes of illustration. The latter were experimented in
a step-by-step fashion, from the initial drawing phase to the final result of the
compositions, to determine a logical, comprehensive sequence in the process of
development.
Then, the content of this paper outlines the revised processes, ideas, and methods that
are needed for the creative practices. It includes the basic starting points, specifying the
learning process and elaborating upon fail-proof methods, to effectively develop each
stage. For drawing, the starting point for illustration, it was important to take into account
and experiment with different practices to develop precision methods to overcome the
challenges and difficulties of this task. It expands on the remake, which is defined as a new
version of a work (Figure 1), the appropriation, and the decontextualization of images to
find totally unforeseen expressions, and translates images using systematic compositions
for their precise configuration.
Each conceptual aspect in this paper elaborates upon outside sources whose purpose is
to elucidate the processes that serve as practical guidelines. Didactic essays, current
trends, and other factors, which, together with academic vision and experience, will
validate the explored exercises and propose ways to see, convey ideas, and link theory
with practice.
This paper emphasizes the development processes and academic exercises that are
pertinent to the construction of images. It also reviews pedagogical experience,
highlighting the applicability of different practices covering a broad range of parameters,
including the linking of analogue and digital tools to give strong results that contribute to
58
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
the visual world and to generate ideas that can be incorporated into projects at any point
in the creative process. Finally, it provides significant conclusions about pedagogical
initiatives, their projection into the academic field, and the media of contemporary
expression.
Figure 1
Source: Cano, L. (2012). Morning Coke [Class exercise - Remake]. Bogotá, Colombia:
Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
Methodology: Starting concepts
When learning to illustrate, students delve into drawing and communicating. The initial
step is to understand the essence of drawing and its power beyond simple representation,
that drawing is a tool with which to visualize what is to be communicated, represent what
is seen or experienced. This is achieved as a consequence of mental rigor. According to the
structure proposed by Betty Edwards (1999) in her book, The New Drawing on the Right
Side of the Brain, on how to learn to draw, certain steps can be taken to fully reach the
Gestalt shape, or the complete form. After reflecting on her methods, I was interested in
expanding on them and experimenting with students in an illustration class. To fully this
art, a coherent order, similar to the one Edwards uses in the descriptions of her exercises,
has to be established. First, this sequence was determined. Then, the methods of learning
how to draw were identified and studied. Because drawing is the backbone of illustration,
the first requirement is learning to observe. Subsequently, exercises that used copying and
referents as starting points were given—copy, trace, and appropriate; suggest a new point
of view; and recontextualize (Figure 2). Thus, students learned to perceive not faces,
bodies, or landscapes but lines, shapes and forms. Copying is a common practice in
learning, and appropriating images to recreate them must be fully acknowledged as
historically valid.
59
CAROLINA ROJAS
Figure 2
Source: Jiménez, D. (2013). Slasher [Class exercise – Digital Illustration]. Bogotá,
Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
Figure 3
Source: Collazos, A. (2012). Jerry Tea Only [Class exercise – Digital Illustration]. Bogotá,
Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
60
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
It was also important to analyze the concepts applicable to these methodologies. For
this reason, theoretical concepts were studied, which was done by providing information
about the contextual backgrounds and experiences of artists, designers and illustrators.
Once students acquired experience in mimetic and reference compositions, the first
illustrative discourses arose, based on decontextualization and methods for image
updating (Figure 3).
At this point, students faced major challenges in directly communication messages
through illustration and reviewing the different forms of expression in their direct, partial,
or mute relationships with texts and words. Finally, students attempted automatic
drawing, which is free and imaginative, before they moved on to illustrating.
The construction of images from a remake — appropriation,
and decontextualization
The concept of remake (defined as a new version or reissue) is a common expression in
certain artistic media. It is conceived as a new way of approaching creativity that is
characterized by reinterpreting and reinventing images that already exist, and adopting
known scenarios to give them new contexts. Remakes seek to give new meanings, or
reinvent, pre-existing images by making reference to them when their original meanings
are too intangible. Thus, remakes are not expected to be entirely original. We are all
situated in a historical context that informs what exists today. We ourselves are processes
and compilations, and we have a rich history of creations from which to choose to see,
reuse, and rethink to create different messages.
Recognizing an image as an original or a copy depends on the context in which it is
approached. According to Boris Groys (2008), a copy is never a copy, but rather, an original
in a new context. When making a duplication, or more precisely, a repetition, within an
academic environment, the sense of the original image changes completely — it becomes
motivation for enthusiastic learning, which makes copying a valid contemporary exercise.
Copying images is often used in teaching due to its effectiveness in allowing students to
refine the process of drawing and illustration.
There have always been conflicts regarding the concept of originality. According
philosopher Walter Benjamin, works of art have always been susceptible to reproduction:
‘What was created by men can be imitated by men. Students have made copies as an
artistic exercise, teachers make them to make works widespread, and finally third parties
copy them eager to make profit’ (Benjamin, 1973, p. 18). To translate an existing image,
however, is perhaps the most intimate way to relate and understand its formal
construction, as different artists have done it throughout art history. When making a copy,
one is creating a unique image because not every trace is copied, a personal style is
infused, and the new work is necessarily approached from a different perspective.
Illustrators conceive and design. They are responsible for the ‘mental thing [cosa
mentale]’ (Spies, 2009, p.15) and have complete control over the image’s conception. They
select their models personally, which is but one of the first decisions made during the
creative process. Illustrators start from a reference point and then take a unique approach
towards the handling of technique and materials; thus, the original characteristics of their
referents are lost as an image is appropriated and developed. This is particularly evident
when an original image is compared to the resulting illustrations. Images first have to be
de-constituted to be reconstructed; in his essay The Glass Message, Werner Spies
61
CAROLINA ROJAS
introduces the term ‘selection criteria’ (2009) and the idea of a personality who makes a
decision, a personnalité du choix (2009). This personality accepts or rejects what is
included in an image by filtering, imposing a new character, and making it personal. It is
through vigilant observation and strictness that a personality chooses his or her intended
results. Thus, according to Spies, the reproduction and selection in the development of
each image is aligned with the personal points of view and criteria of each illustrator
(Figure 4).
Figure 4
Source: Sierra, L. (2012). Remake [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
Decontextual updates
Decontextualization redefines an image, i.e., changes its nature, reconverts its
meaning, and represents new narratives. When creating an image, the intention is to
clearly transmit its components, objects, characters, or scenarios in ways that allow for
interpretation of this new definition. The process of decontextualization through
illustration is nurtured by referring to works that contribute similar perspectives; these
perspectives actively shift within creative and visual environments, for ‘under each picture
there is always another one’ (Crimp, 2009, p. 78). According to Ana María Guasch (2001),
images can be conceived from other images, and it is valid to take these contributions and
traditions as a starting point to create other stories, inventions, or fictions by integrating
personally reflective and imaginative points of view.
Some examples of the validity of this concept include Marcel Duchamp,
photomontages, Dadaism, and turning ready-made ordinary objects into works of art by
decontextualizing and recontextualizing them: Duchamp’s ready-made has acquired a
62
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
considerable scope, after being portrayed for several years as a sympathetic nonsense: the
deliberated choice of the artist modifies the first aim of the object; it assigns a totally
unexpected expressive vocation (Cabanne, 1967, p.4). Duchamp did this by adorning the
Mona Lisa with a moustache, an act that allowed for the piece to be appropriated and
signed. He also introduced phrases that, according to him, had no logical sense in relation
to the object. He attempted to decontextualize them; however, he realized that everything
acquires meaning; that the brain is capable to making sense of strange relationships, and
in ways that are unique to the individual viewer. There is always a way to link things one to
another, even if it means changing the symbolic value of an object or, in this case, the
components of a created image.
By the mid-twentieth century, pioneering artists who achieved significant notoriety
through transcendental pop art, such as Andy Warhol, Robert Rauschenberg, Claes
Oldenburg, Jime Dine, Tom Wesselman, and Roy Lichtenstein, represented, mixed, and
reinterpreted mundane objects and images of everyday life with bold and shocking
juxtapositions that reflected elements of cultural interactions. Each of these artists defined
their own voice — Warhol's early drawings had very defined lines, for example.
Lichtenstein, on the other hand, produced a less-recognized series of black and white
drawings during the mid-sixties; these revealed the development of his original pieces
when he first started appropriating commercial illustrations and comic strips to
experiment with styles that simulated commercial reproduction techniques. Both types of
drawing represent essential and original contributions to pop art and drawing history.
Likewise, pop surrealism, also known as Lowbrow art, adopted similar parameters.
Robert Williams (2009), one of its predecessors, defines Lowbrow as conceptual realism, a
movement that goes beyond pop art because it depends almost entirely on the
appropriation or copy of something popular. Thus, it is very specific. It was an underground
visual art movement that arose in California in the late seventies that made great
contributions due to its aesthetic, which is loaded with references to popular art, comics,
punk, kitsch, vintage illustration, among others. It mainly reuses images to communicate
clear concepts.
Another concept to consider is appropriation, which translates as taking possession of
something. In an artistic sense, it is about copying images or appropriating them in an
intentional way — with the clear purpose of producing new images. It is not plagiarism
because the origins of the referenced works are recognized. As a matter of fact, the copied
images need to be recognized and reflected upon during the act of appropriation act itself
(Figure 5).
63
CAROLINA ROJAS
Figure 5
Source: Miani, A. (2012). I Love Grandma [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department
of Design, University of Los Andes.
As established by critic Carlos A. Hernandez (2009), appropriation implies adaptation,
active reception, and transformation based on its own code. Rather than being a discourse
in and of itself, adaptation and a personal seal are inherent in the selection of the referent,
its transformation from one medium to another, and the formal conception and execution
of the technique.
This became a preferred strategy for a series of artists during the early eighties, as
exemplified by Pictures, an exhibition that took place in New York in 1977. This exhibition
interpreted recognizable images; a process of ‘rematerialization’ was proposed. Troy
Brauntuch, Jack Goldstein, Sherrie Levine, Robert Longo, and Philip Smith were some of
the artists who participated in the exhibition. According to Ana María Guasch (2001), for
most of these artists, the power of conviction is not in the plot but in the image: they
‘copied’ works from other authors, but recorded them with their own imprint, denying any
form of plagiarism. This directly relates to similar processes and inquiries in illustration.
Appropriation was a response to minimalism and conceptualism. It proposed a return
to the pictorial image and claimed a place as a reaction to modernism; however, the
pictorial image was no longer about representing reality but recontextualizing it. Images
were generated through the reproduction of other images. This movement had a different
aesthetic and initiated the development of methods are still used today in creative fields
to develop ideas and discourses. The philosopher Roland Barthes described it as a practical
method of criticizing the ideology behind consumer culture and also noted the originality
of appropriated images. Sherrie Levine (2009), a founding artist of this movement,
proposed that only a previous gesture can be imitated, never the original; that whoever
64
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
creates images draws on an immense encyclopedia of possibilities. She points out that
‘every image is leased and mortgaged. We know that a picture is but a space in which a
variety of images, none of them original, blend and clash’ (Levine, 1982, p. 81).
Artist Robert Longo, during the era of mass media, desired to influence the
contemporary period, embrace the aesthetic codes that are present in everyday life, and
assess their sociological implications. His art combined traditional drawing with content
that often shocked or disturbed the spectator; it assumed an appropriationist philosophy
that represented artistic images based on previous ones. In his series Men in the Cities
(1979), Longo incorporated his works into the visual milieu of the time, which was the
rebirth of realism and figurative art that was no longer focused on the real but on the
avatars and gods of the imagination, often inspired by references from film and television.
The goal of this paper is not to analyze this movement but to reflect upon how it had the
strong potential to be adopted into other media, in particular, illustration work, which
validated the artistic process of image creators.
Appropriation is a common to many fields, education has also been influenced by this
point of view. Many educators have found it valid to apply this practice to develop
teaching methodologies. It is valid because historically, many geniuses, artists, and
scientists have learned by observing and copying reality. According to the Colombian
educator and artist Esteban Peña (2006), drawing covers or adaptations creates new
arguments, which makes it an effective technique.
Currently, decontextualization is an essential part of audiovidual media creation
processes, According to Michalis Pichler in Statements on Appropriation (2009), intellectual
property is the oil of the twenty-first century; i.e., it is the raw material. Artists such as Paul
MacCarthy, Fabian Ciraolo, and Rodolfo Loaiza create images depicting historical, nostalgic,
and iconic figures of the illusory world in the present; this extremely visual work blends the
past with the present and gives such figures new meaning. MacCarthy, for example,
portrays the icons of the illusory world of the entertainment industry by using images of
pornography, violence, and horror. Ciraolo adds contemporary details to iconic figures to
the present, placing them outside of their contexts. Loaiza refers to the loss of fantastic
characters by exploring characters that in childhood are seen as icons filled with utopian
values and are now confronted by a world of frenzy and eccentricity. Thus, multiple
referents can be found among artists, designers, and illustrators whose creation methods
are based on decontextualization. In this contemporary method of creation, an effective
instruction method for students, one that is based on the use of images and concepts that
carry implicit contextual layers, helps them to resolve the creative process.
According to Éric Troncy in his essay ‘Hard Drive’ (2009), the concept of an image may
acquire an impressive quality when it is not only an image but represents an inexistent
reality: hic et nunc. This type of image captures a precise yet ephemeral instant of an event
that did not really happen. Each image is formed by a compilation of referential
representations that when placed together, construct another reality. Likewise, scenarios
may be recreated using the collective imagination by photographing models in specific
poses that can be drawn later.
When using referential images, changing the context, and transposing and varying the
means deny the copy status. In appropriation, the referential image is expanded upon,
which gives originality to a work that has emerged from a set of images. That is why the
creation of contemporary images is, according to Boris Groys (2009), an individual decision
65
CAROLINA ROJAS
to include or exclude the objects and representations that circulate anonymously in our
world and to give them new context.
Photorealism: Drawing fragmentation for image construction
Important artistic genres to take into consideration are photorealism and hyperrealism.
The evolution of photorealism can be seen during the sixties and seventies, when the
creation of images was based on photographs to gather visual information and to accurate
translate the reference (Figure 6). This movement grew from pop art in which artists
faithfully transferred actual images of popular culture or scenes from everyday life.
Figure 6
Source: Prieto, J.D. (2012). Untitled [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
Hyperrealism bases its aesthetic principles on photorealism. It is also described as a
figurative photorealistic rendering. Perhaps the difference between these two styles is that
photorealism resembles a photograph and hyperrealism is intended to look like reality
itself, which is not necessarily based on a photograph but creates a visual illusion; it is less
literal than photorealism.
Richard Estes, one of the pioneers of photorealism, painted in the trompe-l'œil style,
from the French ‘to trick the eye’, a style of pictorial figuration in which the elements
created an illusion the spectator would believe was real. It is a technique that comes from
66
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
ancient Greece, was used by Roman muralists, and since the Renaissance, has been used
by many artists. With photography, the possibility of total realism in illustration was
enhanced, which can be seen in the stylistic differences between illustrators who imitate
photographs and strive to achieve the highest level of reality, and the ones who drifts
away from realism and add imaginary details.
It is pertinent to mention the work of Chuck Close (though its purpose and function is
not illustrative) due to his creation methodologies for conceptual and minimal art,
especially in his systematic technical restrictions that require analysis from those learning
to draw and illustrate. According Close (1979), the imposition of a series of technical
limitations provides a positive change in a work and ensures accuracy in drawing. This
artist not only uses a grid, which has been done previously by other great masters to
transfer the details of a photograph to a painting that would later be covered by pigments,
but to reveal an essential part of his work and purpose of the process.
The hyperrealist Denis Peterson impresses with his paintings that look like
photographs. They are accurately worked on a grid by filling frame by frame with pigments
to replicate a photograph and go beyond the visual possibilities. Bert Monroy, photorealist
painter, wondered why such artists do not simply take a photograph, which is a pertinent
question when creating illustrations and drawings that look like photographs. Monroy
replies that first, he is not a photographer, and, second, to him, what is important is the
process, not the result, ‘it is not the destination that is important — it is the journey’
(Monroy, 2013). The challenge of recreating reality is his true motivation.
The drawings in the exhibition After(h)ours (2011), from the Spanish artist Juan
Francisco Casas, show not only thematic and conceptual interest but are also meticulously
technical, even though the work is in contrast to academic orthodoxy in that it uses tools
such as Bic pens and markers. Casas offers a sense of how any image, no matter how
mundane, can manage to become important thanks to a technical production process that
consecrates the work through dedication, perfection, and time investment.
Processes and development
The essential aspects of the process of creation have been identified and integrated to
develop exercises that, along with academic instruction and technical practice, were
synthesized in battery of extensive lessons that were done with students. The processes
developed for the construction of images explored the possibilities for and alternatives to
analog and digital layout and applied communicative concepts and techniques. These main
points will be elaborated upon in the subsequent paragraphs.
1. R EMAKING AND APPROPRIATING IMAGES
The first exercises focused on translating photographic language into illustrative
language, starting from the selection of the images to be appropriated and including all the
decisions made in its reinvention. This practice allowed students to identify the image’s
composition, filter these aspects, and impose new character to make it their own.
The selection of referents directly reflects the present time. When images are mixed,
separated, and redefined, the nature of the contemporary world is revealed through the
iconography of an era. The world of visual information is vast and seeks to narrate the
present. Digital media has enabled much greater access to pre-existing images.
67
CAROLINA ROJAS
Illustration works closely with design; they are both creative ways in which to integrate
thought and communication. A drawing can be a first approach to an idea: it is visualized
and manifested as a visual language. In drawing, illusions or delusions of reality are
created. To translate photographic language into an illustrative language necessarily
involves the steps pertaining to the drawing process. It is fundamental to have effective
bases on which to develop a drawing, as explained by drawing professor Humberto Junca:
mimetic, classic, that one that tries to reproduce with 'fidelity' a given referent. That
drawing that is like a tracing of a preceding image (2006, p. 56). The idea is to understand
how to draw in a way that repeats and translates the same forms of an original
photograph.
Many consider the act of tracing or copying an image as cheating or plagiarism.
However, plagiarism is appropriating someone else’s image and presenting it as your own.
Copying enables students to learn to construct the structure of another image by repeating
and tracing to forge a new image, which is a constructive, critical, and valuable experience.
In his talk with students, Portuguese illustrator André da Loba (2013) assured them that
it would be a waste not to use the legacies from other creators and that re-creation of
images is not always plagiarism but it has to be determined carefully.
Thus, tracing is a pedagogical tool, and such an exercise was presented to students
after studying similar methods described in Edwards (1999). According to Edwards, to
learn how to draw, we must learn to see, or in order words change the way we perceive
things. That is why we speak of translating and analyzing tone, stain, and form — such
discussion generates an understanding of construction through rigorous and structured
observation. Tracing is an effective method to through which to learn perspective and
assimilate the steps in building an image. If someone traces and repeats this procedure
several times, they will then be able trace the image by memory without the need for
mechanistic aids, which leads to the skill of automatic drawing.
To achieve a precise and impressive result, technique, materials, and tools are
important. Precision drawing has proven to be versatile enough to provide a fluid line
without interruptions in the transition between analogue and digital. The teaching process
was based on pure technique to fully explore its expressive stylistic potential.
Using a rapidograph or a technical pen allows for creating illustrations with a fine and
unique dotted style, while the use of a line is more dramatic and detailed (Figure 7). This
exercise perfects a method for determining which results are fundamental — drawings
with immediate contour and fluency are put off in favor of subtlety and detail.
Consequently, a good use of line can lead to experimenting with new complexities by
extending and expanding the possibilities of the stroke. Each of these methods has two
main techniques to develop an illustration: cross hatching and stippling.
Students manifested the challenges of translating an image to paper differently. At the
beginning they had some difficulty, especially in translating complex aspects of the image,
such as faces and hair; and managing light, shadow, sharp contrasts, and proportion. This
is common and is related to learners’ abilities, technical skills, and experience. However,
the method of tracing an image was appropriate because of its wide scope and
effectiveness; when taught with the necessary dedication and concentration, students
strengthen their skills to achieve the expected results. Thus, when integrated into teaching
guidelines, these processes translate into effective illustrative results. With these methods,
students exclude the original character of the reference and appropriate the image,
68
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
deconstruct it, and generate their own versions. This is precisely what these techniques
aim to do when insisting that images be redrawn with constancy, thoroughness, and
accuracy.
Figure 7 Source: Rincón, E. (2013). Untitled [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of Design,
University of Los Andes.
2. T HE GRID SYSTEM
The segmented composition of images was also contemplated, starting from the small
sections that make up a whole. By using a grid technique, students achieved a critical
perspective because they were led to explore beyond what they thought they saw and to
identify details that would not be noticeable when looking at the image as a whole.
According to the description given by Joseph Muller-Brockman in Grid Systems (1982),
this procedure is used to widen, move, or reduce a photograph or drawing and consists of
tracing a grid over the image that is going to be reproduced. Later, the same grid is set-up
on a different piece of paper but made larger or smaller; images are then moved frame by
frame. This tactic seeks to teach how to see so that one might draw. If you don't know how
to observe, translating what is perceived into a pictorial language is very difficult. Through
this intelligible and analyzable process, the level of detail in the shapes, volumes, and
tones can be heightened (Figure 8).
69
CAROLINA ROJAS
Figure 8
Source: Rincón, E. (2013). What you lookin´at punk? [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia:
Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
At first, this methodology may seem extensive and complex, but its results are
surprising when constructing an image through its negative and positive spaces, where
lights and shadows are conceived as the stain and the whole, respectively. This study
implemented a similar procedure to the one developed by Colombian artist Daniel
Salamanca, who attended to one of the exercise sessions. In his work Creator Genealogy
(2012), Salamanca did interesting work by filling out little squares on millimeter graph
paper. From these, an image can be generated that is similar to the structure of a digital
image composed of pixels. His work travels from the analog to digital in its graphic
reproduction. The act of drawing itself forces each student to observe what they wish to
illustrate, to separate and join all the pieces back together in their minds, and to memorize
their methods so that they’re able to draw it again. In the words of Bergen, when teaching
drawing, it is commonplace to say that the key lies in the process of viewing and that one
line and area of color are not really important because they register what it seen but
because they allow us to keep seeing (Bergen, 2011).
Considering the importance of structural drawing to illustration, it is essential to refine
this technique for best results. The perception of negative space, as opposed to positive
forms, must be fully understood. For this, the exercises were intended to show negative
spaces by observing a referential photographic image and its translation into an
illustration. Once the positive shapes and negative spaces were identified, the students
proceeded to work on contour by using a grid. By exploring these mechanisms, they were
able to determine the precise location of referential key points for defining contours and
shapes. Once the structural sketches were ready, they proceeded to carefully work on the
70
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
images’ detail and definition by moving frame by frame to define tone, light, and shadow
and fill in the blank spaces to complete the image.
They used pencils and graphite to do these exercises due to their monochromatic
properties and special features that allow for resolution of such images. The students
mastered two essential techniques — first, the expression of form by lines and second, the
shading and amplification of lines to achieve a photorealistic effect. Although all students
followed the same steps, each of their strokes seemed to be absolutely authentic and
reflective of their personalities. Such unique features become the fingerprints of their own
signatures.
3. D ECONTEXTUALIZATION
This type of exercises sought to provide students with the tools to enable them to
generate new ideas. The goal was to redefine images. For a composition to contribute
coherent and explicit designs, it is fundamental to objectively determine the ideas,
concepts, environments, and creative components within the medium and techniques of
the didactic approach. These new images sought to convey messages, ideas, changes,
reinventions, or sensations in different situations. Their construction clearly implies
transferring image elements, objects, characters, or scenarios to elucidate this new value
(Figure 9).
Figure 9
Source: Cáceres, J. (2013). Woody Allen [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
71
CAROLINA ROJAS
According to art critic Eric Troncy, this realistic pictorial style obviously leaves an open
door to narrative possibilities that confirm the aesthetic and cultural context that is being
postulated (2009). This exercise thus focused on communicating ideas solely through
image with no text, meaning they had to be strong and clear enough to have coherent
interpretations. Image development is a process that must strike a dynamic balance
between the external social world and the inner personal universe (Smulders, 2009).
Illustrations achieved by well-thought out strokes, contours, volumes, and spaces reflect a
fascinating interaction.
Photorealism and realistic figurative aesthetics help to decontextualize collective
imaginary icons due to enabling their recognition. The decision to make iconic characters
contemporary may clearly be to create irony, criticize, or offer messages that reel in the
reader, which makes this approach effective and necessary to include when teaching
methods of illustration. As academic critic Linda Hutcheon claims in her text The Politics of
Postmodernism, ‘present representations come from past ones and what ideological
consequences derive from both continuity and difference’ (Hutcheon, 1993, p. 1).
Decontextualization practices require that students reflect upon and define multiple
variables. All elements must be minutely inspected to generate an intended message in
the decontextualized and appropriated image. Another challenge is to achieve one’s goals
by properly assembling the components on which the main idea is based and unifying the
multiple concepts.
This exercise encouraged students to tune into all elements of the configuration
process and to relate these elements with the appropriate means. A very ‘pure’ drawing is
used in this exercise. The illustrative work is done digitally in this stage. The digital drawing
process is very similar to traditional drawing and painting, which requires paint, pencils,
brushes, and a working surface — there are parallel elements in the specialized software
(Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop) for such activities. Digital work enables endless
experimentation and it allows for reproductions without altering image quality, which are
both helpful in illustration. The results are also rewarding because they allow compositions
to be completed with significant potential, fluidity, and detail; digital illustration enables a
combination of line work, the handling of pure color, the essence of a simple minimalist
illustration without effects, and drawings in which bursts of color never come near a
baroque or hyper-realistic style but remain contained in such a way that creates complete
visual harmony.
There is a story behind every illustration; therefore, its discourse must be very clear
and logical on paper. The most important thing is to allow the viewer to complete the
imaginary world hidden in each picture. Even though traditionally, the art of illustration
has been defined as the interpretation or embellishment of textual information through
visual representation, depending on its context and genre, in many cases, images must
completely replace words rather than represent them. The illustration itself
communicates, and this what this practice explores to broaden the students perspectives
(Figure 10).
72
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
Figure 10 Source: Marquez, V. (2013). Bee Yourself [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department
of Design, University of Los Andes.
Teaching experience
The items listed above support the development of methodologies that introduce,
define, and apply the processes of learning to draw, compose, and communicate. These
elements were based on the replication, appropriation, and decontextualization of images,
practices that combine accuracy with the option of starting from existing references to
understand photorealistic and semi-realistic illustration, and which enable correct
interpretation of visual language.
The reproduction of an image by tracing, copying, and observing is part of the process
of learning how to see. Repeated tracing enables the knowledge of structure to be
mechanized. Drawing itself requires that students observe what they want to illustrate,
dissect its pieces, and join those pieces together to create their pictorial translations. They
must memorize a process that can be used in the future to record observations and redraw
and represent ideas. The exercise started with real images from which to re-signify clearly
recognizable formal elements such as the human figure, animals, and objects.
Transforming images deepens decontextualization. The referents not only need to be
observed but appropriated to understand which stories to tell because their content
generates creative ways in which to convey the intended messages. Illustration without
text was explored; these images had to be recognizable and well represented to
communicate effectively.
The application of these concepts and learning methods allowed students to
experience ideas in more automatic, free, and spontaneous ways because they had already
been instructed on the structure, drawing, representing recognizable forms, and
translating simple messages through images. Once grounded in these basic processes, the
goal was to venture into practices of greater depth with exercises that focused on creating
effective illustrations with a communicative intention (critic, satiric, subtle, or insightful),
or representations that configure characters and scenarios to generate clear stories that
have simple yet impressive messages. Therefore, this research covered exercises that are
crucial to illustrating across genres.
73
CAROLINA ROJAS
Final processes and results
Trying new ideas and exploring different ways of communicating messages, stories, and
emotions is one of the biggest challenges in illustration, as is giving proper attention to
applied design for specific editorial or animated projects. It is therefore essential that
those responsible for the creation of imagery be competitive and innovative enough for
the current market; they must gain knowledge and achieve the necessary maturity for
analysis and conceptualization, combined with the proper handling of techniques,
materials, and media.
In this regard, the following practice deepened the visual possibilities for transforming
words and ideas into imaginary and explored different connections between text and
images by developing spontaneous illustrations with enough creativity and content to
attract the viewer. Language provides plenty of material with which to think about and
build short illustrated stories that interconnect in simple, meaningful ways (Figure 11).
Figure 11 Source: Baquero, C. (2013). My name is Paul Jones and I drink Rum [Class exercise].
Bogotá, Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
According to Umberto Eco, a single word can mean many things (1988). In using this
definition in a didactic approach, it is possible to move from the word to the idea and the
imagination of that idea, i.e., to interact with words or phrases that reflect a double
meaning or have multiple meanings. This practice develops in students the ability to make
associations, which requires significant analysis of constructive material with a potential of
graphic representation.
Usually, this method of creating compositions uses collective codes and common
symbolic elements; it develops interesting imaginaries starting from the meanings of
74
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
words and the relationships of shapes that can be generated between elements such as
objects and animals; it reflects everyday actions and changes their meanings. Highly
popular images may be examined and these may include elements and symbols that
represent a specific time, codes registered from literature, cinema, music, or current icons.
Many designers, artists, and illustrators have helped to develop this genre of illustration,
including Andrés Colmenares, Will Bryant, Justin White, Jaco Haasbroek, Aurélie Henquin,
and Lim Heng Swee, aka ‘ilovedoodle’. Their images express strong style that is fresh,
simple, spontaneous, fun, and cartoonish. Many of these works have had so much
commercial success that their creations appear in products of different recognized brands.
The students explored representations of semi-realistic drawings (cartoons), which are
closely related satire, caricature, and humor, making them more realistic. The objective of
this exercise was to provide the tools with which to reflect a fantastic and entertaining
universe; these tools were obtained by visual associations and shown to be able to support
numerous illustrative possibilities. Most of this types of work has a commercial approach
in which its development is not only seen on paper or on screen but it is so flexible and
dynamic that it can be applied to different requirements of commercial industries.
The experimental process was perfected and concluded with a compendium of
exercises that examined the illustrations and construction practices of more complex
scenarios that contribute to the visual world. Most developed characters begin from reality
but become more interesting and useful with subsequent experimentation.
Images can change the narrative power of words (Salisbury & Styles, 2012); thus, we
explored a scenario that elaborated upon the development of imaginary characters by
focusing on the design and creation of characters with extraordinary stories. In this
process, the full developmental cycle began from a sketch from which to generate
drawings step by step, using different analog and digital methods. The construction of the
image was done though mimetic drawing by tracing; using a grid; reproduction using
referents, appropriation, and transformation; or simply by imaginative automatic drawing
until the final image was reached.
It was relevant to look at examples of fantastical universes throughout history to see
how they had been translated into texts and imagery environments. Bestiary
representations were studied (illustrations were collected form fables or fiction about
imaginary or real wild creatures) due to the interest these amazing rarities generate. Our
attention was drawn to the monsters, hybrids, and rarities interpreted by Umberto Eco in
his book On Ugliness (2007). The ‘freak’ concept was also contemplated, as seen in the
movie Freaks, directed by Tod Browning (1932). This concept refers to beings with physical
differences or similarities to strange creatures, an idea familiar to fantasy, science fiction,
animation, video games, and comics. These concepts extend the daily collective
imagination and are represented through different visual formats such as literature, art,
cinema, and illustration. Some examples include the Universal Animalarium of Professor
Revillod by Javier Sáez (2003), the wonderful illustrated book Where the Wild Things Are by
Maurice Sendak (1963), and the commercial animated movie Monsters, Inc. (2001) by
Pixar.
All research material provided valuable elements that encouraged students to create
their own characters and stories. According to Portuguese illustrator André da Loba (2013),
illustrators tell tales with stories of their own or with stories adopted from elsewhere;
there is always something to tell. In this exercise, students managed to build simple, jovial,
75
CAROLINA ROJAS
fearful, funny, and sophisticated stories. Even when they started from the same central
axis, they ended with vastly different conceptualization. Each student imprints a ‘voice’ on
a specific theme to transform it in accordance with his or her references, experiences,
tastes, and even worldview. These aspects give birth to the insightful creation of these
curious characters and their stories (Figure 12).
Figure 12 Source: Velásquez, J.D. (2013). The Scholastic Phenomenon Child [Class exercise]. Bogotá,
Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
Students showcased their compositions in illustrated books that showed the story and
origin of each character that was developed. Short stories were also built around the
leading character. Some students combined words and images to convey the overall
meaning of the book, while others specialized in telling what happens with the character in
images only. According to Martin Salisbury and Morag Styles (2012), the boundaries
between words and images are more and more indistinct as words are recognized as
pictorial elements and the end result is a visual absolute.
During this exercise, students combined imagination and technical versatility. They
were taught not only to focus on illustration but also on telling stories through their
drawing skills and with the aid of specific channels (analog and digital); they were able to
create worlds using different scenarios that were enriched with color and full of subtlety
and narrative content. This set of initiatives and exercises allowed students to understand
the full extent of illustration practice in its different phases, to develop a sense of
observation and analysis, to make decisions and accurately combine methodologies, to
explore various media and materials for building graphical representations, and to
contributing their own creativity with absolute motivation and resourcefulness.
76
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
Conclusions
At first glance, illustrating may seem easy. But upon further inspection, its practice is
truly complex. The field of illustration is vast and versatile; illustrators must have extensive
knowledge and unlimited resources available to develop their work to its full potential.
Some difficulties may stand in the way of their creative desires and completion of their
processes. Therefore, it is important for students to identify the different variables
involved in the process so that they may plan and work most effectively. It is a
fundamental skill to organize the different components, to discipline the mind, and to
direct all of one’s attention and concentration toward the creative objective. Having
proper guidelines undoubtedly helps illustrators to make the best use of their resources
and follow through on inspiration. The key is to encourage students to practice and
explore in reflexive and conscious ways.
With the support of multiple theoretical, conceptual, and visual referents in the fields
that relate directly to illustration (arts and design), it was possible to interpret the essence
of illustrations, understand concepts such as referencing and appropriating, and create
coherent materializations. Combined, these provide a solid base from which to exercise
more complex combinations of text and images and to begin the task of illustrating and
communicating properly. It was also clear that image appropriation and
decontextualization worked as a starting point from which to generate new creative
representations. The experiences of what we have done, what we have seen, and who we
are generate a mixture of referents that are important to our creative processes.
The pedagogical tools discussed in this paper taught students to draw, compose, and
polish visual pieces that were charged with content with clear and noticeable
communicative intent. These methods became a concrete base from which students could
safely and enthusiastically generate proposals in different scenarios within the broad field
of illustration.
The methodological approaches, conceptualizations, and strategic mechanisms
explored in the course of this investigation provided the tools necessary for designing the
exercises that were then experimentally tested on students. When the guidelines of these
practices were followed, students were able to achieve professional-level images (Figure
13).
Figure 13 Source: Miani, A. (2013). Franky [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
77
CAROLINA ROJAS
The skills that were explored are fundamental in learning to appropriate all means and
make the most of them in way that optimizes and sharpens interpretation, allows ideas to
materialize according to explicit purposes, deals with challenges effectively, and
consolidates versatile proposals of graphic representation. The theoretical framework,
referents, reflections, and inspirational components studied provided knowledge and
guidelines that greatly impacted the academic curriculum — open-ended knowledge,
experience, and possibilities were presented, which increased the students’ opportunities
to explore and consolidate multiple concepts with sense and objectivity.
This research on the work of illustration clarified the phases and variables that are
necessary to take into account to understand the processes of image construction, graphic
representation, and interpretation. Through the exercises outlined in this article, students
developed theoretical and practical approaches to graphical solutions for different means
of contemporary expression through analog, digital, and mixed-media tools. They created,
modified or composed, and experimented with illustration in multifaceted styles in ways
that were conceptual, creative, and innovative. Thus, the process of research and
experimentation provided valuable elements that demonstrate that to achieve one’s own
voice in the field of illustration, apprentices must first go through specific technical and
experimental learning processes. When these elements are integrated, coherent
guidelines for the processes of illustration could be imparted to students so they can
illustrate in different ways.
This teaching of illustration aimed to impart a proper understanding of the possibilities
inherent in visual expression. It did so through an exploration of categorical tools for
teaching and learning. As a result of this research, a compendium of exercises was
developed as a resource for future classes of illustration. This research also resulted in an
illustrative editorial collection that teaches each technical, conceptual, or thematic
approach. Some student illustrators whose work was the result of these teaching
techniques later participated in open calls, competitions, and exhibitions, a major
achievement not only in terms of methodological development but also in increasing the
motivation, commitment, and performance of the students who participated in this
illustrative academic experiment.
Finally, this paper contributes to the knowledge and practice of teaching illustration.
These processes take into account the main keys to arousing interest for the different
forms of creation at different levels. In general, these guidelines facilitate the development
of work by practical didactic methods that increase student motivation and reflection.
Acknowledgements: This article is the result of a research project developed
through interactive practices with students from the Illustration course of the
Design Department of Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia, 2012–14.
This study also produced an experimental illustrative publication, a series of
six books that describe the full magnitude of the research process. Each title
makes reference to conceptual or technical approaches as well as thematic
content.
78
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
References
Benjamin, W. (1973). La obra de arte en la época de su reproductibilidad técnica [The work
of art in the age of mechanical reproduction]. Madrid: Taurus.
Bergen, J. (2011). Sobre el dibujo [Bergen on drawing]. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, SL.
Monroy, B. (n.d.). Digital photo‐realistic artist. Retrieved from
http://www.bertmonroy.com/
Cabanne, P. (1967). Conversaciones con Marcel Duchamp [Dialogues with Marcel
Duchamp]. Barcelona: Anagrama.
Crimp, D. (2009). Pictures 1979. In D. Evans (Ed.), Appropriation: Documents of
contemporary art (p.78). London: Whitechapel Gallery.
Dalley, T. (1982). Guía completa de Ilustración y Diseño [Complete guide to illustration &
design techniques & materials]. Madrid: H. Blume Ediciones.
Eco, U. (1988). Signo [Sign] (2nd ed.). Barcelona: Labor.
Eco, U. (2007). Historia de la fealdad [On ugliness]. Barcelona: Random House Mondadori,
S.A.
Edwards, B. (1999). Nuevo Aprender a Dibujar con el lado derecho del cerebro. [Drawing
on the right side of the brain]. España: Ediciones Urano S.A.
Groys, B. (2008). The topology of contemporary art. In O. Enwezor, N. Condee & T. Smith
(Eds.), Antinomies of art and culture modernity, postmodernity, contemporaneity (pp.
71-82). Durham: Duke University Press.
Guasch, A. (n.d.). El arte último del siglo XX del posminimalismo a lo multicultural.
Retrieved from https://hscauna.wordpress.com/material/
Hernández, C. (2009). La apropiación en las artes plásticas actuales. Retrieved from
http://www.scribd.com/doc/51685457/La‐apropiacion‐en‐las‐artesplasticas-actuales
Hutcheon, L. (1993, July). La política de la parodia postmoderna. Criterios. Retrieved from
http://www.criterios.es/pdf/hutcheonpolitica.pdf
Junca, H. (2006). Puntos de vista impuros. Viendo al calco y al error con otros ojo. Revista
Ojo, volume (4), 56–59.
Kern, H. (1979). Chuck close: The artificiality of reality and the reality of art. In Chuck Close.
Munchen: Kunstraum Munchen.
Levine, S. (1982). Statement 1982. In D. Evans (Ed.), Appropriation: Documents of
contemporary art (p.81). London: Whitechapel Gallery.
Muller‐ Brockmann, J. (1982). Sistemas de retícula. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
Peña, E. (2006). La copia como medio de expresión. Revista Ojo, volume (4), 60–63.
Salisbury, M. and Styles, M. (2012). El arte de ilustrar libros infantiles. Barcelona: Blume.
Spice, W. (2005). Die Gläserne Botschaft [The glass message]. In Robert Longo (pp. 12–23).
Italy: Gruppo Editoriale Zanardi.
Troncy, E. (2009). Hard drive. In Robert Longo (pp. 24–29). Italy: Gruppo Editoriale Zanardi.
79
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Alison SHREEVE* and David GILLETT
Buckinghamshire New University
*alison.shreeve@bucks.ac.uk
Abstract: Industry in the UK identified a need for higher qualification for kitchen
designers, many developing their design skills on the job having been cabinet
makers and fitters for example. A Foundation Degree, a UK work-related higher
education qualification, was developed by academics and industry
representatives. A blended learning approach using a mix of face to face and
distance learning offered those in work an opportunity to achieve an industryrelevant qualification. As blended learning was a new departure for the school
we wished to study how the ideas for the course, which were based on the
premise of creating a community of practice were played out as the course
unfolded. This research is a work in progress which uses an ethnographic, mixed
methods approach to explore the experiences of students on the course and
those of the academics who set out to design and implement a blended learning
course. It uses multiple participant views to evaluate the ongoing experiences of
learning and teaching on the programme with a view to enhancement and
sharing knowledge about blended learning approaches more widely. The
research reported on here is primarily based on the students’ experience of the
first six months of the course.
Keywords: communities of practice, blended learning, higher education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Introduction
This research evaluates a work in progress, the design and implementation of a
Foundation Degree course in Kitchen Design in a UK University. The course is the outcome
of two years of planning and discussions between the university and key figures in the
kitchens industry keen to provide a framework for professional qualifications and
recognition for what is an important part of the UK economy.
The final decisions about the course resulted in a blended learning programme
designed to enable students to work and study. This was a major departure for the
academic school because there were no existing programmes in blended learning or
distance learning mode within the art and design area at the time and the ethos of the
school is based on experiential learning with a very practical approach to product design in
a range of disciplines. However, kitchen design, when placed within the full time
undergraduate system which we originally tried, only attracted one applicant. We
assumed that this subject was probably viewed as too narrow and young people were
possibly unaware of the number and breadth of jobs available to designers in the industry.
The one applicant came from a family run kitchen business.
We decided that the tight industry context would be more appropriate to a Foundation
Degree, a two year UK qualification designed to be closely linked into working contexts.
We proceeded to re-design the course for those already interested and committed to
careers in the kitchens industry. The course was constructed within an overarching
philosophy to create a community of practice (CoP) on the course, despite the challenges
inherent in setting out to do this as Wenger (1998) identifies; it requires mutual
engagement organised around a purpose which brings people together. As Duguid (2005)
states, a CoP is established over time and it is essentially the practice which creates the
CoP rather than the more warm and cuddly notion of community which holds it together.
However, we wanted students to feel as if they belonged to the course and to
communicate with each other and the course team, even though they were studying at a
distance. We also wanted this course to engage with wider debates and interface with the
kitchen industry as part of the learning process, engaging with other professionals in
kitchen design. In this we were perhaps aligning, as tutors, with the community of practice
dimension identified by Drew (2004, 2015) as one of the dimensions of approaches to
learning evidenced by design tutors.
There were several factors built into the course which we hoped would lead to such a
community of practice around kitchen design even though the students would be learning
at a distance for much of the time.
Course Structure
This was planned with three intensive face-to-face study periods of two and a half days
each academic year. These sessions are situated in the university’s conference centre set
in the heart of leafy countryside in parkland and buildings which date back to the 12th
century. We planned long days of activities and talking which would be a total immersion
in things ‘kitchen’. The first of these residential blocks introduced the students to each
other and to a range of people connected to the course development and some of our
industry supporters. From breakfast to bedtime there were groups and sub-groups
engaged in discussion and debate. Whilst setting up the lecture room for the first session
the authors were aware of a growing group of students in the adjacent coffee area and
81
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
outside who were already actively engaged in conversation. Later in the weekend they had
group activities designed to foster further interpersonal development. At the time of
writing this article there have been two residential weekends. These have been used to
brief students and to share critique of work done in the first semester. In between
residentials the students use a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) to communicate with
their tutors and each other. The second deliberate decision made to encourage a
community to develop was the use of social media sites.
Social Media
Other courses in the school had successfully introduced closed Facebook sites to share
conversations around module topics and subjects. We decided to use a similar tool
because we assumed most people are familiar with it and use it regularly and we wanted
to encourage debate which was more of a conversation than the VLE which was directly
related to assessed work. We decided to keep it closed, but tutors and key industry
supporters were also given access.
Before the course began the course leader investigated other, more visual sites.
Students were logged onto Pinterest on the first day of the course and used this
enthusiastically to exchange images of kitchen and design related things that interested
them. Postings were usually accompanied by very brief captions which summarised why
they had been selected.
Industry Supporters
The curriculum was designed in conjunction with representatives from industry,
including training groups, managing directors of fittings companies, appliances and
independent smaller design companies. Their support was also critical in engaging the first
cohort of students. Scholarships were provided from five companies to enable students to
study and to support the cohort generally. Offers to present to students have resulted in a
selection of activities from specialist industry suppliers who have either designed online
engagements or have attended the residential sessions. An industry software package is
being provided free of charge to students on the course. Facilities and showrooms have
also been offered for visits and learning activities. These deliberately help to break down
the barriers between a course which is ‘academic’ and the professional working
environment. The course team also recruited a well-known kitchen designer to act as a
tutor and ensure that there was an opinion grounded in professional authority to
complement different discipline specialisms within the course team.
The supporters continue to grow and to offer opportunities for the students, including
a competition category within a trade show and promotion in the industry press.
Evaluation Research
Having set up the programme and seen it running for one semester the course leader
and head of school wanted to see how well their ideas were working and how the
participants, course team and key supporters experienced the new course. A small
research project was designed which went through the University’s ethical clearance
process in order to bring a level of rigour into the process.
Given the intention to create a community of practice in kitchen design learning and an
interrelationship with the industry itself we asked:
82
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Have the learning and teaching approaches enabled a community of practice
dimension to develop within the student cohort?
To what extent is there any overlap with professional practice communities in kitchen
design?
Methodology
As we were interested in the experience of participants, from the students, to the
teaching team and the course development team, we adopted a mixed methods
qualitative approach to elicit feelings and observations from participants. Underlying the
research questions is a fundamental ontological position that the lived experiences of the
participants are where the data lies in this research (Mason 2002). As we were also key
players in the development and delivery of the course we acknowledge that there is an
element of participant researcher here; we cannot remove ourselves from the researched
context. In order to openly acknowledge this the course leader is maintaining a reflective
journal which will be accessed to explore intention, observations about progress of
implementing the modules and working with course team, students and supporters. This
constitutes an autoethnographic approach within an ethnographic tradition seeking to
understand how a group of people, in this case associated with a new course, experience
and live through the experience (Cousin, 2009). Typically the researcher is also immersed
in that setting and participant observation is included (Robson 2002). There are limitations
with this as an overarching research approach which we recognise. The intention to
actually improve or change the experience should it be needed is more akin to an action
research approach, commonly used in pedagogic research as teachers are, or should be,
seeking to improve the learning experience for their students. This positions the
researchers firmly within the ethnographic group they are observing.
Naturally occurring data, in the form of student engagement with the learning tasks
and postings on the social media sites designed to encourage engagement, do correlate
with a ‘natural’ environment for research, but additional methods have been employed to
generate data which is the accounts of experience rather than the lived experience of
interacting with the course.
Focus groups were held in the second residential block with students and more
informal discussions between the course leader and industry representatives in order to
elicit views about their experience, particularly in relation to the research questions. The
framework for the focus group with students was about the experience of the course to
date and learning at a distance, how the group gelled together and what they understood
as professional in this particular context.
Ethics
All students were given a written description of the research project, its purpose,
intentions and duration. They were told about the intention to publish, where and to
whom the research would be disseminated and why. All were given the opportunity to
withdraw at any point in the process which is ongoing throughout the duration of their
three year programme. One student declined to take part in the research process, but all
others signed consent forms. No names or details of individuals are used in the research.
83
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
Analysis
Analysis of data was carried out in three phases, the focus groups, the communications
of students who had signed consent forms to allow us to use communications through the
VLE, social media sites and email communication and the use of social media image based
sites. The reflective journal of the course leader was used to contextualise the comments
and observations from these three phases and helped to balance the analysis. This paper is
primarily based on the student focus group outcomes.
A thematic analysis was used to identify characteristics of a community of practice
identity emerging within the student group and the relationship between the course,
tutors and the industry. This was contextualised by the design intention behind the course
and structural factors which helped to create a community of practice are included in the
analysis.
We recognised that the course design had already structured certain ways of behaving
which were aligned to a community of practice identity, so there were some structural
constraints which helped to shape activities. We also acknowledge limitations in using
focus groups which tend to block out any individual responses which might suggest that
there are those within the group who have less of an identity with the course or who don’t
feel part of a community. Discussion of the outcomes use a framework for creating a
Community of Practice identified by Wenger et al (2002).
Research Outcomes from the Student Focus Group
The focus group included all but one of the students on the course and was carried out
in an informal atmosphere. There was much laughter and jocularity, but amongst this were
some serious points about learning, the industry and the way the students bonded as a
group. Had our plans to create a group which would survive being at a distance worked?
Social media
Pinterest provided a fast way to bring people into a visual conversation around kitchen
and design more generally. Once the basics had been grasped most people continued to
engage enthusiastically in the first few weeks and then in bursts of activity as more
pressure to complete assignments began to bite. The use of Pinterest however was patchy.
As we had stressed the importance of using social media through the assessment criteria
for the first year as a way to embed behaviours which we wanted to see, it was important
for all students to use it and to contribute to the visual exchange of ideas. There were
some students who posted significantly more than others, perhaps because the purpose of
the postings was unclear to some as the focus group discussion identified.
Facebook tended to be used less frequently and for more text based exchange or to
post information which might be useful to others for example information about
exhibitions or designers. The focus group revealed that not everyone understood the
purpose of the Facebook page and not all students were habitual Facebook users!
Time
At the first residential weekend when the course started the researchers had been
preparing the learning environment whilst outside the room students were helping
themselves to coffee and making introductions. To an outsider it sounded as if they were
really getting on very quickly and were very sociable. This impression was enhanced by the
student visit to the local pub on the second night of their stay. During the focus group
84
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
however, it became clear that our perception needed to be tempered by an insider
viewpoint. Students pointed out that this, their second time of meeting as a group was an
occasion where they felt more at ease with each other and felt as if they were getting to
know each other better.
The group has been in contact over six months since the first face to face meeting, but
still they felt as if they were new friends and colleagues and the second physical encounter
was still part of an ongoing process of knowing and developing as a group. Despite these
feelings expressed they still demonstrated a caring and supporting disposition: ‘it’s a
relaxed atmosphere’, ‘more communal’, ‘there’s no competition’.
However, the importance of the face to face meetings in establishing trust over a
period of time was emphasised by comments around disclosing their inner feelings. The
newness of the course, both in its mode of attendance (mostly learning at a distance) and
its specific subject matter within the university meant that both the tutors and the
students were embarking on a journey into unknown territory with very few signposts in
the way of previous work to guide them. Once away from the first residential weekend
most students felt unable to voice their fears about assignments to the rest of the group
and thus get the reassurance they needed about the direction they were taking. Most
agreed that ‘I was scared to ask for help’. However, they all agreed that following the first
assignment and the discussions held at the second residential they were in a more secure
position as a group:
Now we know each other a bit more I would be a lot happier this time around to stick a
picture on Facebook: ‘this is what I’m doing, what do you think?’
Feeling isolated
Working at a distance however for most was an isolating experience: ‘Working at home
you don’t know if you’re doing the right thing or not’. Some people felt panicked at home
but were reluctant to say on social media that this was how they felt and were unable to
obtain a sense check from peers.
Sub groups/pairs
A couple of students had however made contact outside the group and outside the
formal mechanisms set up within the course. One pair used the phone to check up and
provide support, describing it as we ‘cried to each other’! Other students who lived
relatively near to each other also met and undertook joint visits which helped to provide
peer support. All agreed that they would be less worried now to use the course
mechanisms, but suggested during the focus group that they would set up a Facebook
group for each other, where the tutors were not invited! The tutors felt this was an
excellent idea and would give everyone ownership of their own learning and a space
where they didn’t have to worry about losing face or appearing ‘stupid’.
Social Environment
The location for the course was selected because of its professional atmosphere as a
conference centre. Students could have been invited to the studios and workshops of the
main campus, but we decided that the venue was important as we intended to immerse
them in the subject of kitchen design for two and a half days. The somewhat luxurious
setting in a country park and the excellent food were part of the course design; whilst
students were with us we wanted them to feel special. This was reflected in their
responses to the question of what helped them to ‘gel’ as a group. The social environment,
85
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
eating and drinking together were important factors in helping them to feel part of a
group. One of the designed learning activities was to visit a kitchen product company and
to work with their experimental chefs using the latest cookers, making and eating a meal
together in the evening. They also recognised the importance of contacting each other
between the residential weekends suggesting that they should have face to face meetings
in between, to visit companies or workshops, even if not all members would be able to join
in. This physical contact appeared to be important, even though mechanisms for
contacting each other through the course VLE, Facebook and Pinterest had been set up to
try and ensure multiple ways to create a community online. Some of these mechanisms
were not fully understood or used by all the group, suggesting more hands on activity at
the residential weekends might help to improve the use of social media. However, the
single most important factor in the group bonding was probably the common interest in
kitchen design.
Specialist Subject
The primary identities of most of the course participants are that they are already
involved in the kitchens industry, but not necessarily as designers. Roles range from over
twenty years’ experience in running a design business, through to sales, supply chain
experience and being newly employed in the industry. Some students were hoping to gain
employment in the industry in the near future.
The subject of the course was what brought people together and formed the focus of
their learning activities, conversations and experiences: ‘it’s easy to gel if you’re of the
same interests’; ‘we like the same thing’. However, it is clear from the wide-ranging
selections of images which they place on Pinterest, that they do have different interests
and are attracted to different things within the sphere of kitchen design. Each person is an
individual linked into a community of practice in some form which is centred on kitchens
and design.
Learning in Design
Many of the issues students raised in the group were also commonly raised by students
on full time design courses. These related to the ambiguity and uncertainty (Austerlitz et
al, 2008) which characterises learning in art and design. As they were at a distance and also
felt in the first six months that they couldn’t ask for help this emphasised the problem of
supporting students through the ambiguity associated with creative outcomes. They felt
that it was difficult, I didn’t understand [the assignment]’; ‘we were all getting upset about
it’. Because you couldn’t see what everyone else was doing you couldn’t check whether
you were on the right lines. One student ended up undoing quite a lot of work and that felt
‘demoralising’. It was clear that the course team would need to change the approach to
support at a distance and find ways to signpost more clearly the kind of work that was
expected in order to minimise the ambiguity; difficult when the course is new and no
previous examples are available to show what is expected. One student commented that
‘it’s research led’ implying perhaps that it was OK to be doing this at a distance, because
each person was undertaking something as an individual. This underlying understanding
that learning is student-led and owned through a ‘research led’ approach was interesting
and reflects findings in research by Orr et al (2014) suggesting that full time final year
undergraduate students perceive the pedagogy of art and design as student-centred,
86
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
where they are co-producers in their learning and the blended learning version might be
no different to full time experiences in this respect.
Rippling out
We had intended to create a group of students who worked together as a course and
who also linked out into the professional sphere of activity in kitchen design, through our
contacts and through the learning activities. Many of our students actually work as
professionals already and some have their own business. One would expect, with this kind
of profile, that a reach out into the professional sphere was almost a given thing in some
cases. We were also keen to engage all students with that outreach in order to create an
overlapping circle of practice (Logan 2006) which characterises much design teaching.
However, there was evidence that actually doing the course was helping to create new
relationships with industry and new ways to develop industry contacts for some people.
One student had taken advantage of a member of the course development team’s offer
and emailed her for advice, something we hoped would be happening. Others approached
people in retail and asked for information, or spoke to designers who worked in their
location. Most reported having received a positive response to their requests, indicating
that they were able to reach out into the industry as well as welcome input from industry
specialists through lectures as part of the course. New relationships with people and
knowledge were beginning to stretch their understanding of the subject area, but also the
way some of them felt about their roles. Two experienced kitchen designers expressed this
as ‘the lectures were all professional, they have much more useful information for me’ but
also there is an increase in self-esteem in undertaking a validated programme of study:
‘the customer will have more respect because you’re more educated’.
The awareness of many of the group about the politics and structure of the industry
was interesting to hear. They were aware of the discussions within the industry about
professionalism and problems with unqualified people being able to set themselves up as
kitchen designers. They called on the industry to do more to promote the need for a
qualification and also reflected on where they hoped it would take them, as the first
people in the UK to achieve a recognised degree in kitchen design. One expressed the view
that they would become ‘a design group that starts up the kitchen industry’ and ensures it
becomes seen as a profession. They thought the course would ‘turn us into professionals’,
but also they were aware that consumer attitudes to design and paying for design may
need to change. They hoped the industry would also work hard to help change this too. An
experienced designer with his own business felt proud to be doing a degree in kitchen
design, ‘customers are more relaxed’ knowing that he is doing a degree: ‘I tell everyone’.
Academic Perspectives
The design of the residential weekends was intended to provide an intensive
immersion in all things kitchen design. There were specialist speakers from industry and
the design professions, as well as engaging an award winning designer as a tutor. These
structures were deliberately set up to help create a community of practice which engaged
learners and the industry within the framework of a university validated programme.
We didn’t start out with much knowledge about the technology required or the kinds
of learning objects we might need to support our students, but we used previous
knowledge (even though second hand in some cases) about what had worked with using
social media in other design courses. The course leader increased his knowledge of
87
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
technologies for learning very quickly and engaged with other more experienced
academics. He began to take on the role of ‘technology steward’ (Wenger et al 2009)
identifying what worked, modifying and evaluating as the course progressed.
Discussion
The idea of Communities of Practice has been well established since its introduction by
Lave and Wenger in 1991 and Wenger’s (1998) elaboration of the idea. Many have
questioned whether a community can be constructed artificially (e.g.Lea 2005) and others
have challenged the importance of power relations within the CoP (Barton & Tusting
2005). Within this context the ongoing course development meetings established good
working relationships between the University and with the Industry with contributions
from representatives of different sectors: suppliers, designers, SMEs etc. The student body
are also drawn together because of their overriding interest in kitchen design and this has
to be the key factor in developing a Community of Practice. This interest is what creates a
common purpose and link between students spread over the whole of the British Isles and
a team of academics who were not specialists in kitchen design when they started this
programme. However, as Wenger (1998 p 250) states, in order to create a learning
community the infrastructure needs to provide opportunities for engagement, imagination
and alignment to the values of the community. It is perhaps these factors, as well as the
technologies in blended learning, which need work to ensure a community of practice is
built up.
As a general aim in setting up the Blended Learning course we had a more overarching
vision about what we wanted to see as a development group, rather than a road map
guided by principles. However, in reviewing progress it is helpful to see how closely we
have matched Wenger et al’s Seven Principles (2002) in developing the CoP idea.
Design for Evolution
Open Dialogue between inside and outside perspectives
Invite different levels of participation
Develop both public and private community spaces
Focus in value
Combine familiarity and excitement
Create a rhythm for the community
Designing for evolution requires the academic team to be open to opportunities from
students, the industry and our colleagues supporting the VLE. Listening to the students
through the focus group has been a useful experience for all of us, enabling the generation
of new ideas to evolve from the group (the students’ own Facebook group). Some
restraints on evolution are inevitable as we have university structures and timeframes to
manage, but some of the other categories for development also suggest that the seven
principles are important for the future success and evolution of the programme.
Discourse, according to Gherardi & Nicolini, (2002) is something which enables
interaction between different communities of practice, but is also a means to create a
sense of who we are and where we belong. Discourse is about performing a practice and
88
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
learning to take part in this practice is part of the development needed to become a
member of a CoP:
The performance of a community is achieved mainly through material and discursive
means which put the community on stage, on the basis of the things it is good at doing.
(p422)
Thus the necessity to enable opportunities to practice or engage with the discourse of
the community of kitchen designers is a very important issue in a blended learning
environment. Open dialogue was created with the introduction of industry specialist
speakers who have been very generous with their time and encouraging students to
contact them outside the limited face to face contact time. A range of different industry
specialists have been introduced in face-to-face sessions to encourage dialogue and
regular tutorials have been held by phone or skype to maintain exchanges with students.
However, time and evolution of the group is important as the focus group showed that
trust needs to be built up gradually so that peer to peer dialogue can take place through
social media and the VLE. The purpose and function of the technology also needs to be
more firmly embedded as a means to dialogue, as the focus group indicated mixed take up
with social media and with a forum for discussion on the VLE being misconstrued by most
of the students and not resulting in exchange or discussion. The students’ decision to
create their own space for dialogue via Facebook was a welcome development and one
which we shall monitor for its role in learning and fostering the community of practice.
Such student-led opportunities to create dialogue through web2 technologies, will ‘limit
the likelihood of students telling tutor’s stories’ about design as advocated by Ghassan &
Bohemia (2015) in a blended learning project. Independence in creating and developing an
identity of participation in a CoP through the practice of discourse appears to be essential.
On a more organisational level the course team have an Industry Advisory Board which
is a link to the outside world and enables discussion. The Kitchens, Bedrooms and
Bathrooms, KBB National Training Group have also been generous in inviting the course
leader into their Board meetings, to keep dialogue going around education and training
issues. Students are not part of these conversations, but connections between education
and industry are enabled through these relationships and the interest which many sectors
of the industry have expressed to us in the last 12 months also enables dialogue at
different levels within the CoP.
Public and private community spaces are evolving in the course. The VLE itself has
areas where individuals receive their grades and feedback unseen by others. The setting
up of student only areas is a welcome development and also the communication between
sub-groups is interesting. The concern of the researchers lies in those who might be
excluded from too many private spaces and who might not have voiced opinions or
concerns during the focus group or in other forums. This would be worth monitoring to
check whether identities of non-participation (Wenger, 1998 p190) are being created as
well as identities of participation within the CoP.
In addition to the functional aspects of the VLE which provide the regular input and
information which mimic the studio environment students are encouraged to reflect on
the new information. This aspect of the course is not well understood, but embedded
questions within the online presentations are being set in place to stimulate debate
89
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
around the content of the taught curriculum. This will have a twofold purpose, to check on
students’ learning and also to help them practice and rehearse the discourse of the CoP.
Since the second residential weekend the course leader has introduced a blog owned
by each individual student. This is a personal space where ongoing work can be presented
and commented on. This can range from small quotes, to images or audio capture. This has
been designed to encourage public presentation, sharing and getting feedback. These
blogs are open and accessible, either via the university microblog which will stream each
student’s individual blog, or directly to the student’s space. This is designed partly as a
professional face to the industry but it is open to scrutiny by interested public audiences
who may also comment on the blog, thus building in another way to extend into the wider
public sphere of kitchen design.
Shared values need to be fostered around the process and evaluation of kitchen design
within the course community. With no prior work to help them to imagine what is required
there was some demonstration of confusion in the focus group. Whereas design education
explicitly looks for the innovative and creative, there are still parameters within which
work is produced to an acceptable standard. The tutors hold the power (Barton & Tusting
2005) in this relationship as they are the arbiters of the accepted values for the community
(Orr & Bloxham 2012). In this case, where award-winning industry practitioners are also
tutors the power is also representative of standards present in industry practices. More
active joint construction of the shared values for the course would be helpful for students
and needs work over time as advocated by Wenger at al (2002) and may not remain static.
There is also a question about whose values are to be prevalent in the CoP and the value of
the CoP to the individual participants. These are not simple or straightforward issues, but
ones which require open discussion
Combining familiarity and excitement is an interesting observation. The focus group as
a whole was full of laughter and a sense of excitement about the course, but it was
tempered with observations about clarity of purpose and guidance. The challenge in
guiding students on a new programme when you are teaching design at a distance perhaps
calls for more use of the familiar than we were able to provide. Excitement is definitely on
the agenda at residential weekends, but some familiar frameworks might be helpful to
stabilise engagement as well. This is an issue the course team will take forward for
discussion.
A rhythm for the community is provided by the structure of the course, with its three
residential blocks and the module structure. However, it was interesting to note the
students need to have some face to face contact or activity between the residentials.
Regular tutorials were also offered, but whether this rhythm is the best or only way to
create the sense of community is questionable. Perhaps more focused questioning might
help to establish exactly what the best patterns or rhythms might be for learning as well as
developing the community. There was definitely a sense of students having worked too
hard, and spending too long on some assignments, producing more than we had
anticipated or needed. This was evidenced by those with dyslexia in particular who had
spent about twice as long on activities as we estimated. There was also evidence to
suggest that individual students needed to develop their own rhythms of working – setting
alarms and creating their own timetables around their busy lives. Rhythms then are
perhaps something which needs multiple levels and frequencies within the COP too.
90
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Conclusion
Are we succeeding in creating a course which helps students to create an identity of
participation in a community of practice? We think there is some evidence to suggest that
this is happening, but acknowledge that there is a temporal dimension which we have to
continuously negotiate. With more experience of providing blended learning in design we
think we will be able to improve the course experience. We already appreciate that there
are ways to prepare students before they arrive and to provide more practice in using the
communication tools of the VLE and social media sites in their first residential introduction
to ensure that they are familiar with using them and understand the purpose of different
digital tools.
The relationship of the course community of practice to the wider industry, which we
view as essential development for the students also offers us opportunities to do things
differently. As students are already reaching out into their local design communities this
might be something to encourage and facilitate. The use of mentors outside the course
could help to provide a link and also a new window into the industry. For students who are
new to kitchen design this could provide access to the situated knowledge (Billett 2001,
Lave & Wenger 1991) which ‘old timers’ in the community of practice provide.
Bearing in mind Duguid’s (2005) reminder that practice is at the centre of any CoP and
is what holds the community together, we will need to establish ways of working, being
and speaking which help to cement the community. It is the practice of a course situated in
two worlds, education in a blended learning mode and the professional world of kitchen
design which will enable students to feel as if they belong to the CoP and a shared
discourse which will enact the practice and help to create an identity of belonging
(Gherardi & Nicolini, 2004).
Making deliberate efforts to incorporate the ‘rich professional’ context of work places
may also provide a way to enhance the online learning community (Smith et al 2009). Most
of our students are employed in environments where kitchens are integral to their working
lives as well as their home lives. Bringing this knowledge into the shared environment
online may help to ensure identities of participation are encouraged and enabled,
increasing the flow between different communities of practice and the development of
integrated identities of learner and practitioner within the course community of practice.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank our students and industry
supporters for their help and cooperation in starting this course and in taking
part in this research project to evaluate progress.
References
Austerlitz, N., Blythman, M., Grove-White, A., Jones, B., Jones, C., Morgan, S., Orr, S.
Shreeve, A. &. Vaughan, S (2008) Mind the gap: expectations, ambiguity and pedagogy
within art and design higher education. In: L. Drew (Ed), The Student Experience in Art
and Design Higher Education : Drivers for Change (pp. 125-148). Cambridge:.Jill Rogers
Associates Limited.
Barton, D. & Tusting , K. (2005) Beyond Communities of Practice: Language, Power and
Social Context. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
91
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
Billett, S. (2001) Learning through working life: interdependencies at work. Studies in
Continuing Education. 23(1): 19-35.
Cousin, G. (2009) Researching Learning in Higher Education. New York & London:
Routledge
Drew, L. (2004). The experience of teaching creative practices: conceptions and
approaches to teaching in the community of practice dimension. In A. Davies, (Ed).
Enhancing curricula: Towards the Scholarship of Teaching in Art, Design and
Communication (pp106-123). London: CLTAD.
Drew, L. (2015) The Experience of Teaching a Creative Practice: An Exploration of
Conceptions and Approaches to Teaching, Linking Variation and the Community of
Practice Dimension. In Tovey, M. (Ed) Design Pedagogies (pp95-112). Farnham, Gower.
Duguid, P. (2005) ‘The Art Of Knowing’: Social And Tacit Dimensions Of Knowledge and The
Limits of The Community of Practice. The Information Society: An International Journal.
21:2, 108-118
Gassan, A & Bohemia, E. (2015) Amplifying Learners’ Voices through the Global Studio. In
Tovey, M. (Ed) Design Pedagogy (pp215-236). Farnham, Gower.
Gherardi, S & Niccolini, D. (2002) Learning In A Constellation Of Interconnected Practices:
Canon Or Dissonance? Journal of Management Studies. 39:4, 419-436
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M., R (2005). 'Communities of practice' in higher education: useful heuristic or
educational model? In Barton, D. & Tusting, K. (Eds). Beyond Communities of Practice.
Language, power and social context (pp180-197). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press..
Logan, C. (2006). Circles of Practice: educational and professional graphic design. Journal of
Workplace Learning. 18:6, 331-343
Orr, S. and Bloxham, S. (2012) Making judgements about students making work: lecturers’
assessment practices in art and design. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 234253
Orr, S., Yorke, M. & Blair, B. (2014) ‘The Answer is Brought About from Within You’: A
Student-Centred Perspective On Pedagogy In Art And Design. International Journal of
Art and Design Education. 33:1, 32-45
Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research. Oxford, Blackwell
Smith, P., Stacey, E. & Ha, T.S. (2009) Blending Collaborative Online Learning with
Workplace and Community Contexts. In E. Stacey & P. Gerbic (Eds) Effective Blended
learning Practices: Evidence-based Perspectives in ICT. Pennsylvania, Hershey.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning meaning and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. & Snyder, W. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice: a
guide to managing knowledge. Harvard, Harvard Business School Press
Wenger, E, White, N. & Smith, J. (2009) Digital Habitats: stewarding technology for
communities. Portland, OR, CPSquare.
92
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
Alke GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
Staffordshire University
a.c.groppel-wegener@staffs.ac.uk
Abstract: Students within the design disciplines can be faced with a duality when
they are studying at university – the ‘practice’ they experience in a
workshop/studio environment is put in contrast with the ‘theory’ of contextual,
critical and historical studies. This paper presents a research project that
investigates whether the design thinking and problem solving used in the studio
can also improve students’ levels of academic literacy. The ‘Fishscale of
Academicness’ was initially inspired by an analogy in the work of Claire Penketh.
This analogy, likening texts to fish in the context of developing undergraduate
students’ reading skills, has been extended and developed into a lecture and
seminar activity to support students to better determine the provenance of
secondary sources for their own research and essay writing. This paper analyses
metaphors student groups developed and discovers that allowing students to
design their own personalised (and visual) metaphors turned the abstract
experience of analysing secondary sources into something more concrete. It
argues that integrating studio-like teaching and learning into the seminar
environment has the potential to develop not only understanding, but also
ownership, crucial to fostering engagement with academic skills in the Higher
Education environment.
Keywords: study skills, academic literacy, metaphor, fishscale, information
determinacy
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
Introduction
This paper is part of the evaluation of an ongoing research project which attempts to
develop ways of teaching academic practice based on learning strategies found in the
workshop/studio environment. A session was developed with the aim of prompting
students to focus on identifying the provenance of secondary sources using the metaphor
of sea creatures and utilising design thinking. While the overall research includes students
from a number of disciplines and levels, as well as feedback gathered through
questionnaires, the data discussed here is concerned exclusively with first-year students
from studio-based art, design and media courses and analyses the drawings students
produced and discussed during the sessions. For the purpose of this paper, particular
attention is paid to how the students visualised a selection of sources from different
academic levels, as well as the variations between their descriptions and the images they
produced. It will be argued that including a visual design task in the teaching of this very
academic practice allows design students to use learning strategies they are familiar with
from the studio environment and, in extension, experience more ownership of the task.
Background
Many students starting in Higher Education are faced with the hurdle of academic
practice so often hidden from all but the most inquisitive university starter. They might
think they are prepared for the work not realising how much of a step up from school they
will be expected to make. Their tutors most certainly will mention (and possibly instruct
them in) a number of vital study skills, but there is a reason that this is sometimes called
academic practice: it needs to be done repeatedly in order to be internalised.
In a way, one would think that students of design would be a step ahead of their peers
from other disciplines: they are well used to practising something in order to develop the
considerable technical and thinking skills a professional design practitioner needs on
graduation. While there are certainly Higher Education institutions in which theory and
practice are well integrated within design education, in others that is unfortunately not
quite the case. In the latter there still seems to be a divide between what happens in the
workshop/studio environment as opposed to what happens in the lecture theatre/seminar
room. In the studio these students hone their (technical) skills. In the lecture theatre and
seminar room things are happening that are integral to the future of a practising
professional, but often seem disconnected to the design student: the contextual studies,
the history and theory of their discipline and the broadening of their horizons to both the
past and the future. Students who have no difficulty doing immaculate research in order to
sort out minute details in, for example, the design of a new chair can seem completely
disengaged in the context of reflecting on said work and putting it into a larger context.
Maybe this disconnect is not due to the subject matter; the reason students often
seem utterly baffled by what we ask them to do in the lecture theatre and seminar room
could be based on a very different way of doing it. It is a different sort of practice they
need to engage with, and maybe it is this disconnect between studio practice and
academic practice that needs to be addressed. After all, a neat referencing system does
not make a high quality reference list.
94
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
At Staffordshire University, where this study is located, a certain disconnect can be
found between theory and practice in some of the art and design courses offered. Study
skills have been identified as a potentially challenging issue for students on these courses,
so much so that a writing-in-the-disciplines approach is followed with dedicated
contributions from a specialist. This includes credit bearing input into a dedicated module
on all the creative, studio-based disciplines in art, design and media, which include courses
in 3D design/crafts, animation, comic and cartoon arts, film and media production, fine art,
graphic design, illustration, photography, photo journalism, surface pattern design as well
as textile surface design. These modules are taught through a mixture of lectures and
seminar work and are assessed by short illustrated essays of between 1000 and 2000
words.
Traditionally a weakness in these modules has been that students, who more and more
rely on a simple search engine to find their sources on the internet, seemingly put little
effort into analysing the type of source they are using as evidence for their research. It
seems that these students are not alone; actively questioning the provenance of secondary
sources, particularly when found online, has been identified by Metzger et al. (2003),
Hepworth and Walton (2009), as well as Wiley et al. (2009) as a weakness in student
researchers’ academic practice. According to an estimation by Breivik and Gee (2006),
undergraduates are searching only 0.03% of the web, and there seems to be little
understanding of academic peer-review in the context of publishing information.
While research is common in the context of artistic and design practice, whether it be
investigating the properties of material or looking for inspiration, a deeper exploration of
academic sources unfortunately does not follow this, and art and design students seem to
be as (if not more) inexperienced at establishing the provenance of their sources as their
counterparts in less visual subjects. Hemmig (2008), for example, found that artists
particularly ‘frequently cannot evaluate information that is given to them’ (349). It seems
that merely explaining the importance of the provenance of secondary sources with some
choice prompts to identify which sources are trustworthy and valuable in the academic
context, has little impact on the sources cited in the students’ essays.
There are strategies that address this and introduce students to this field of academic
literacies. Walton and Hepworth (2011) used online discourse as the main tool to get
students to develop their own evaluation criteria. Balusek and Oliver (2012) tested their
students using a scaled point system and found that, with the help of this template,
students effectively distinguished between different types of sources, evaluated them and,
crucially, identified peer reviewed sources from examples.
However, in the particular context of art and design students, who often think of the
academic side of their studies as ‘boring’ and ‘dull’, presenting the provenance of sources
as something combining numbers and checklists is counterintuitive. An alternative
presented itself in the work of Claire Penketh, who used an analogy likening academic
texts to deep water fish in the context of developing undergraduate students’ reading skills
(Beaumont and Penketh, 2010). This concept has been extended and developed into a
lecture titled ‘The Fishscale of Academicness’ with supporting group work in a seminar
setting (see Figure 1 for a sample illustration). The teaching and learning strategies used
here draw specifically on turning the academic practice of determining a secondary
source’s provenance, which is so often hidden from students, into what is basically a
95
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
design problem. Rather than teaching resources and their use, learning activities were
created that would attempt to facilitate students to engage with information using a set of
Figure 1: An overview illustration showing the depth of the academic ocean populated by sea
creatures representing secondary sources from the Fishscale of Academicness resource.
Illustration by Josh Filhol
critical thinking skills, one of the main principles of inquiry-based learning (HamptonReeves et al., 2009).
The Fishscale of Academicness, discussed in detail in Gröppel-Wegener and Walton
(2013), is a teaching intervention based on the idea of giving students a task in order to
consolidate their learning. As in the studio, an initial demonstration by an expert would be
followed by the learners exploring and practising the newly introduced skill. Students are
not just asked to make a judgement call based on predetermined criteria, they are utilising
a learning-by-doing approach to analyse types of sources through their visualisation as sea
creatures. In the process student groups design their own personalised (and visual)
metaphors, thus also making use of one of Lawley and Tompkins’ (2000) key points about
metaphor: they are turning the abstract experience (of analysing secondary sources) into
something more concrete (the sea creatures). They are also linking the concept that some
sources are considered of more academic worth than others into the visual of depth in an
ocean, with the sea creatures representing their sources living somewhere between the
shallows (of little academic worth) and the deepest sea (of most academic worth).
The use of metaphors and analogies is key to this learning strategy. In the context of
psychoanalysis, metaphors are used extensively to discover meaning that might be
concealed. Similarly the ‘academicness’ of a secondary source is just as hidden to the
uninitiated, and the ‘proper’ vocabulary to discuss this is also something that students
might lack, particularly in their first year of studies. So it makes sense to use metaphors in
the context of the hidden academic practice of establishing a source’s provenance. But it is
not just the use of metaphors as such that is useful here, the trick is to ask students to
make use of two common stages of translating one form of metaphor to another:
verbalising and physicalising.
As Lawley and Tompkins explain:
96
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
Much of the Symbolic Modelling process involves facilitating the client to verbalise the
symbolism they ascribe to their imaginative representations, their nonverbal behaviour
and to the material objects that draw their attention. […] The other common type of
translation involves the client physicalising their spoken and imaginative metaphors,
that is, intentionally creating a physical symbolic representation. This could be drawing,
painting, sculpting, poetry, prose and making music. […] Physicalising a metaphor often
enables clients to depict things they cannot say, and to encapsulate and convey the
overall wholeness of an experience in a single material representation. (Lawley and
Tompkins, 2000, p. 16, their emphasis)
Determining the provenance of secondary sources is, of course, not happening on such
deep a level as psychotherapy and it is not a therapeutic process. However, some of the
same principles apply in the design process. Indeed, metaphors are already being
discussed in the context of designing and design education (see for example Coyne,
Snodgrass and Martin, 1994), with Hiort af Ornäs, Keitsch and Schulte arguing that
‘Metaphors are pedagogic tools for conveying certain ideas, providing ways of structuring
thinking and understanding abstractions’ and that ‘Metaphors can support learning in
novel ways and contexts. For beginners, they can be used to encourage students to
structure thinking and understand abstractions.’ (Hiort af Ornäs, Keitsch and Schulte, 2014,
p. 5)
The tasks linked to the Fishscale combine the processes Lawley and Tompkins discuss –
students are asked to verbalise their understanding of the sources in group discussions and
at the same time to physicalise them as a visual representation. As the ‘theme’ for this
visualisation is predetermined (sea creatures), students have a ready-made vocabulary of
both images and words at their disposal to work towards the understanding of what makes
a source academic. Design students go through a familiar process (of designing
something); they are tapping into tacit understanding (according to Biggs, 2004, tacit
knowledge ‘has an experiential component that cannot be efficiently expressed
linguistically’, p. 7) and make it more tangible through observation, verbalising and
physicalising, until it becomes understood.
Research Design
This paper analyses the way student groups drawn from first year art and design
disciplines physicalised and verbalised sample sources they had been given during a
session when the concept of the Fishscale was explained to them. The aim was to find out
whether the concept was understood and whether it was important to ask students to
both visualise and verbalise their understanding of the provenance of the sources.
Seven different classes of students took part in the research covering the disciplines of
Animation (17), Comic and Cartoon Arts (17), Film and Media Production (39), Fine Art
(26), Graphic Design and Illustration (21), Photography and Photojournalism (28), as well
as Surface Pattern and Textile Surface Design (17). A total of 165 students participated. In
groups of about 5 students each, the students discussed a number of sample sources, one
or two sources per group, depending on the time available during the class. The sources
were selected according to their type and care was taken that none of the small groups
97
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
worked with two texts of a similar academic depth. Each class had representations of all
the levels of academicness, which were later discussed as part of a ranking exercise.
The types of sources were drawn from leisure publications, the online presence of a
reputable newspaper, a page from Wikipedia, a ‘creative’ type high quality magazine, a
book giving examples of infographics curated for a general public, two peer-reviewed
academic journals and an academic book based on a PhD thesis. The same collection of
sample sources was used for all the classes, and students were told that these were not
connected to their subject disciplines on purpose as the point of the exercise was to
identify and appreciate the types of sources rather than their content.
The students produced a total of 65 images of individual sources as sea creatures in
response to the samples. Students were asked to include a commentary explaining why
these sea creatures had been chosen as representations, 8 of the images did not include
this commentary. The image examples included here are published with the permission of
the individuals who drew them. When this permission could not be obtained the images
are only described. An example can be seen in Figure 2, with the description given by the
student groups as the caption (original spelling and grammar has been kept here and in the
following captions). It is important to keep in mind that the students also presented their
designs in class, so another layer of communication, the oral presentation and discussion,
is in the mix for them. Unfortunately this layer could not be captured in this research.
Findings
To give an overview of the findings, first there will be a discussion of the images and
commentaries on the types of sources produced by the groups. Here particular attention
will be paid to the more academic ones and how they were perceived by students – as well
as whether this way of analysis allowed the students to show their findings even if they
were lacking the right academic vocabulary. This section will end with a discussion of what
the images show that the written commentary does not, with a particular focus on the
accessories that were added to the sea creatures.
The students successfully identified the sources from the leisure category as not
suitable for academic research and ranked them near to the surface of the ‘academic
ocean’. The 12 student groups working with those sources often portrayed them as groups
of small fish, and they were mostly either described as or drawn colourful. Other words
used to describe them were ‘lively’, ‘bright’, ‘cheerful’ and ‘friendly’. Comments also
showed that students analysed their sources, including terms such as ‘opinionated’, ‘onesided’, ‘all form with no function’ or ‘information is pointless’ (see Figure 3 for an
example).
6 student groups tackled the printout of a Wikipedia page. Most of these commented
on its potential ambiguity when it comes to academic work, mentioning the way it is
compiled. It was described as ‘straightforward’, eel-like, ‘fat’ (because it has a lot of
information in it), a pufferfish (because ‘the wrong part’ is ‘poisonous’), and as a jellyfish
(as incorrect information ‘can sting you’). All student groups ranked Wikipedia as a midrange academic source.
The newspaper article was investigated by 7 student groups. Most of the comments
here showed that students felt it was an accessible and trustworthy resource with lots of
information, located at a mid-range academic level. One group likened it to an angler fish,
98
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
saying that ‘the article relies on visual aids in order to guide the reader through the
information.’ Another group visualised it as a shark ‘because there is too much text and
there isn’t much photographic pieces that show anything’ (an example can be seen in
Figure 2).
Figure 2: It's fairly flat and has some quirky illustrations hence the star shape. I would trust starfish,
despite the lack of facial features. It lives on the rocks so it can be found both on the
surface (the web) and in a deeper source (the Guardian newspaper). [Graphics/Illustration
student on newspaper article]
Figure 3: -One-sided.-Opinionative.-Not a great deal of content.-Very image heavy.-Famous female
sex. [Photography/Photojournalism describing women’s leisure magazine]
7 student groups analysed the design magazine. All of them ranked its academicness as
not quite on the surface, but pretty shallow nonetheless. Terms to describe it included
‘personal’, ‘colourful’ – so much so that one group designed a ‘rainbow fish’ to visualise it
99
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
– and a lot of them mentioned that it included a lot of images. One group described it as
an eel, as it was ‘long and straightforward’ and another as an octopus (see Figure 4).
Figure 4: It is an octopus because it has a series of information which are all to do with the same
thing, the octopus is the main parts and the legs of the different facts. [Fine Art describing
creative Magazine]
Figure 5: We have chosen a jellyfish to represent our source of information given to us because, much
like a jellyfish it is colourful and comes in different colours. The information is spread out
and patterned around much like a jellyfish's limbs. It also may start off simple but it ends
complicated. Jellyfish also go and do what they want with no care, this book is sets out
the same way. [Film/Media Production describing infographic book]
The non-fiction book for the general public was analysed by 6 student groups. Terms to
describe this were ‘visual’ and ‘colourful’. The sea creatures represented ranged from
traditional fish shapes to the puffer fish (‘The information in the book seems small at first
100
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
but when you continue to read you realise that the information goes into more depth’), a
flat fish, rather like a flounder, and a jellyfish (see Figure 5).
Figure 6: It is large and full of information. It appears intimidating to anyone unfamiliar with it and its
content. It is black-and-white covered blue. [Comic and Cartoon Arts describing PhD book]
For this research it was of particular interest to see how academic secondary sources
were considered by the students. One of the aims of the session was to introduce them to
the concept of peer-reviewed journals and to make them aware that the further they
would progress through their three year programmes the more they would be expected to
engage with ‘deeper’ academic sources. For this reason three types of sample academic
sources were discussed in class: a book based on a PhD thesis and two peer-reviewed
journals, which will be discussed here in more detail.
The book based on PhD research was published for a specialist audience, but it was not
the PhD thesis itself, thus missing the formatting and idiosyncrasies that can be found in an
original doctoral submission. 7 student groups analysed this source. The attributes given to
it were well observed. Two groups described it as a whale (one example can be seen in
Figure 6), focusing on the amount of information given on one specific topic. Other groups
mentioned an octopus, a jellyfish, an eel-like fish and a flat fish.
Most of the student groups identified this as a very deep source, and terms used to
describe it included ‘boring’ and ‘dull’. A lack of pictures was remarked on, as was that it
was full of information.
While the PhD book was considered overall full of information, but dull, the two peerreviewed academic journals were often seen as scary and teeth featured a lot in the
relevant illustrations. Students were sampling two different academic journals, the Journal
of Writing in Creative Practice (JWCP), which is closely connected to creative practice in the
articles featured, and Teaching and Learning Inquiry (TLI), which is very theoretical in
scope. 11 student groups looked at the former. While some of them identified this as a
deep academic source, most of them had it in lower mid-range. There were also a lot of
differences in how it was described. Some students saw it as scary fish (piranha, two
sharks, kraken). Others saw it as flat and straight forward (turtle). One described an
101
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
octopus. Terms like ‘trustability’, ‘informative’, ‘references his findings’ were added. Some
students were not impressed, using terms like ‘wordy’, ‘unfriendly’, ‘quite bland but
content rich’ and even ‘nasty’.
Figure 7: This article is a kracken because the journal is big and unfriendly, has no images.
[Graphics/Illustration students describing an article in JWCP]
Figure 8: Shark grey scary, a lot of information. Star shaped because it talks about a range of
different things. [Surface Pattern/Textile Surface describing article in JWCP]
Both groups from the Graphics/Illustration class make the point that the source has no
images (which was true for the issues they had available, although more current issues of
this journal do include pictures). They describe a reading experience the students find
scary (Figure 7) simply by showing a kraken crushing a ship.
Other groups use the metaphor of sea creatures with limbs in order to make the point
that the journal includes information on different things; Figure 8, for example, shows the
journal as a combination of starfish and shark.
102
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
9 student groups analysed issues of Teaching and Learning Inquiry. Imagery used here
was mostly of sharks (one of them sleeping to show how boring the text was), and there
were a lot of terms in the descriptions identifying this source as ‘complicated’, ‘hard’,
‘intimidating’, ‘dull’, ‘academic’ and ‘formal’. A number of groups commented that this
journal made them feel out of their depth because it was not targeted at their own area of
expertise. In the commentary given in addition to Figure 9, for example, students are able
to identify features of this genre, such as ‘language is specialised’, ‘very complex’ and
‘orderly’.
Figure 9: The language is specialised and unfamiliar making it less accessible. Without a brief
knowledge of the background to the text it is very complex to understand. It is very
orderly and academic. [Fine art describing an article in LTI]
Figure 10: The fish is scary to begin with and it seems you will find nothing. But if you keep searching,
to the right person it becomes easier and there is useful information.
[Photography/Photojournalism describing article in TLI]
103
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
There is an interesting difference between the commentaries of two groups in
particular, both of which describe the experience of approaching the source rather than
the source itself. A group from Photography/Photojournalism (Figure 10) described (and
drew) a fish that initially is scary (with lots of teeth at one end), but which then becomes
‘easier’ to understand and with ‘useful information’ once the time is put in to understand
it in more detail. This is shown nicely by the nature of the fish changing at the tail, which is
less spiky than the rest of the fish and becomes more colourful. Figure 11, on the other
hand, an illustration provided by a group of Animation students, is described as looking
‘enticing from the outside’, but that once the reader is beyond the cover the source is
judged as ‘complex and rather intimidating-scholarly, academic and formal.’ This is not a
shark, but an angler fish, with very sharp teeth, complete with mortarboard and diploma
as a nod to its academic status. This illustration also includes the warning ‘Do not Feed’ to
show that it is potentially dangerous.
As with the mortar board and diploma in Figure 11, it is the sometimes added
accessories that make a bigger statement than the sea creatures themselves. By adding
mortarboards and diplomas students express a particular view of the university
environment; dressing up fish with pipes and monocles shows the expectation of a certain
traditional stuffiness when it comes to academia. But in this case, these stereotypes help
students get to grips with the fact that there are different levels of academic sources out
there.
Figure 11: Looks enticing from the outside, not a creative fish-once opened it is complex and rather
intimidating-scholarly, academic and formal. [Animation students describing article in TLI]
The students do not just reference their idea of academic life in this way, added
accessories are a way of making additional points, even when they are not mentioned in
the commentary. The source in Figure 3, for example, is dismissed as academically useless
through the visual clue of adding handbags to a whole school of fish, accessories that are
not mentioned in the written description.
Indeed, sometimes the images produced are more telling than the commentary. Figure
12 portrays a peer-reviewed academic journal and the written commentary is in a way
quite funny, with students trying to imagine the type of character this source could be
104
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
described as (‘Probably lives in a semi-detached house, has a library card’). The fish that
was drawn does not show teeth to show that it is scary, although the expression of its
mouth is probably best described as quizzical. What really gives this picture significance,
however, is the thumbs down gesture the fish makes. It is a tiny detail that clearly shows
how dismissive the students are of this source, and possibly this type of source.
Figure 12: Lots of text - very dull. Grey cover. Probably lives in semi-detached house, has a library
card. [Graphics Illustration students describing TLI]
Figure 13: [Fine Art on PhD book, no written commentary included]
As mentioned before, sometimes there was no commentary included with the pictures.
That does not mean that they do not tell a story about how the students perceived the
particular source, although of course some of this is down to interpretation and possibly
guess work. Figure 13 shows the analysis of the PhD based book by a number of Fine Art
students. It is clearly a jellyfish, so based on the use of this type of sea creature by student
groups we can assume that the ‘sting in the tail’ plays a part in this evaluation. This
105
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
particular specimen also has facial features, which are very neutral – a ‘mouth’ that is very
straight, no smile or frown is included. But most striking perhaps is the inclusion of a ‘nose’
made up of a question mark. The picture gets a sense of scale by the inclusion of a much
tinier fish alongside the jellyfish, which might relate to the amount of information included
in the book. The tiny fish also says ‘Help’, which (particularly when considered together
with the question mark nose) might be in reference to the students feeling helpless and
overwhelmed by this type of source.
Discussion
As the images and explanations show, in a relatively short time, students come up with
insightful assessments of sources and usually their assessments of how useful the
respective types of sources are in an academic context are accurate. The few times when
they are not, discussion in the classroom showed that students tried to determine the
value of the sources for them specifically in the context of their own subject, when they
did not take on board that the sources were chosen outside of their discipline on purpose.
As has been seen, sometimes the same creature was designed by different sets of
students for different sources, and it is interesting to see that the commentaries
accompanying these designs clearly explain why that particular creature was chosen. So
different aspects are highlighted, or they are explained in a variety of contexts.
It comes as no surprise that the shark features a number of times, particularly to
describe an academic source, because this is included as an example of representing an
academic source in the presentation that introduces the Fishscale concept. However, a
number of sea creatures came up repeatedly in student work that did not feature in the
presentation. For example, there are a number of different sources that are described as
creatures with a number of limbs, like starfish, squid or octopi. In these examples, the
limbs are often compared with different facts or perspectives, they are often chosen for
magazines or journals. However, there are still clear differences made between the octopi
which represent the academic level – the creative magazine visualised in Figure 4 is
multicoloured and sports ‘creative’ accessories like a hat and sunglasses, whereas the
kraken in Figure 7 visibly wreaks havoc making it not just more serious in appearance but
also scary.
Overall, the comments that students use to describe their reasoning behind which sea
creature best visualises a specific source gives an insight into their thinking processes and
it gives them the vocabulary to analyse types of text that might be unfamiliar to them.
Most of these students lack the right terminology to analyse academic literature, to the
point that many of them refer to journals as ‘books’. Encouraging them to describe the
sources in terms of sea creatures allows them to show their analytical skills by using means
of communication that they are familiar with: drawing/designing on the one hand and
talking about something that, while some of them might see it as an odd subject, is
nevertheless much less alien than academic terminology.
The concept behind the Fishscale of Academicness might be considered as particularly
useful for art and design students as it is a visual approach to a very real problem in Higher
Education. However, the visual nature of the concept is only one of the aspects that makes
it useful. Rather, it is the design task and integrated designerly thinking that makes it
invaluable. This works because students are alerted to the necessity of analysing the
106
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
provenance of the secondary sources they are considering to use. Rather than just ranking
them, students need to find a way to represent sources through an analogy and
externalise a brief analysis of them in three ways: as picture, in oral discussion and as
written text. So any inherent understanding they might have that comes from skimming
the sources needs to be specifically externalised. As has been argued by Gröppel-Wegener
and Walton (2013) this task allows students ‘to move from an affective state of uncertainty
regarding the information they are engaging with to a point of relative certainty’ (p. 16).
The important factor is not necessarily the visual nature of this concept, but rather the
activities through which the translations of the students’ understanding into different
physicalisations become visible to them: because they are being asked to analyse and
describe sources they become aware that this is behaviour they need to integrate into
their own research practice. They develop a sense of ownership not just of the sources
they have analysed and translated into a sea creature, but also of this activity. It works
because it uses an approach that is embedded in the practice of design teaching. In a way
the presentation is a demonstration of how to go through questioning the provenance of a
secondary source. The students are using team work to practise (and practice) this crucial
stage of academic practice and they produce a physical outcome that potentially becomes
part of their research process, just as an early sketch becomes part of their design process.
Conclusion
The engagement of the students with the provenance of secondary sources and the
related design tasks clearly demonstrates an understanding of the concept of information
determinacy. While the research data collected at this stage does not show whether there
was long term retention of the concept, as a strategy to make the problem understood it
has been proven successful (and the data collected as part of the larger research project
confirms this).
Through the analysis of a range of metaphors student groups developed during these
sessions, it is clear that using a studio-like teaching approach is a possible way to make
students aware of the sometimes hidden academic practice of questioning the sources
they come across in their research. Engaging students in an active way gives them a readymade strategy for following this through individually – and taking ownership of this
activity.
What this research also has shown is that while first year students may lack the right
terminology to describe academic sources correctly, they do have the right skills to analyse
them and describe them if another vocabulary is presented. The physicalisations of the
metaphors the students are coming up with also show their impressions of the type of
sources they are expected to engage with – some of them are clearly intimidated by the
complexity of academic texts. However, hopefully they realise that academic practice gets
easier by being practised, just like the tasks design students encounter in their workshops.
References
Balusek, K. and Oliver, J. (2012) An Assessment of Students’ Ability to Evaluate Sources
using a scale. [conference presentation] International Society for the Scholarship of
107
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) conference, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada 22.-27. October
2012
Beaumont, C. and Penketh, C. (2010) Evaluating the Undergraduate Experience to improve
and Access Course. Presentation at Flying Start Symposium at Liverpool Hope
University, 10. June 2010
Biggs, M. (2004) Learning from Experience: approaches to the experiential component of
practice-based research in: Forskning, Reflektion, Utveckling. Stockholm,
Vetenskapsrådet, 6-21
Breivik, P.S. and Gee, E.G. (2006). Higher education in the internet age. Libraries creating a
strategic edge. Westport: Praeger.
Coyne, R, Snodgrass, A and Martin, D. Metaphors in the Design Studio. Journal of
Architectural Education. Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 113-125
Gröppel-Wegener, A. and Walton, G. (2013). The Fishscale of Academicness. In: Walsh, A.
and Coonan, E. eds. (2013). Only Connect … Discovery pathways, library explorations,
and the information adventure. Huddersfield: Innovative Libraries, pp. 15-38
Hampton-Reeves, S., Mashiter, C., Westaway, J., Lumsden, P., Day, H., Hewertson, H. and
Hart, A. (2009). Students’ Use of Research Content in Teaching and Learning: A report
for the Joint Information Systems Council (JISC). [online]
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/aboutus/workinggroups/studentsuseresearch
content.pdf
Hemmig, W. S. (2008) The information-seeking behaviour of visual artists: a literature
review. Journal of Documentation, Vol. 64 Issue 3, 343-362
Hepworth, M. and Walton, G. (2009) Teaching information literacy for inquiry-based
learning. Oxford: Chandos
Hiort af Ornäs, V., Keitsch, M. and K. Schulte (2014) Metaphors in design curricula.
International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, 4 & 5
September 2014, University of Twente, The Netherlands
Lawley, J and Tompkins, P (2000) Metaphors in Mind – Transformation Through Symbolic
Modelling. The Developing Company Press
Metzger, M.J., Flanigan, A.J. and Zwarun, L. (2003). College student Web use, perceptions
of information credibility, and verification behavior. Computer & Education, 41, 271-290
Walton, G. and Hepworth, M. (2011). A longitudinal study of changes in learners’ cognitive
states during and following an information literacy teaching intervention. Journal of
Documentation, 67 (3), 449-479
Wiley, J., Goldman, S., Graesser, A., Sanchez, C., Ash, I. and Hemmerich, J. (2009). Source
evaluation, comprehension, and learning in internet science inquiry tasks. American
Educational Research Journal, 46, 1060-1106.
108
Whose Job Is It Anyway?
Fiona GRIEVE a and Kim MEEK*b
a Threaded
Media; b Unitec Institute of Technology
*kmeek@unitec.ac.nz
Abstract: Many undergraduate students struggle to successfully manage the
transition from academic study to creative sector employment. Talented
graduates with great portfolios don’t necessarily connect to meaningful
vocational outcomes.
A lack of experience in the ‘business of design’ is often cited as a significant
impact on employment decisions made by creative directors. Placements and
internships can add valuable commercial experience that offer employers
confidence that graduates will add value. Paradoxically, many studios are
insufficiently resourced to offer meaningful experiential learning opportunities
and frequently, students are poorly prepared to access them. Coupled with an
international paradigm shift in rhetoric, both fee-paying students and
institutional managers are respectively demanding and promising, higher value
vocational relevancy from investment in tertiary education. Responding to these
challenges, many Graphic Design programmes are not only revaluating their
curriculum and currency of practice, but also seeking greater connectivity
vocational support between academy and industry. This paper case-studies the
development of an integrated and experiential teaching model that fosters
engagement with Graphic Design industry partners, effectively coordinating and
leveraging the power of academic and alumni relationships across a range of
professional experiences including non-residential project based learning
opportunities and collaborative learning partnerships.
Keywords: design education, design curriculum, learning collaboration,
vocational success
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Introduction
Undergraduate students wake up every morning facing a climate of change,
uncertainty and intricacy. Educators wake up facing increasingly diverse students needs,
organisational restructuring, curriculum reshaping and portfolio diversification, while
Design professionals wake up to global and business challenges in a competitive and
challenging marketplace.
Are we chasing each others coat tails as we try to establish our own identities and roles in
a ‘supercomplex world’ (Barnett, 2000, p.257).
Supercomplexity shows itself discursively through the world of work through such
terms as ‘flexibility’, ‘adaptability’ and (more recently still) ‘self-reliance’ (Barnett, 2000,
p.257). Shelly Kramer highlights key attributes for graduates for businesses at Dell’s Think
Tank sessions, ‘It’s important to be resourceful, adaptable, and willing to learn new skills’
(Kramer, 2015). These are familiar terms which highlight businesses preferred graduate
profile and are also embedded in undergraduate programme brochures and heralded as
graduate aims and profiles the world over.
‘Increasingly, students are being asked to take on the general capacities (core skills)
required by the corporate world’ (Barnett, 2000, p.261), before they have even entered
the workforce. We know that students are undertaking degrees founded on sound and
current pedagogical theories promoting ‘work integrated learning’, ‘experiential learning’,
participatory ‘communities of practice’ and multi-modal collaborations.
If we inhabit ‘a world in which we are conceptually challenged, and continually so’
(Barnett, 2000, p.257) is it any wonder then, that students have uncertainty about the
graphic design profession as a whole, including their own (and our) professionalism?
As defined within our Bachelor of Design and Visual Arts programme regulations
(Unitec Institute of Technology, New Zealand), we promise to ‘provide learning
experiences that stimulate students to critically reflect on their own practice, and that of
others, and which fosters in graduates a commitment to lifelong learning, personal
development and the advancement of the creative professions’ (BDVA Programme
Document 2008, p.15).
So how is it that at the end of every semester we reflect on our value as senior
academics teaching undergraduate Graphic Design we are increasingly perplexed by the
lack of intention, motivation and professionalism exhibited by our final-year degree
students?
Have we become side tracked by the constant renegotiation and ever increasing
expectations in our dual role as educator and professional practitioners/researchers? Did
we have a misplaced notion that design-led businesses were watching us from the wings,
waiting to be offered perfect graduate with ‘that certain spark’ (Beverland, 2012, p.47)?
Were we failing to effectively stimulate our students into being ‘performative learners’,
did we care more about their futures; were we more invested in the profession than they
were?
Trying to understanding what motivates our student goes hand in hand with the
growing interest in the measurement of ‘learning outcomes’ outside the classroom
(Hoover, 2009). In his essay The Millennial Muddle (2009), Hoover contradicts claims cited
by Howe & Strauss in Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation (2000).
110
Whose Job is it Anyway?
The authors assigned them seven ‘core traits’: special, sheltered, confident, teamoriented, conventional, pressured, and achieving . . . Their life mission will not be to
tear down old institutions that don't work, but to build up new ones that do. (Hoover,
2009)
We wanted to believe it all. However, we were left struggling to equate Millennials
Rising with the behaviours we were seeing in our students. Hoover (2009) identifies that ‘a
competing narrative about students had developed. In it, more of them were anxious and
depressed, and more were as self-centered and demanding as diners in a crowded
restaurant’.
Jeannine C. Lalonde’s observation (Hoover, 2009) as assistant hall director at Boston
College, was that her job was not only to support students, but also to challenge them.
Yet some students, who seemed to see themselves as customers, did not want those
challenges — they wanted problems solved for them. ‘I was seeing many of these
positive things, but I was also confused by all the entitlement I was seeing. (Hoover,
2009)
Perhaps to prepare graphic design students for the ‘business of design’, we would need
more effective signposts, with enticing journeys to overtly attractive career destinations?
As educators we know that re-shaping the graphic design curriculum to deliver
experiences that meets the needs of all stakeholders is involved and elaborate. With a
summer break in hand we could only start ‘to consider economic, political, historical,
social, and cultural factors’ (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996) required to underpin the type of
substantial curriculum reform required to transform student learning and development.
Our scenario
By the close of the academic year in 2012, we were made acutely aware of the
international paradigm shift in institutional rhetoric, both fee-paying students and tertiary
managers respectively demanded and promised, higher value vocational relevance from
investment in tertiary education.
Responding to these challenges we identified the need to develop a teaching model
that could provide high quality collaborative and vocational experiences for our students.
One that evaluated curriculum and currency of practice, but also sought greater
connectivity and vocational support between academy and industry.
Acknowledging that the ‘desire for a new partnership between education and
professional practice is an on-going and relevant discussion that continues to intensify’
(Buchanan, 1998), we set about developing a blended learning and teaching model that
sought to engage our students, modified conventional course structures and re positioned
‘‘the general metaphor of the studio’ (Clinton & Reiber, 2010) cited in Cennamo & Brandt
(2012, p.842).
Recognising that teaching and learning is a continuous journey which need not be
‘formalized within a timeframe of a formal education but as a constant state of being’,
libertes both educators and students. The idea that the ‘studio’ experience ‘can be like a
nested network on its own, connecting institutes, profession, business and society.,’ offers
111
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
new and ‘fluid’ counterpoints to evolve and deliver curricula, ones which connect and
motivate our students for a ‘supercomplex world’ (Pos, n.d.).
The Rhetoric: The fundamental transformation of
Higher Education
As design educators we are continuously challenged by emergent transformative
practices of the creative industry. We were acutely aware of the multitude of internal and
external, local and global economic, structural, social and cultural influences and policies
that are shaping our design programmes. The ‘higher education sector is undergoing a
fundamental transformation in terms of its role in society, mode of operation, and
economic structure and value’ (Ernst & Young, 2012, p.4).
Significant change to undergraduate programmes is routinely orchestrated and
aggressively actioned with universities in Australasia responding to the ‘need to
significantly streamline their operations and asset base, at the same time as incorporating
new teaching and learning delivery mechanisms, a diffusion of channels to market, and
stakeholder expectations for increased impact’ (Ernst & Young, 2012, p.4).
Like many American counterparts, our institution is adopting a more fluid and flexible
model of tertiary education delivery, ‘it’s estimated that adjuncts constitute more than
forty per cent of all instructors at American colleges and universities’. Our reality was
already a restructured department with significantly reduced tenured appointments, with
‘the rest … filled by ‘experts’ drawn from industry’ (Cumming, 2013).
In this type of shape shifting environment, how could we form a teaching collaboration
between academy and industry that embraced some of the principals of ‘convergence’
(the coming together of students, staff and professionals across faculties to work on
projects, undertake research and learn from one another) without undermining the value
of tenured roles?
To ensure that we didn't exploit our ‘experts’ and peers from creative industry and
practice, we needed a value proposition that could meaningfully engage and collaborate
with the profession in a way that wasn’t founded on recruitment or economic transaction.
For our sector partners (many of whom were successful alumni), the value proposition
was one of manifold reciprocity. Industry professionals could directly shape curricula and
inform assessment, influence student experience and capability development, and allow
the ‘preflighting’ of potential graduates for internship and employment opportunities.
What are creative industries looking for?
According to the New Zealand Government, career opportunities for our students were
looking relatively positive, ‘Two years after completion of a Bachelors degree in graphic
and design studies, 72% of graduates were employed and 17% we in further study. This
compares to 64% employed and 30% in further study for all graduates with a bachelors
degree’ (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, 2015).
But what did the future needs of the creative industries look like in New Zealand? The
common finding and signal for the creative industries by the Alliance Sector Skill Council,
(2011) was the call for graduates with ‘hybrid skills’ (as cited in Creative Arts Qualification
Review Needs Analysis Report, 2013).
112
Whose Job is it Anyway?
These hybrid-skills (Alliance Sector Skill Council, 2011) included:
Multi-skilling (understanding different technology platforms and their impact on
content development and digital work flow and new approaches to working in crossfunctional creative/technical teams within and across companies);
Multi-platform skills (having the creative and technical skills to produce content for
distribution across all potential platforms and the ability to understand and exploit
technological advances);
Management, leadership, business and entrepreneurial skills;
IP and monetarisation of multiplatform content (understanding intellectual property
legislation to protect from piracy, exploiting intellectual property internationally to
take advantage of emerging markets);
Sales and marketing;
Diagonal thinking skills;
Creative skills;
Archiving of digital content.
Clearly new initiatives in education were going to be required — and we would be
playing catch-up. Internationally, institutions and programmes were already leading
collaborative inter- and multi-disciplinary studio environments and projects demonstrating
a new level of integration that superseded both the liberal arts and specialised discipline
models.
Collaboration in various forms (inter-, multi-, trans-disciplinary) claimed to be the
preferred working model for future designers (e.g. Bennett, 2009; Ligon & Fong, 2009;
Davis, 2011; Hunt, 2011). This begs the questions: What kind of designer is needed?
More specifically, what depth or breadth of knowledge does the industry require of a
young designer or design graduate to successfully participate in a contemporary work
environment? And, furthermore, how can they be educated? (Fleischmann, 2014)
Trying to bridge the gap
Was it time for our specialist degree in Design and Visual Arts to be replaced by a new
award that responded to new discourses, technological developments, social and
environmental responsibilities? Our institution and senior management certainly believed
so, they had introduced a Bachelor of Creative Enterprise (BCE). Perhaps this new award
could preserve the value of specificity and provide a multi-disciplinary design education
that better serves employees needs for graduates with ‘hybrid skills’?
Meanwhile, we were interested in a new approach to professional practice based
inputs, one that would intrinsically develop and flex students ‘hybrid skills’ through integral
relationships with professionals in their workplace, participating in their methodologies,
projects and critique. Friedman (2012) argues ‘that design graduates need two kinds of
education: ‘One is specialty training in the advanced skills of a specific design practice. The
other is a broad training that involves the kinds of thinking and knowledge designers need
for a wide range of professional engagements’ ‘(as cited in Fleischmann, 2014).
If economic structures, IT and business models had been the recent driver of curricula
change, how could we incorporate the types of provocations and thinking that Sarah Stein
113
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Greenberg’s was sharing in Radical Ideas for Reinventing College, From Stanford’s Design
School (2014) which place students at the centre of change?
Trying to measure the gap
The Mind the gaps: The 2015 Deloitte Millennial Survey seeks to highlight the
discrepancy between what business values, skill sets and attributes our graduates believe
they bring to employers after graduation and what capabilities business want in
employees.
With the obvious exceptions of academic knowledge or intellectual ability, Millennials
say they were stronger on ‘soft’ attributes such as being professional, hard-working,
flexible, and in possession of integrity and maturity. They were not as confident in their
technical or specific business skills, including financial, economic, and general business
knowledge; the ability to challenge or disrupt current thinking; the ability to create
opportunity; sales and marketing; and similar talents. (Deloitte, 2015)
Recent graduates agree that upon graduation they did not have the ‘full range of skills,
personal qualities, and experience’ that today's employees and organizations require. Only
28 percent of Millennials feel that their current organizations are making ‘full use’ of the
skills they currently have to offer (Deloitte, 2015).
Reporting such as this triangulates with current reporting parallels across both
international and New Zealand business contexts and further highlights employee needs
for ‘hybrid skills’, that are ‘a combination of technical, business, creative and interpersonal
skills to have the ability to successfully understand, navigate, use and meet the
requirements of the current environment (NZQA National Qualifications Services, 2013).
When Millennials were asked what skill sets they would emphasise if they were leading
businesses and hiring it was interesting to note that they would focus on ‘softer’ and
personal skills which aligns with the qualities that Millennials believe they brought to the
table. ‘So, despite their acknowledgement that this may not be what businesses currently
value, Millennials would overstate the merits of ‘personal traits such as integrity’,
‘flexibility and team working’, ‘professionalism’ along with ‘creative thinking’ (Deloitte,
2015).
The Deloitte Executive Summary (2015) recommendations propose that closer
relationships between academics and business would potentially clarify assumptions on
the currency of educational content and re-calibrate the location of students at the centre
of change.
Location, location, location: situated graphic design
education
As academies have begin to grapple with the hydra-like conditions impacting the future
scope of graphic design education, there has been a number of innovative models trialed,
that are useful to introduce.
Many of the models we examined had resources and networks in place to cultivate
collaborative inter- and multi-disciplinary studio environments and projects that went
beyond our initial ambition to situate graphic design education within professional
114
Whose Job is it Anyway?
domains of practice, to ‘actively encourage students to develop empathy, optimism and
integrative thinking’ (Edwards-Vandenhoek & Sandbach, 2013).
Cross-institutional collaboration such as Global Studio which involves teams of students
from a UK University and international Universities, ‘the Global Studio responds to shifting
trends taking place in design practice with regards the emergence of globally networked
organisations and the inherent shift in ways of working’ (Ghassan & Bohemia, 2013).
Responding to alumni calls to address a need ‘for more integrated, interdisciplinary,
and hands-on educational experiences for students’ (Shadinger & Deborah, 2014), North
West Missouri University introduced their Knacktive model which employs highly selected
groups of undergraduate students to ‘replicates the intense teamwork atmosphere of a
technology-oriented, professional marketing communication agency’ (Shadinger &
Deborah, 2014). During the Knacktive experience, student-led teams conduct market
research, analyze data, write creative strategies, and ultimately develop an integrated,
digital, marketing communication campaign and promotional materials for a ‘real-world’
client.
While University of Western Sydney (UWS) Rabbit Hole aligns closely with the intent we
had to develop a model that ‘incorporates participatory design methods and work
integrated learning’ and facilitate a studio experience ‘that is both student-centred and
client-focused, with the teaching team providing opportunities for students to work on real
life design projects with community bodies and industry partners, with an emphasis on
design advocacy and professional engagement’ (Edwards-Vandenhoek & Sandbach, 2013).
The rise of professional vocational training
Whilst we have identified situated learning models that straddle and negotiate the
interdependence of education and research/industry, we pondered what other models
challenged or augmented the traditional location of graphic design education within the
academy?
In a Network society and a sustainable design education, Pos argues that:
ambitious students and young designers make use of the global network by studying
abroad or applying for apprentice worldwide. Their mobility by using the digital or the
(public) transport network makes them like ‘journeyman’ in the medieval guild system.
A professional whose work isn’t at mastery level yet and travels to gather experience in
a wide range of his profession. (n.d.)
While what briefly follows below is in no way not a definitive record, our initial survey
of subscription models within private practice reveals a wide range of online, web-based ,
blended and face-to-face offerings marketed within the spectrum of professional
vocational training.
The adoption of non-credentialed skills is being met by a significant number of learning
communities for creators, Skillshare.com pride themselves on nearly ‘1 million skillshare
students’ with a mission statement set on ‘dismantling the traditional barriers to learning
so that anyone, anywhere in the world, can learn whatever they set their minds to’
(Unlocking the World's Creativity, 2015).
115
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
The pedagogical platform for many of these these initiatives is varied when reviewing
Udemy for PC Magazine, William Fenton touches on some of their distinctive
characteristics:
Online education suffers from something of an embarrassment of riches. With
platforms as varied as Khan Academy, Udacity, Coursera, and edX, learners can enroll in
just about any course that sparks curiosity, and often at no cost. But what about learners
who also want to share their expertise? Whereas platforms like Coursera and edX curate
courses from universities, and Udacity and Khan Academy host their own content, Udemy
(free) is unique because it allows any user to act as either learner or instructor. (Fenton,
2015)
Meanwhile, Australian-based design school Tractor (http://www.tractor.edu.au), ‘an
independent design school created by designers for designers’, is leveraging their
relationship with The Design Kids (http://thedesignkids.com.au), an active online design
community of 30,000+ ‘emerging’ Australasian designers, who work with students and
graduates to offer industry knowledge, exposure and opportunities through events and
online resources.
In contrast independent named designers are leveraging their brands to offer
alternative vocational educational experience ranging from James Victore web presence
(http://www.jamesvictore.com) to the bespoke co-located studio-based experience
offered at Studio Catherine Griffiths (http://www.catherinegriffiths.co.nz).
Then there are well-known marquee graphic designers unflinchingly sharing their
perspectives on education and practice through internationalised professional conference
programmes and web-forums, arguably the most well known being Stefan Sagmeister.
Not that global reach is required to project firm opinions, Holger Jacobs (both professor
of typography and principal of Mind Design, http://www.minddesign.co.uk), offers frank
insight into a range of designerly concerns and provocations regarding preparation for
industry.
Why do so many graduates still feel the need for more experience? Are the colleges not
responsible for preparing students for 'real life'? Small studios are not a training camp
for the big world . . . Forget about internships, get real, find some clients, start working,
start making mistakes, start enjoying your achievements. (Jacobs, 2011)
LiveStudio: An emerging pedagogy
Our role in LiveStudio has been to re-set the conditions for ‘experiential learning’ and
to facilitate student negotiation of the effectiveness of their individual practice. Students
are evaluated not on what they know about a particular subject/discipline but the manner
in which they practice it. Ongoing formative feedback operates throughout the LiveStudio
course of practical study which provides opportunity and incentive for students to become
self aware and responsible for their own insights.
Studio Practice: Graphic Design & Animation, is the Level 7 undergraduate course
(BDVA) that provides the pedagogical platform for LiveStudio. This 30 credit, practitioner
focused course is predicated on the belief ‘that acquiring knowledge through practice is
dispositional. This performative knowledge is in part, acquired through practice, through
116
Whose Job is it Anyway?
repetition and imitation and active experimentation. Practical knowledge is acquired as
much by example as by discursive instruction.
Thus while the programme not only aspires to relevance in addressing the accelerating
changes faced by ‘networked’ society it also aims to deliver a heuristic learner–centred
pedagogy in which students take responsibility for their direction of personal
development. By means of the project–method a highly motivated ‘focal’ interest ensures
practice with those particular ‘subsidiary’ application and skills necessary for a holistic
project resolution.’ (BDVA Programme Document, 2008, p.17)
Socio-cultural theories continue to underpin new developments in teaching and
learning, which reaffirmed the type of pedagogical experience a ‘live studio’ model needed
to foster. John-Steiner & Mahn (1998, p.16) focus on three central tenets from Vygotsky's
complex legacy, social sources of individual development, semiotic mediation, and genetic
analysis, ‘and have presented an argument for viewing learning as distributed, interactive,
contextual, and the result of the learners' participation in a community of practice.’
Communities of practice are of course not isolated; they are part of broader social
systems that involve other communities (as well as other structures such as projects,
institutions, movements, or associations). So the social world includes myriad practices;
and we live and learn across a multiplicity of practices. (Wenger, 2010, p.3)
Figure 1
Students pitch design concepts to Special Group creatives, Heath Lowe & Emma Kanuik.
Source: K. Meek.
The principles and structure of ‘communities of practice’ supported the ambition we
had for a tripartite collaboration between ourselves, the academic institution, the design
profession and our students that would authentically create professional co multi-modal
and cross-sector nature contexts for student practice.
Blended learning modes of delivery and formative feedback occurred simultaneously
through tripartite collaboration to provide motivation for independent learning in the form
of web-based, face to face, small group tutorials, site based presentations and critique,
industry feedback online and via phone, peer to peer and lecturer to student.
117
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
LiveStudio: Testing a framework
With an emphasis on co-participation and cooperative learning we adopted small
collaborative groups and maintained project-based web platforms accessible to peers,
staff and design studio partners throughout the duration of LiveStudio. Web-based forums
were used for online critique, feedback and resource hosting using web-based tools such
as WordPress, Pinterest, Moodle, Instagram and Facebook.
‘Students are required to give oral presentations on their projects,’ engage more in
group feedback to foster collective knowledge and ‘attend to their written communicative
`skills’ and develop self-monitoring capacities’ (Barnett, 2000, p.261).
Students also enrol into 15 credit Practice in Context course and are required to
produce a research methods framework which informs a ‘Project Document’ that is a
critical component of the LiveStudio project. Parallel guest speaker programmes were
introduced to expose students to research methods and social and cultural contexts.
‘The notion of experiential learning, which is embedded within Studio learning, is
predicated upon the practical integration of pure and applied knowledge and the
interdependence of theory and practice’ (BDVA Programme Document, 2008, p.13).
Introducing LiveStudio 1.0
LiveStudio is an initiative developed to facilitate engagement with design sector
industry partners, coordinating a range of professional experiences ranging across work
integrated learning (WIL), internships, negotiated studies, studio collaborations, through to
project partnerships.
LiveStudio connects students to a network of work integrated learning experiences
through external partnering. Partnering is initiated, brokered and coordinated through the
extensive and long standing contacts and connections held by academic staff. The
development and maintenance of industry relationships is integral to establishing the
currency of LiveStudio and is an ongoing dialogue.
Learners are exposed to the processes, conventions and systems of industry
professional practice through experiencing project work-flows driven by industry
professionals and supported by academic staff.
LiveStudio non-residential structure allows for industry partners to contribute in a
hands-on way (but on their own terms) to the active development of work-ready creative
talent through learning experiences, contribution to assessment and moderation processes
and identification of potential interns or future employees.
As academics this model allows us to research and rethink the future of practitioner
(graphic design) focused education as we test a model that challenges ‘the gap’ between
academy and industry. LiveStudio also allows staff to be seen externally as professionally
credible and to demonstrate currency within the creative industry sector. Enabling staff to
further develop active stakeholder partnerships and opportunities for ongoing professional
development and insight.
In 2013 and 2014 we selected LiveStudio partners from our network of professional
relationships established from either our role as educators or from our research and
professional ‘networks’ (Rost, 2011). All of the partners we approached were interested in
118
Whose Job is it Anyway?
an open and inclusive educational structure which located the centre of learning within
their design-led studio.
We were cognisant of the fact that we needed to pitch an ‘open structure’ (Rost, 2011)
that allowed partners to embed their own creative processes, content and methodologies.
One that worked within business time frames, at their workspace, and with the hope that
we could offer a tangible value exchange beyond investing in emerging designers and
giving back via alumni connections.
LiveStudio partners
Industry partners, largely drawn from alumni, were invited to work on a schedule of
industry focused projects through a programme of non-residential learning partnerships.
Our partners developed ‘real world’ briefs in consultation with academic staff, engaged in
an iterative series of reviews and student critiques.
Introducing the LiveStudio in to students on the first day of our semester revealed
several key findings. Firstly, that the majority of our students had selected graphic design
because Visual Arts and Design had been the subject they had performed best in at
secondary school and secondly because they perceived it as a subject where they didn't
have to read or undertake written exams. In both 2013 and 2014, barely 10% of students
had been to visit a design-led studio and seven could name their dream studio job. By
getting them to identify their strengths and interests we were able to place the students
into the following practice/content areas; Brand Identity, Editorial Design, Interactive
Design, Illustration and Motion Graphic Design.
2013 Industry Particpants 2013 (teamed with 53 GDA students)
Fairfax Media, Inhouse, Federation, gardyneHOLT, Special Group, Waxeye, Fuman,
Supply.
2014 Industry Particpants (teamed with 43 GDA students)
Special Group, Waxeye, Fuman, Supply, Milk, Threaded, AS Colour.
The LiveStudio process
Based on the above survey and identification of their personal and professional
interests, student were assigned to a LiveStudio groups. Unless otherwise told, they were
working as a group of individuals, contributing to a ‘community of practice’ and responding
to a brief as determined by their design agency partner.
Students were encouraged to; research the design agency they were going to; check
out the location on a map before the day; take a pen and notebook; dress appropriately;
ask questions, be themselves and be on time and take morning tea!
The development of a LiveStudio Project Document was initiated as a durable record of
learning and was designed to ensure that all participating students acknowledge and
understand the process and design methodologies implemented by our retrospective
industry partners. Students were required to construct and design a definitive record of all
creative phases and embed a reflective and reflexive discourse that communicates ideas,
content, context, research and outcomes.
The Project Document draws from core design methodologies accounting for all phases
of the project; including:
119
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Overview: Project Background, Client Background,
Brief: Design Requirement, Design Deliverables,
Research: Target Audience, Sector Insights (visuals),
Brand: Purpose, Attitude, Positioning (keywords), Brand Story, Single Organising Idea
(SOI), Moodboard (visuals),
Design: Concepts, Artwork and Application.
Aside from briefing sessions and initial partner meetings students overall process
involved:
2 weeks set for preparation of research into moodboards
4 weeks set for initial design concepts (2 of these are a mid-semester study break),
3 weeks set for preparation of finals,
1 week set for final production for assessment.
LiveStudio Case Study: Special Group (2013)
Special Group is a creatively led independent advertising and design agency based in
New Zealand and Australia (http://www.specialgroup.co.nz).
Creative Director: Heath Lowe & Senior Designer and Alumni: Emma Kanuik
I NDUSTRY B RIEF
Pineapples Pineapples Pineapples! Our challenge is to create the identity for the
pineapples that are Good for the land, good for the growers, and good for you!
E LEMENTS REQUIRED :
Identity for All Good Pineapples, considering type, colour, graphics and the ability to
tie in with the All Good Umbrella.
Label to appear on individual pineapples.
Street poster or posters to communicate this new product.
Tee-shirt.
W HO WE ARE TALKING TO :
Existing All Good customers, who appreciate the fair trade principle.
Likely to be a female household shopper.
New customers who do not yet know of, or purchase All Good produce.
C REATIVE BRIEF SUMMARY :
GET: Health and ethically conscious consumers.
WHO: Appreciate ‘good’ produce and the All Good attitude.
TO: Buy All Good’s pineapples.
BY: getting them excited about how tasty and delicious these pineapples are; as well
as communicating the ‘good for the growers, good for the land and good for you’
message.
LIKE THIS: Attitudinal, innovative, exciting with a clear message.
120
Whose Job is it Anyway?
M ANDATORY :
Must use the All Good Logo.
Must work along side the All Good Banana’s branding.
S TUDENT P ROJECT R ESPONSE
Figure 2
All Good Pineapple brand ideation. Souce: J. Body.
Figure 3
Online community of practice feedback. Souce: J. Body.
121
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Figure 4
. All Good Pineapple packaging treatments. Souce: J. Body.
LiveStudio Case Study: Annabel Langbein (2014)
Milk is a strategic design communications agency. Their work changes outcomes for
businesses and their brands (http://www.milk.co.nz).
Creative Director and Alumni: Ben Reid
I NDUSTRY B RIEF :
Annabel Langbein is a New Zealand celebrity cook, food writer and publisher. She is
also a regular radio guest and TV presenter, and has fronted her own TV series, Annabel
Langbein The Free Range Cook, which launched on the TV One network in New Zealand
and now screens in over eighty countries. She is known for promoting organic food,
primarily using seasonal ingredients and is a member of the Sustainability Council of New
Zealand.
C REATIVE O UTPUT
Explore the Annabel Langbein brand architecture and brand language (style, voice,
design, illustration, photography)
Ensure your creative and narration captures and evokes Annabel’s values (A free
range life).
Apply to a range of everyday home-wares products (Demonstrate how you might
brand actual product, packaging, what materials you might use – think of economics
and sustainability).
This is a range with critical commercial viability milestones – the product needs to sell.
Use your own intuitive self-assessment and interrogate your work: Does it communicate,
would I buy this, do I love it, is it distinctive, is it appropriate to its price point, and does it
seem right for the Annabel Langbein brand.
122
Whose Job is it Anyway?
Figure 5
LiveStudio project team being briefed in by Milk’s Creative Director, Ben Reid. Source: K
Meek.
S TUDENT P ROJECT R ESPONSE
Figure 6
Annabel Langbein pattern concepts. Source: A. Apercho.
123
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Figure 7
Annabel Langbein mgzine and web landing page concepts. Source: A. Apercho.
LiveStudio: Student Reflection
A small scale online survey study was conducted seeking feedback from students on
the most valuable aspects of working with a LiveStudio project. Student respondents
highlighted aspects such as ‘preparation for the real world’ and ‘development of time
management skills’, an ‘increased work ethic’, along with ‘professional networking
opportunities’ that could extend beyond graduation.
Tellingly, students often questioned whether they were prepared for ‘industry centred
learning’ and felt is was ‘a large shift’. One that challenged their confidence and ability to
manage timeframes, to develop the ‘empathy’ skills needed to design solutions that met
the needs of their client, audience and target market.
There was value placed in receiving critique and constructive feedback from industry
partners, but this new level of accountability coupled with a lack of ‘real world experience’
left many feeling ‘lost and uncertain’ calling for ‘more frequent updates, meetings and
emails’.
Upon reflection, students identified and described how commercial and professional
priorities fostered new attention to research, timely execution of concepts and
communication to clients as a positive creative shift in their design ability.
Several students commented on the transference of professional experience to their
freelance work and how the incorporation of LiveStudio project outcomes into their
portfolio enhanced their ability to get work.
When asked how the LiveStudio programme could be improved, students wanted to
see situated learning imbedded earlier in their degree. With requests to incorporate
‘professional conduct’, ‘industry based expectations’, ‘becoming better thinkers and
makers’, and to ‘decide whether or not graphic design is the right calling for them’ into the
course.
Feedback suggests that students wanted more frequent updates from studio partners
and clearer milestones as they struggled to ‘set goals’ for themselves, which left them
feeling a little open’ to critique or unrealistic expectations.
124
Whose Job is it Anyway?
More general feedback included learning to ‘fit in’, ‘earning trust, ‘keeping up with
tasks’, ‘quickly learning new technical skills’ and ‘knowing the most efficient way of
accomplishing things’ along with ‘being decisive in decision making’.
At the completion of internships, students cited learning industry standards, processes
and techniques, responding to fast deadlines, incorporation of feedback into design and
need to ask questions and keep learning as core learning experiences they took away from
their internship.
When asked to look back and identify the ‘real’ value of their internship, students
noted that it ‘reaffirmed their career aspiration in graphic design’, ‘improved their
communication and technical skills’, and ‘enabled the development of professional
networks’.
LiveStudio: Academic and Industry Reflection
From an educational perspective we were positive about the LiveStudio feedback from
students. Our intention to provide high quality collaborative and vocational experiences
that fostered greater connectivity between students, academia and industry had
motivated and engaged our students. Evidence from formative assessment events to
summative (end of semester) grades revealed improved performance and increased
student retention.
In critique session educators noticed how the adoption of ‘communities of practice’
galvanised students and increased ‘peer to peer’ mentoring and knowledge transfer.
Students were now sharing research methods and actively participating in brainstorming
and critique sessions.
Blended learning modes of delivery provided motivation for independent learning and
we witnessed the emergence of ‘self-reliance’ (Barnett, 2000, p.257) as students now had
a richer range of forums to stay connected. This range of delivery approaches was more
sympathetic to the diversity of student schedules and supported increased administrative
and communication channels for collaborative learning.
The 2013 LiveStudio ‘communities of practice’ groups had been required to manage
and publish Wordpress blogs to account for and share their process with peers, partners
and lecturers. While the blog was a requirement in 2014, it was heavily impacted by staff
resourcing issues, as this modality challenged our students and required close tutor
supervision.
Noticeably, participating Industry partners across both case study years, were
disappointed with the levels of professional engagement and group collaboration in 2014,
leading us to re-assess the importance of online collaborative spaces and contribution to
communities when working with non-residential industry partners.
The relocation of formal presentation and critiques into professional domains of
practice necessitated new levels of communication, execution and presentation strategies.
We witnessed the early development of ‘soft’ attributes, as students gained new levels of
respect for receiving and responding to critical feedback.
Industry partners quickly identified the students in each group that were invested and
responsive, these students were committed and eager to impress. Notably, in several
instances strong initial concepts were presented by outlier learners, who were unable to
125
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
resolve their ideas or manage an iterative progression systematically — a source of
frustration for both industry partners and educators.
The intention of re-situating the learning environment in a professional domain was to
encourage the unlocking of student performance from institutional administrative
boundaries to open, free-flowing engagement aligned to our industry partners’ workflows.
However, we frequently observed that the reality of a modular multi-course academic
schedule curtailed this mode ideal, leading us to question the value of timetabled learning.
In the essay Network society and a sustainable design education, Pos argues ‘that the
phenomena of the design-education based on a local institute with a hierarchical program
structure and fixed time of study is an outdated concept. 21st century education can thrive
from a fluid and dynamic non-linear and non-hierarchical network (n.d.).’
Interim provocations and speculative thinking
LiveStudio occupies a space that sits between tutor-led design education and studentled design education (Ghassan & Bohemia, 2013), whereby the tutor is an active conduit
facilitating learning experience from multiple viewpoints – translating, interpreting,
dissecting, repeating, promoting, listening, inquiring – supporting decision making,
fostering design process and feedback.
However, LiveStudio primarily centres on students taking responsibility for their own
decisions through self-reliance and collaborative peer engagement. We construct this
approach to give learners the opportunity of ‘dealing with uncertainty’. LiveStudio
attempts to model the professional demands of ‘normal chaos’ that are characteristic of
contemporary studio design practice, but frequently found students struggling to navigate
competing interdependent demands of communication, design process, problem solving
and time-based tasks (Ghassan & Bohemia, 2013).
Were we poised to develop a multi-disciplinary model that responds to business and
institutional desire to foster ‘T shaped’ people more adaptive, collaborative and resilient to
real world environment and an uncertain future?
A similar question has been anticipated in Design futures—future designers: give me a
‘T’?, while testing the POOL Model framework, an alternate learning and teaching model
developed in order to facilitate the education of the T-shaped design student
(Fleischmann, 2014, p.7). Fleischmann asks if undergraduate students can ‘learn the skills
required for effective collaboration and thus develop a broad understanding of other
disciplines while simultaneously continuing to develop their discipline-specific skills’.
CEO of IDEO, Tim Brown, has detailed his desire to only employ graduates with
‘nascent T-shaped potential’. According to Brown, T-shaped people have two kinds of
qualities:
The vertical stroke of the ‘T’ is a depth of skill that allows them to contribute to the
creative process . . . The horizontal stroke of the ‘T’ is the disposition for collaboration
across disciplines . . . T-shaped people have both depth and breadth in their skills.
(Hansen, 2010)
In Why we should talk to our neighbour, Dauppe (1995) anticipates a similar need for
greater development in graphic design education by recommending improved grounding
126
Whose Job is it Anyway?
in cultural and media studies, giving students the best chance of engaging in new
discourse, that often speaks of social responsibility and ethical awareness.
Alternatively, could the establishment of a commercial studio staffed by academics,
graduates and interns (albeit driven by 21st century pedagogical needs) offer graphic
design services to internal and external clients? Powered by our Institution and partnered
through academic, industry, and cultural linkages, this model would pursue both an
academic research agenda and be a community facing, socially responsive project centre.
In contrast and given the challenges of delivering engaging education models to
Millennials, should we dispense with timetables, campus based learning and face-to-face
engagement and allow students to be at the centre of control to freely navigate the
powerfully disruptive offerings of the online learning sector.
Professional vocational education is big business, Linkedin recently announced its
purchase of Lynda.com for $1.5 billion in April 2015 (Sawers, 2015). Many of these options
offer a membership based economic structure which must be an attractive option for
students seeing the value of learning but set on bypassing significant or unsustainable
student debt. Is membership based learning the future economic paradigm for education
with associated badging acting as a discrete back channel to industry endorsement and
ongoing professional development?
Could the future of design education be as Pos (2011) suggests, ‘within a networkbased structure, with talented people making use of all the connections and learning as
well as teaching within fluid communities’ with ‘the idea that education is not an isolated
and formalized state or commercial ‘product’, but part of the daily routine and
incorporated within the networks of local and global society’.
High profile and venerable institutions globally are beginning to future-proof their
legacies through speculative thinking. Specifically, can the on-campus experience be kept
relevant in an era where online learning is becoming increasingly disruptive? Sarah Stein
Greenberg, executive director of Stanford Design School, introduces one such provocation
with Open Loop University, what would happen if we give ‘students six years of college to
use whenever they wanted throughout their adult life’ (Vanhemert, 2014)?
Speaking of the results of a purposeful year long workshop where staff and students
authentically collaborated on behalf of the institution, Greenberg says, ‘We need to be
training our students not just to expect that they will be society’s leaders, but also to be
our most creative, daring, and resilient problem solvers’ (Vanhemert, 2014).
When envisioning future developments beyond LiveStudio, we find ourselves
immersed in new types of speculative thinking that both challenges and informs key
aspects of our role as educator and practitioner. This much we know, ‘the traditional fouryear undergraduate track — basically that today’s system makes way for a bunch of welltrained sheep’ (Vanhemert, 2014).
LiveStudio presupposes that New Zealand educators can be leaders in designing
emergent pedagogy for the creative industries. However, to explore and create new
initiatives, the tertiary sector will need to have confidence to acknowledge and invest in
the specificity of the local context, alongside integrating the best of international
innovation.
127
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
References
Alliance Sector Skills Council. (2011). Sector Skills Assessment for the Creative Industries of
the UK. Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/download/144895_LinkClick2.pdf
Barnett, R. (2000). Supercomplexity and the Curriculum. Studies in Higher Education no. 25
(3):255–265. doi: 10.1080/713696156.
Beverland, M. (2012) Four Skills Graduates Need to Cut It in Design-Led Firms. Design
Management Review no. 23 (4):46–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1948-7169.2012.00211.x.
Buchanan, R. (1998). Design education. Education and Professional Practice in Design.
Design Issues: Volume 14, November 2 Summer 1998.
Cennamo, K. & Brandt, C. (2012). The ‘‘right kind of telling’’: knowledge building in the
academic design studio. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60:839–
858 doi: 10.1007/s11423-012-9254-5
Clinton, G., & Reiber, L. P. (2010). The Studio experience at the University of Georgia: An
example of constructionist learning for adults. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 58, 755–780.
Cumming, G. (2013, December 9). Tertiary education restructure: Death by design. The
New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from http://www.nzherald.co.nz
Deloitte. (2015). Mind the gaps: The 2015 Deloitte Millennial Survey. Retrieved from
http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/AboutDeloitte/gx-wef-2015-millennial-survey-executivesummary.pdf
Dauppe, M.-A. (1995). Why we should talk to our neighbours. Eye. (4) 16. Retrieved from
http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/why-we-should-talk-to-our-neighbours
Edwards-Vandenhoek, S. & Sandbach, K. (2013). Down the Rabbit Hole: A Situated
Approach to Design Education that Facilitates Socially Responsible Emergent Designers.
Proceedings of the 2nd International conference for design education researchers. Oslo:
ABM-media.
Ernst & Young. (2012). University of the Future. Retrieved from
http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/University_of_the_future/$FILE/Universit
y_of_the_future_2012.pdf
Fenton, W. (2015, May 8). Udemy. PC Magazine. Retrieved from
http://au.pcmag.com/udemy/30473/news/udemy
Fleischmann, K. (2014). Design futures—future designers: give me a ‘T’?, Studies in
Material Thinking. Retrieved from
https://www.materialthinking.org/sites/default/files/papers/SMT_Vol%2011_Paper%20
03_Katja.pdf
Friedman, K. (2012). Models of Design: Envisioning a Future Design Education. Visible
Language, 46(1/2), 133-53.
Ghassan, A., & Bohemia, E. (2013). From Tutor-led to Student-led design education: the
Global Studio. Proceedings of the 2nd International conference for design education
researchers. Oslo: ABM-media.
Greenberg, S. S. (2014, 11 November). Radical Ideas for Reinventing College, From
Stanford’s Design School [Video]. Retrieved from http://video.wired.com/watch/wxdradical-ideas-for-reinventing-college-from-stanford-s-d-school
128
Whose Job is it Anyway?
Hansen, M. T. (2010, January 21). IDEO CEO Tim Brown: T-Shaped Stars: The Backbone of
IDEO’s Collaborative Culture. Retrieved from http://chiefexecutive.net/ideo-ceo-timbrown-t-shaped-stars-the-backbone-of-ideoae™s-collaborative-culture
Jacobs, H., (2011). The dilemma with internships. Retrieved from
http://www.minddesign.co.uk/show.php?id=206&pos=2#internships
Hoover, E. (2009, October 11). The Millennial Muddle. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Millennial-Muddle-How/48772/
Howe, N. & Strauss, W. (2000) Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. New York:
Vintage.
Jacob, H. (n.d.). The dilemma with internships. Retrieved 20 Feb, 2015, from
http://minddesign.co.uk/show.php?id=206&pos=2#internships
John-Steiner, V, & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural Approaches to Learning and
Development: A Vygotskian Framework. University of New Mexico.
Kramer, S. (2015, January 20). Millennials in the Workforce: What Really Matters To Them.
Retrieved from http://www.v3b.com/2015/01/millennials-in-the-workforce-whatreally-matters-to-them/
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). (2015). Occupation Outlook,
Creative Industries: Graphic and Web Designers. Wellington, New Zealand: MBIE.
Retrieved from http://www.mbie.govt.nz/occupation-outlook/pdf-library/creativeindustries/graphic-web-designers.pdf
Multi-disciplinary Design Network. (2010). Multi-disciplinary design education in the UK.
London: Design Council.
NZQA National Qualifications Services (NQS). (2013, July). Creative Arts Qualification
Review
Needs Analysis Report. Retrieved from http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/qualifications-andstandards/qualifications/Creative-arts-quals-review/Creative-Arts-Needs-Analysis-Jan2014.pdf
Pos, P. (n.d.). Network society and a sustainable design education. Retrieved 20 Feb, 2015,
from
https://www.academia.edu/9474610/Network_society_and_a_sustainable_design_edu
cation
Rost, K. (2011). Network society and a sustainable design education. Research Policy, 40(4),
588–604.
Sawers, P. (2015, April 9). LinkedIn acquires online education company Lynda.com for
$1.5B to help progress your career. Retrieved from
http://venturebeat.com/2015/04/09/linkedin-acquires-online-education-startup-lyndacom-for-1-5b-to-help-you-progress-your-career/
Shadinger, D. & Deborah, T. (2014). Knacktive: Answering a Call for More Interdisciplinary,
Collaborative, Educational Experiences. College Teaching, 62:2, 55-61, doi:
10.1080/87567555.2014.885875
21st Century Learning Is Not A Program. (2013, June 1). Retrieved from
http://www.teachthought.com/learning/21st-century-learning-is-not-a-program/
Unitec Institute of Technology. (2008). Bachelor of Design & Visual Art Programme
Document.
Unlocking the World's Creativity. (2015). Retrieved from
https://www.skillshare.com/about
129
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Vanhemert, K. (2014, November 11). Radical Ideas for Reinventing College, From
Stanford’s Design School. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2014/11/radicalideas-reinventing-college-stanfords-design-school/
Wenger, E. (2010). Chapter Communities of practice and social learning systems. Retrieved
from http://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/09-10-27-CoPs-andsystems-v2.01.pd
130
Research Meets Practice in Master’s Theses
Marja SELIGER
Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture
marja.seliger@aalto.fi
Abstract: Discussions about art and design research – the epistemologies,
ontologies and methodologies – have prevailed since 1990s when several art and
design universities in Europe launched doctoral education. The debate has
concerned academic research and requirements for doctoral dissertations,
whereas very little attention has been paid to Master’s theses and the research
skills acquired on the Master of Arts level. This study investigates whether
Master’s theses in art and design have become more research-oriented and how
research meets practice in the theses. The study is conducted at Aalto University
School of Arts, Design and Architecture. First, faculty interviews were arranged
and thesis guidelines analysed. Secondly, theses published in 2010–2014 were
surveyed to find out what research-orientation means in Master’s theses. The
outcome of the study shows a paradigm shift towards research in Master’s
theses. Three different types of research-orientation in theses are identified and
presented: theoretical, artistic and production-based research. Secondly, faculty
interviews reveal the uniqueness of study programmes and their specialised
educational goals. As Master’s theses aim to provide evidence of the skills
learned, both practical and theoretical skills are exemplified in theses. Profiling
study programmes means defining research practises, strategies, methods and
expected outcomes in Master’s education.
Keywords: Master’s thesis, study programmes, research-orientation
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
MARJA SELIGER
1. Introduction
Completing a Master’s thesis is the final step in achieving a Master of Arts degree in
any university. The purpose of a thesis is to demonstrate a candidate’s proficiency and
ability to apply skills and knowledge learned. Therefore a student conducts his/her thesis
project independently, although consulting a professor or another supervisor specialized
on the field of study. The Master’s thesis is a mandatory assignment, which has to be
completed and approved by the faculty before the Master’s degree is granted.
The requirements for a Master’s thesis are based on the field of study and therefore
considerable differences can be found in theses produced within various disciplines and
universities. In science universities, theses are usually independent studies demonstrating
candidate eligibility and knowledge in their major subjects. Respectively in art and design
universities, Master’s theses have traditionally been independent artworks or design
projects to show evidence of candidates’ artistic qualities and originality.
The aim of this study is to discuss various types of Master’s theses in the fields of art
and design, as well as the developments over the recent years. Based on a survey and
faculty interviews at the Aalto University, the author presents three models of researchorientation embedded in Master’s theses. The models labeled as theoretical, artistic and
production-based take different epistemological stances and lead to different types of
inquiries and methodologies.
Since 1990s when several art and design universities in Europe launched doctoral
education, vivid discussions and debates have revolved around artistic research, what it is
and how new knowledge can be produced, what the dominating ontologies and
epistemologies are. The debates have often concerned academic research vs. artistic
research, which H. Borgdorff calls ‘an uneasy relationship’ (2012, p. 59). Discussions
advancing doctoral education have had an impact on Master’s education, as well. This
study aims to explore how the development towards research in art and design is
materialized in recently published Master’s theses.
Chapter 2 describes the survey conducted at the Aalto University and Chapter 3
presents the findings explaining what research orientation means in art and design
Master’s education. Chapter 4 elaborates the thesis process, and finally, Chapter 5
recommends topics for further discussions.
2. Survey of Master’s Theses
Altogether 18 faculty members, professors and university lecturers conducting
Master’s seminars and supervising students at the Aalto University participated in informal
conversational interviews to discuss the Masters’ thesis process and types of theses
produced in 2010–2014. The faculty members were asked to name recently published
theses which they considered high quality and characteristic of their study programme.
Out of the altogether 70 theses, 50 were analyzed as regards to research goal,
methodology adopted and outcomes.
In the interview sessions, teachers were first asked to describe their own thesis topic
and process. Quite spontaneously, the older faculty members began to describe the
changes which had taken place since their graduation. Theses used to be either artistic or
scientific, although scientific theses were rare. In artistic theses, the outcome was either
132
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
an artwork or production, accompanied by a short descriptive text about the process.
According to one professor: ‘Today a Bachelor’s student writes a better thesis after three
years’ study than what an average MA student wrote after five years in 1980s. The
improvement concerns especially academic skills, research writing.’
On one hand, the teachers considered the development positive, because today’s
working life requires research skills, conceptualization and verbalization. On the other
hand, the graduation of some students is delayed because of problems in writing and
finding the theoretical frame. Some students are ambitious and make an excellent artistic
production and write an excellent study, almost completing work for two theses. Teachers
were clearly proud of the achievements of their students and the high-quality work,
although at the same time worried about the time taken to graduate. The only problem
mentioned about art works was that they tended to become too large and require more
than six months to complete.
The interviewed faculty members described academic writing and research skills
courses, additional writing clinics and mini-seminars arranged as tools to speed up
graduation. Some doctoral candidates and researchers with the PhD degree participate in
thesis supervision, which was considered a positive trend.
The requirements and types of theses have been specified in the Master’s thesis
guidelines of the Aalto University. During the interviews in 2014 the guidelines stated:
‘Master’s theses can be roughly divided into two categories: artistic and scientific. Some
degree programmes may also comprehend additional categories, such as production-based
or pedagogical theses.’ The written part is mandatory, although ‘The length of the written
portion varies depending on the extent of the artistic or productive portion. […] The
minimum length is 60,000 characters, but that implies a strong emphasis on the artistic or
production portion.’ (Master’s Thesis Guidelines, 2012)
The interviewed teachers avoided using the word scientific and rather talked about
theoretical theses. They felt that scientific refers to natural sciences. Some teachers
criticized the division into artistic and production-based theses, because ‘[…] in an art and
design university, every production includes an artistic or aesthetic function’.
The wording of theses guidelines changed in 2015: ‘The thesis may be a piece of
theoretical, artistic or applied research, a work of art or a combination of these; it may also
include a production component. The production component may be, depending on the
field, for instance a design, a work of art, an exhibition or project.’
The requirements for the length of the written part are expressed more precisely in the
renewed guidelines: ‘The recommended extent of the written component of the thesis is
25–70 pages (approx. 50 000–140 000 characters) depending on the extent of the possible
production component.’ (Master’s Thesis Guide 2015) The most essential change concerns
the statement of objectives, which are more explicit in the renewed guidelines:
– Students demonstrate command of the field of the Master’s programme and ability to
apply the knowledge and skills acquired in the programme independently;
– Students demonstrate ability for research-oriented work on an artistic, theoretical or
applied research topic and demonstrate ability to use data and source material for
research purposes;
– Students demonstrate good communication skills for work in the field of study
133
MARJA SELIGER
The first objective describes the aim of art and design education as it has been since
the time of Bauhaus in 1920s: to provide evidence that the candidate has the necessary
command of the study field in order to independently apply knowledge and skills in
demanding tasks and assignments. The second objective is more recent and strengthens
the role of research: The ability for research-oriented work on an artistic, theoretical or
applied research topic. Research has taken its place in art and design education although
the word research-oriented leaves room for various interpretations and types of theses.
The third objective is to prove that a candidate has sufficient skills in work-related
communication.
As regards artistic and production-based theses, especially the type of the written
component has changed since 1990s. A short description of the production process used
to suffice, whereas nowadays the expectation is that a student conceptualizes or reflects
his/her work on a topical discourse or an art genre. The variety of theses has increased and
students have more possibilities to tailor their artistic, production-based or theoretical
theses. According to the interviewed faculty members, the huge variety of topics and
approaches and the freedom of choice can sometimes confuse a student. Therefore more
emphasis needs to be given to the thesis process and supervising.
3. Research-orientation
The interviewed teachers were asked to name recently published theses from their
study programme and then place the exemplified theses into some of the categories
mentioned in the thesis guidelines: artistic, theoretical, production-based, pedagogical or
applied research. The variety of theses named was great and showed the uniqueness of
departments and study programmes. Some theses were clearly theoretical or artistic, but
some were hybrid or qualified both as theoretical and artistic.
The topics of the analysed theses varied from architectural planning to films, media, art
exhibitions, industrial design, art pedagogy and so on. The variety of methods employed
was huge, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods, co-creation,
participatory and usability studies, interventions and design games. When analysing the
theses and their strategies of inquiry, the synthesis showed three main categories of
research-orientation: theoretical, artistic, and production-based research. In this study,
the epistemological stance of the three types of research is reflected on the texts written
by Crotty and Frayling.
Michael Crotty in The Foundations of Social Research (1998) introduces four elements
of research: methods, methodology, theoretical perspective and epistemology. (p. 2) He
describes epistemology as ‘[…] a way of understanding and explaining how we know what
we know’ and discusses three major positions in social research: objectivism,
constructivism and subjectivism. (pp. 3–9) In objectivism, the reality is believed to exist
apart from the researcher’s conscious mind, and objective truth is discoverable.
Constructivism, meanwhile, denies the existence of objective truth, because truth or
meaning is constructed in and out of the researcher’s engagement with the world, within
her conscious mind. The third position, subjectivism, goes further and argues that the
meaning is imposed by the researcher on the reality, and the reality does not contribute
with anything to the meaning.
134
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
Christopher Frayling stated in his well-known article Research in Art and Design in
1993: ‘Much of the debate – and attendant confusion – so far, has revolved around the
stereotypes of what research is, what it involves and what it delivers.’ (Frayling 1993) He
introduced three categories in art and design research using the prepositions into, for and
through, and instigated a vivid discussion about the epistemological stance of art and
design research.
With research into art and design Frayling meant historical, aesthetic or perceptual
research. This type of study includes ‘Research into a variety of theoretical perspectives –
social, economic, political, ethical, cultural, iconographic, technical, material, structural …
whatever.’ (Frayling 1993, p. 5) Art and design activities and artifacts are observed and
scrutinized from outside and the researchers themselves need not be artists or designers.
Thus research into art and design shows an objectivist position.
With research through art and design, Frayling referred to ‘[…] development work – for
example customizing a piece of technology to do something that no one had considered
before, and documenting the results.’ (p. 5) Frayling included materials research,
development work and action research into the category of research through art and
design. Thus research through art and design aims to document technical and practical
knowledge development in art and design from either objectivist or constructivist
positions.
‘The thorny one is the research for art and design […]’ Frayling wrote and continued:
‘Research where the end product is an artifact – where the thinking is, so to speak,
embodied in the artefact, where the goal is not primarily communicable knowledge in the
sense of verbal communication, but in the sense of visual or iconic or imagistic
communication.’ (1993, p. 5) Thus research for art and design can be produced from a
subjectivist position.
Frayling’s text has caused misinterpretations and category confusions, which according
to Ken Friedman, are based on a failure to read Frayling’s text. (Friedman 2008, p. 156)
Friedman claims: ‘Many designers confuse practice with research. Rather than developing
theory from practice through articulation and inductive inquiry, some designers mistakenly
argue that practice is research.’ (p. 154) Friedman’s point is that practice is the source of
inquiry in empirical research. To conduct research means applying scientific methodology
and rigor when making interventions into research practice and analyzing design
processes, artifacts and their use.
Theoretical Research
According to Aalto University Thesis Guide (2015), a theoretical thesis is research which
does not include a candidate’s own art or design production. A survey on recently
published theses and the faculty interviews revealed that although research topics are
connected to the field of study, the variety of methodologies adopted is large. For
example, a theoretical thesis can be a study of the history of architecture. This leads to
methodology different from research on media audiences or gender representations, or a
research about curating practices, which constitute topics of some recently published
theses.
Crotty (1998, pp. 3-9) suggested considering epistemology and philosophical
perspectives first, before selecting methodology and research methods. Also Creswell
points out the importance of philosophical worldviews: ‘Although philosophical ideas
135
MARJA SELIGER
remain largely hidden in research, they still influence the practice of research and need to
be identified.’ He introduces four philosophical worldviews – postpositive, social
construction, advocacy/participatory and pragmatic – and adds that the discipline that a
student represents, the beliefs of advisors and faculty, and past research experiences
shape these worldviews (Creswell 2009, p. 5).
Creswell defines the term research design as ‘[…] plans and procedures for research
that span the decisions from broad assumptions to detailed methods of data collection and
analyses.’ In social sciences, the strategies of inquiry are qualitative, quantitative and
mixed-method strategies, which lead to different research methods. (Creswell 2009, pp. 3–
5) Creswell elaborates the term strategies of inquiry as ‘[…] designs or models that provide
specific direction for the procedures in a research design.’ (p. 11) In this study, the term
strategies of inquiry is applied, because it well describes the manifold research cases, tools
and methods used in Master’s theses in art and design.
A student writing a theoretical research in art and design might end up employing
similar qualitative methods than used in social and behavioral sciences, e.g. ethnography,
grounded theory, case studies, phenomenological or narrative research (Creswell 2009, p.
13). In some cases, quantitative methods and statistics are needed to describe the
research case, e.g. to yield figures about art gallery visitors or newspaper readers’ topic
preferences and time spent on reading papers. From the epistemological point-of-view,
the objectivist position is strong in theoretical research.
Artistic Research
Discussions about artistic research became heated at the end of 20 th century, when art
and design doctoral education was launched in many universities. The debates have
focused on academic research and doctoral dissertations, questioning whether new
knowledge can be acquired through a researcher’s own artistic or practical design work
and productions.
The focus in this study is on Master’s education, in which artworks as theses are a
common practise and a tradition. An artistic thesis typically shows a strong subjectivist
position and equals to Frayling’s description of research for art and design. The tradition in
the field has been that while artistic theses provide evidence of a candidate’s design skills
and artistic expressions, they also contribute novel ideas and ways of seeing to the
professional design community. That is achieved by exhibiting the artefacts concerned,
while a short description of the production process and techniques has been sufficient.
Presently the requirements for the written part are more explicit, while leaving room
for various interpretations. For example, the written part may reflect the artwork on artphilosophical theories or previous works within the art genre. Sometimes an artistic
production takes a stand on a social question or discourse and unfolds everyday behaviour
patterns and phenomena.
Instead of adopting systematic methodology, artistic research is more about discovery,
as John Dewey wrote already in 1934: ‘Art expresses, it does not state. It is concerned with
existences in their perceived qualities, not with conceptions symbolized in terms.’ (p. 140)
By juxtaposing scientific and artistic inquiries, Dewey explains that regardless of different
methodologies, new knowledge and understanding can be found both ways: ‘A wellconducted scientific inquiry discovers as it tests, and proves as it explores; it does so in the
virtue of a method, which combines both functions.’ (p. 176)
136
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
John Dewey’s classic book is based on ten lectures on the Philosophy on Art at Harvard
University in 1930s. During that time philosophers, historians and other scientists
researched art from the objectivist position. Sometimes also artists and designers wrote
texts, which were used for art education, e.g. at the Bauhaus school. The books written by
Johannes Itten, Paul Klee and Lásló Moholy-Nagy investigated art, design processes and
artefacts from a constructivist or subjectivist position.
Hannula, Suoranta and Vaden use the notion inside-in: ‘The research is done inside the
practice, by doing acts, which are part of the practice.’ (2014, p. 3) They describe the
framework, the context and the artistic process: ‘[…] moving back and forth between the
periods of intensive (insider) engagement and more reflective (outsider) distance-taking.’
(p. 16) Research means taking part in a research tradition, in which an artistic work needs
to be contextualised and situated in the art tradition. In addition, it needs to be verbalized
and published. (p. 17) The style of writing an artistic research can be narrative or essayistic,
whereas theoretical research is written in a more formal research reporting style.
Artistic research includes also visual communication research and production of
artefacts, e.g. comic books, animations and films. Visual communication has increased and
the world has become ocular-centric or eye-centred, as Gronbeck cites Jay (Gronbeck
2008: xxi) to describe the expanding use of visual media.
Production-based Research
In academic discussions, the notions of practice-based and practice-led research are
often used as synonyms for artistic research. For the sake of clarity, this study applies the
terms artistic research and production-based research due to different strategies of
inquiry. Artistic research is discovery-led, whereas production-based research means
searching solutions to a situated problem using a pre-defined methodology. The word
production in this context is not limited to tangible artefacts, but can also refer to a service
or an innovative design process. In most cases, production-based research takes a
constructivist position and equals to Frayling’s description of research through art and
design.
Simon wrote that as natural sciences are concerned with how things are ‘[…]Design, on
the other hand, is concerned how things ought to be devising artifacts to attain the goals’
(1996, 114). How to change existing situations into preferred ones and which methods to
use, is the question Nigel Cross investigates in his book ‘Design Thinking’ (2011). Cross
discusses design ability and the way designers think and approach a problem to find
solutions. He introduces key strategic aspects which appear to be common for professional
designers. First, innovative designers seem to take a broad systems approach to a problem,
rather than adopting narrow problem criteria. Secondly, they frame the problem in a
distinctive and rather personal way. The third aspect, identified by Cross, is designing from
first principles. Cross exemplifies the first principle with product design cases, in which
function and usability are the key principles. (p. 75-76)
Cross refers to Lawson (1994), who interviewed a number of internationally leading
architects. One issue these architects especially emphasized was the importance of
sketching and drawing within the design process. Drawing meant imagining or discovering
something, and understanding the problem. Lawson also suggested that skilled designers
are good at coping with uncertainties, and one way to cope is trying to impose order.
(Cross 2011, pp. 13–15) In addition to sketching, designers use mock-ups, prototypes,
137
MARJA SELIGER
scenarios, mood boards – design things, a term introduced by Pelle Ehn (Koskinen et al.
2011, p. 125).
What is essential in design is formulating and re-interpreting the design problem into a
task, and especially so if the work is conducted in a team. Nigel Cross discusses design as
teamwork, the related problems and possibilities, and brings up new emphazes: cocreation, collaboration and persuasion. (Cross 2011, pp. 91-93) Koskinen et al. use the
term constructive design research and describe the shift from industrial design to usercentred design (2011, p. 18).
Although a Master’s thesis is a student’s individual work, it can be conducted within a
bigger research project. Service design projects are typically cases which involve
multidisciplinary design teams, customers and stakeholders. Stickdorn and Schneider
(2011) define service design as an iterative, nonlinear process, the structure of which
consists of four stages: exploration, creation, reflection and implementation. Exploration
means discovering and gaining a clear understanding of the situation from the customer
perspective. The creation phase begins with ideation, brain-storming and sticky notes.
Instead of discussing research methods, they describe tools, which can include shadowing,
contextual interviews, cultural probes and personas. (pp. 122-213)
Similar processes and methods are applied in design projects, which enhance social
responsibility and aim to identify solutions to situated problems to improve well-being.
Inspired by the heritage of Victor Papanek (1985), some Master’s students choose thesis
topics for environmental or human-centred design.
In summary, production-based research contributes through expertise in art and design
and practical knowledge embodied in constructive nature of work, work processes, and
resulting outcomes. The discussion of production-based research has been most active in
the fields of design where the focus is both on products and on services. As it includes
architectural planning, production-based research can also be called applied research.
Findings
The outcome of this study shows that the theoretical backgrounds and research
methods adopted in theses vary according to the departments and study programmes. The
composition of a theoretical thesis may resemble theses written in social sciences,
whereas artistic and production-based theses do not find equals in other disciplines.
In an artistic thesis, a student may reflect his/her work on philosophical, aesthetic or
artistic discourses. A production-based thesis may involve a problem-solving task, which
begins by exploring the present situation and continues by creating and building a
prototype. The research methods include observations, interviews or empirical data
analyzes. The aim is to combine practise and research in order to reach the objectives of
higher university education, including qualifications to continue to doctoral studies.
4. Master’s Thesis Process
Based on this study of art and design research in Master’s education, the author
concludes that the strategies of inquiry can be theoretical, artistic or production-based.
Each one of these research orientations leads to different methodologies and thesis
designs. It is advisable to define the topic and goals first, before deciding whether the
thesis will include an artwork or a production, or whether it will be a theoretical thesis.
138
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
A thesis process in art and design is illustrated in Figure 1. The process begins by
defining the topic and goals for a thesis. A student’s personal interest and curiosity offers
the starting point, but often the first topic is too general and wide and needs to be
narrowed down. A good piece of advice is to write a short description of the intended
contents and aims like ‘My thesis is about… My intention is to find out…’ and discuss the
idea with a professor and student colleagues. There are many guidebooks for writing a
thesis, e.g. Furseth and Everett (2013, pp. 1–16) give practical instructions and tips, helping
to make progress by resorting to brainstorming, analogies, mind-maps and open-ended
questions.
The TOPIC and a tentative TITLE for the thesis
GOALS for the thesis
THEORY BASE and key literature
Theoretical research
Objectivist position
· Research question
· Hypotheses
Artistic research
Subjectivist position
· Art-philosophic focus
· Reflection
Production-based research
Constructivist position
· Problem statement
· Design thinking
Methodological approach
· Quantitative
· Qualitative
· Mixed methods
· Laboratory tests
Artistic work approach
· Inside-in engagement
· Distance taking
· Social / human aspect
· Discovery
Problem-solving approach
· Exploration
· Creation
· Reflection
· Implementation
Theory generation
Artistic production
Product or service design
Written research
Work of art or design +
a written component
Documented production +
a written component
Figure 1: Thesis Process
Once the topic has been defined, the aims of the research need to be stated, because
they influence the strategies of inquiry and research methods to be adopted. Reading
literature begins already at the planning stage, to review how the topic has been
researched before, out of which sites, and what have been the outcomes. Studying earlier
research helps in finding a novel approach, and planning the artistic or production
component, if relevant.
Gillian Rose introduces methodological tools, sites and modalities to study
interpretations of visual images. There are three sites at which the meanings of an image
are created: the site(s) of production, the site of image and the site(s) of an audience. Each
of these sites comprises three different aspects, which Rose calls modalities –
technological, compositional and social. He suggests that each one of these modalities can
contribute to a critical understanding of images (Rose 2010, p. 13). As regards industrial
design research, Koskinen et al. (2011) introduce emerging methods, which bridge
research to design practice.
There are topics which can lead either to a theoretical, artistic or production-based
thesis. For example, if the research topic centres on visual images and representations of
139
MARJA SELIGER
oneself (selfies) in social media, the research question could be: What are the reasons to
produce selfies and for whom are they made? This leads to a theoretical, empirical study
investigated from the site of producers. Interviews could be a method added to an analysis
of visuals. The same topic could also lead to an artistic research, in which a researcher
produces her own selfies, communicates with an audience and conceptualizes the process
in writing. Or a researcher could be a facilitator in a selfie workshop for a specialized group
of people. The research question and accompanying methods lead the production-based
research. In each case, a literature review is needed to build a theoretical frame.
An essential part of any empirical research is data collection and analysis, requiring a
description of the method, of the procedure of data gathering and analysis, together with
references to the literature and pictures used. When collecting data from people or about
people, researchers need to follow research ethics, protect their research participants and
create trust. Creswell writes about ethical issues to be considered in different stages of a
research, from the statement of the research problem and research questions to collecting
and analysing data and disseminating the results. (Creswell 2009, pp. 87–92)
In some cases, a written consent is needed and signed by the participants. It discloses
the facts and purpose of the research and guarantees the confidentiality of any privileged
information. The Aalto University has a Research Ethics Committee, which provides exante advice and evaluation of research ethics in studies with human subjects. The
Committee informs researchers about decisions of the National Advisory Board of
Research Integrity.
5. Discussion: A Paradigm Shift
The recent development towards research and theoretical theses in art and design can
be described as a paradigm shift. Since the Bauhaus time in 1920s, the educational goal in
universities of art and design has included training skilled practitioners for design
professions needed by industries such as textile, ceramic, furniture, building or graphic.
Training art and design professionals still remains the goal today, although the
requirements for design expertise have changed and increased in number. Both practical
skills and theoretical knowledge, conceptualizing, teamwork and leadership skills are
required. In addition, a Master’s degree should give qualifications to continue with
doctoral studies and research.
The decision to launch doctoral education at the former University of Art and Design
Helsinki (since 2010: Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture) was both
disputed and defended by the academic society, provoking active, sometimes impetuous
debate about art and design research. This was the case also in other countries, as
Borgdorff describes in The Conflict of Faculties and introduces criteria for the assessment
of particular artwork or practice as research (Borgdorff 2012, p. 212).
The research debates have focused on doctoral education, but when looking back at
the period of over twenty years, it is obvious that the discourse and debates in art and
design research have had a positive influence on Masters’ education and theses, as well.
However, a big divergence between study programmes, their educational strategies,
practices and theories surfaced in this study. The author suggests various study
programmes to build their identity and specify their philosophical worldviews, strategies of
inquiry and methodologies.
140
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
To conclude, this study shows that research has taken its place in the education of
professional designers. Design thinking methods are adopted to solve problems and to
improve existing situations in societies. The scope of visual communication has increased
and more research is needed about interpretations of visual representations in the global
context. Based on this study, the author recommends more discussions about Master’s
education research in art and design: what research is, what it involves, and what it
delivers.
References
Borgdorff, H. (2012). The Conflict of the Faculties: Perspectives on Artistic Research and
Academia. Leiden, the Netherlands: Leiden University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design – Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Los Angeles, London: SAGE Publications.
Cross, N. (2011) Design Thinking. Oxford, New York: Berg.
Crotty, M. 1998. The Foundations of Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Gronbeck, B.E. (2008) ‘Visual Rhetorical Studies. Traces Through Time and Space’ in Olson,
L.C.; Finnegan, C.A. and Hope, D.S. (eds.) Visual Rhetoric. A Reader in Communication
and American Culture. Los Angeles, London: Sage Publications.
Jay, M. (1994) Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in the Twentieth-Century French
Thought. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dewey, J. (2005) [1934]. Art as Experience. London: The Berkley Publishing Group.
Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. London: Royal College of Art. Research
Papers, 1(1), 1-5. Retrieved 15 Jan, 2015, from
http://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/view/creators/Frayling=3AChristopher=3A=3A.html
Friedman, K. (2008). Research into, by and for design. In Journal of Visual Art Practice,
Volume 7 Number 2, pp. 153–160.
Furseth, I., & Everett, E.L. (2013). Doing Your Master’s Dissertation. Sage Publications
Hannula, M., Suoranta, J., & Vadén, T. (2014). New York, Washington: Peter Lang.
Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redström, J. & Wensveen, S. (2011). Design
Research Through Practice. From the Lab, Field and Showroom. Amsterdam: Morgan
Kaufmann.
Lawson, B., (1994). Design in Mind. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann
Master’s Thesis Guide of the Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture
(2015) Helsinki, Aalto University. Retrieved 15 Jan, 2015, from
https://into.aalto.fi/display/enmasterarts/Graduation+and+Thesis
Papanek, V., (1985). Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. London:
Thames and Hudson.
Rose, G. (2012). Visual Methodologies. An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual
Materials. London: SAGE Publications.
Simon, H. (1996) [1969] The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Sticdorn, M., & Schneider, J., (2011). This is Service Design Thinking. Hoboken, New Jersey:
BIS Publishers.
141
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and
Education
Mark GRAHAM* and Daniel BARNEY
Brigham Young University
*mark_graham@byu.edu
Abstract: An important topic in art and design education is how the confluence
of design disciplines with media arts and other fine arts disciplines is shaping
content and pedagogy at both the college and K-12 levels. The problem for those
who train artists and art educators is how to prepare students within a field
where art, design, and media arts are changing both in content and in their
relationships to each other. This problem is particularly acute for art education
where there is a need for current and future teachers to have experience with
and be able to teach within various art, design, and or media arts areas. This
paper describes an ongoing research project that is exploring the pedagogy and
interrelationship of design, media arts and art programs within university level
art programs. This study is still in progress; data is being gathered and
interpreted. This research is designed to provide insights and recommendations
for the preparation of artists and art teachers who will need to navigate
educational assessments, licensure requirements, and art and design programs
within rapidly changing schools.
Keywords: college art, design, education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
Introduction
An important topic in art and design education is how the confluence of design
disciplines with media arts and other fine arts disciplines is shaping content and pedagogy
at both the college and K-12 levels. The significance of this topic is reflected in the theme
of the 2014 NAEA annual conference, which was media arts and the 2015 conference,
which was design education. The problem for those who train artists and art educators is
how to prepare students within a field where art, design, and media arts are changing both
in content and in their relationships to each other. At the same time, many university art
and design programs have very different philosophies and approaches toward both
content and pedagogy. Design, media arts, and other art disciplines are often in separate
departments and very different approaches to both content and teaching. As a
consequence, there are limited opportunities for students in one area to take classes in
another area. This problem is particularly acute for art education where there is a need for
current and future teachers to have experience with and be able to teach within various
art, design, and or media arts areas.
This ongoing research project describes the interrelationship of design, media arts and
art programs within university level art programs. It is designed to provide insights and
recommendations for the preparation of artists and art teachers who will need to navigate
educational assessments, licensure requirements, and art and design programs within
rapidly changing schools. The theory and practice of design disciplines and media arts have
distinctly different perspectives on both the theories and practice of art education. How
these disciplines evolve and interact has enormous influence on student learning in the
visual arts and on art and design pedagogy. This study of undergraduate art and design
education is particularly urgent in light of changes confronting higher education and the
continuing debate about the content and teaching within undergraduate art education
(Salazar, 2013).
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study is to describe selected art and design programs at the
university level in order to anticipate future directions of the field and address the future
needs of both K-12 and college students in relation to the various art and design
disciplines. A primary audience for this study is university educators and in particular those
who train art teachers. In addition to describing existing programs, we looked for
innovative curricula and programs in an attempt to describe excellent or emerging
practices. The ultimate goal was to describe generative possibilities for university art and
design education that addressed emerging needs and changes within the field of K-12 art
education. There are few studies of college art or design pedagogy, and in particular, few
studies of how these disciplines are organized, how they interact at the university level,
and how art education programs work among these programs. Within the context of art
and design programs, the researchers were looking for generative possibilities for the
training of educators.
143
GRAHAM & BARNEY
The Problem
Within the field of art and design education and in many art and design programs,
there are significant philosophical and pedagogical differences and divergent descriptions
of desired student learning outcomes. Some of these differences include the need for BA
generalization versus BFA specialization, different definitions of scholarship, differences in
foundations content and philosophy, and the tension between applied programs and
liberal arts programs. At the same time, communities of practice in art, design, art
education, and media arts are experiencing rapid changes as well as significant overlaps in
methodologies and blurring of boundaries among disciplines. The trend is toward
interdisciplinary collaboration and experimentation. New media, including digital media
are transforming the way children, students, and adults see art and design and the roles of
artists and designers in society.
Although this research focuses on college level art and design programs, it is intended
to inform university art educators who train K-12 teachers. This distinct subset of
university art and design faculty have unique aims for their students. In addition to training
students to become practicing artists or designers working within their respective
disciplines, art educators are concerned with the added layer of teacher preparation. In
their communities of practice within schools or other sites, art educators must be
prepared in art, design, and media arts disciplines. Consequently, there needs to be viable
ways for art and design education students to navigate among these disciplines during
their preparation.
Theoretical Background
There are many different aesthetic theories that frame contemporary art and design.
This study is concerned with how university programs define the content and teaching of
their disciplines. Related to these issues are disciplinary organization, collaboration, future
vision, and governance. The primary focus is on pedagogical and interdisciplinary issues
that influence how students are initiated, informed, introduced, or sequenced within and
among various art and design disciplines. One area of particular interest is foundation
programs since this is where art and design disciplines often converge.
Foundations
The discussion of foundations content and pedagogy is germane to this study because
this is where students are initiated into both art and design content and pedagogy.
Foundations within college art programs have many different purposes and often include a
composite of critical thinking, technical skills, formalist principles, and conceptual skills
(Barney & Graham, 2014; Graham & Sims-Gunzenhauser, 2010). There is often a strong,
taken-for-granted sentiment that students should develop functional competence in
manipulating the basic elements, principles, and vocabulary of visual art (Dickerman,
2012). There is also a distinction between design disciplines and fine art disciplines that
the Bauhaus sought to erase, but which seems to be deeply entrenched in both the
thinking and practice of many art programs (Bergdoll & Dickerman, 2012). Critics of
traditional fundamentals in art education have suggested that the formalist agenda ignores
important contexts of culture and postmodern practices. New technologies have
144
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
challenged definitions and functions of art and in turn challenged a foundations program
that was, to some extent rooted in a response to traditional artist materials (Tavin,
Kushins, & Elinski, 2007).
Olivia Gude (2004, 2013) suggests that the elements and principles of design are
insufficient for 21st century art making and only a weak reflection of an avant-garde that
was inspirational 100 years ago. She describes postmodern principles of art-making
including appropriation, re-contextualization, layering, and hybridity. Her approach
includes development of expanded self-awareness, self-forming ideas, empowered
making, and community themes as a basis for art making. According to Gude, a good art
project encodes complex aesthetic strategies, gives students tools to investigate and make
meaning, and uses the actual methodologies of artists. In contrast to abstracted, universal
principles, it may include post-studio practices that emphasize concept and repurposing of
forms and materials that are culturally situated. Similarly, Terry Barrett (2007, 2011),
suggests that postmodern approaches such as working collaboratively, layering, mixing
codes, and collapsing boundaries are generative ways to frame art education.
The content of art education is being re-imagined in contemporary practice and
teaching. For example, visual culture, critical pedagogy and the discourse surrounding artmaking are important components of creating an image. This is a shift from the quest for
abstract form to a focus on historical, political, and understanding of visual culture and
social responsibility. Paul Duncum (2010) describes seven principles of visual culture
education that focus on critical theory and the deconstruction of images. Both Gude and
Duncum want to ground art making in the practices of contemporary art, including
performance art. This is a shift from an emphasis on materials, techniques, and objects to a
focus on concepts, problems, and ideas about social engagement. Student artwork is not
seen so much as an aesthetic object, but as a platform for learning or evidence of learning.
Art becomes a kind of research text that is framed by critique, analysis, theory, and
documentation (Frigard & Taylor, 2013). Writing as a way to articulate personal
interpretation or critical analysis may also become an important part of art education. The
problems of defining foundations programs are significant because they reflect recurring
issues that characterize both pedagogical and philosophical differences between art and
design programs.
College Art Pedagogy
Salazar’s (2013) study of the art education at the college level considers teaching and
learning in undergraduate studio art program and also notes the paucity of research of
pedagogical practice in studio art programs. There is an ongoing debate about the nature
and purposes of undergraduate studio training (Madoff, 2009; Lupton, 2005). Programs
vary, depending on how they define skill and how much they depart from Bauhaus models
as well as how much they integrate digital culture and the design disciplines that are
concerned with clients and commercial enterprises. For example, some design educators
have called for renewed attention to the development of skills, including conceptual skills,
technical skills, and critical skills (Lupton, 2005). Other studies of design programs
highlight the importance of design in promoting social change and economic opportunity
(Van Zande, 2011). The landscape of art and design education at the university level is
rapidly changing due to changing communities of practice and traditional debates about
the content and teaching within various art and design disciplines.
145
GRAHAM & BARNEY
In 2008, the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD) formed a
working group to research Design Education in this country. They found that over 45,000
students were enrolled annually in design programs. This study noted that industry models
typically emphasize cross-disciplinary work within design disciplines and often include
collaboration with media, communications and computer experts rather than fine artists
and historians. These projects are typically team-based projects, rather than the work of a
solo artist, and include work produced on behalf of a client or an organization. These
features of design production methods can be key differentiating factors between art and
design disciplines.
Methodology
This is an ongoing, qualitative, collaborative investigation of both local concerns and
trends in the field. The investigators from the Department of Visual Arts at Brigham Young
University met together regularly to discuss data gathered from site visits from different
university level art programs. This was not an attempt to conduct research for purposes of
generalization. The purpose of the inquiry is to help generate ideas, to see what others in
the field have done, to understand solutions they have found concerning curriculum and
program structures, and to gain a broader vision of curricular practices in other locations.
The inquiry is qualitative, rather than quantitative; purposive, rather than normative; and
educational, rather than scientific.
Data Collection
Initial contacts were made and information was gathered through phone calls, Skype
interviews, or email correspondence with individual faculty members who we know or
who have been recommended to us. Prior to site visits, participants were sent an email
with our key questions. We started our conversations with general questions and asked
follow up questions that were more specific to our research objectives. We collated the
interview notes, along with gathering general information from school websites. We then
informally analyzed and summarized this data, looking for ideas and themes as we
conversed with members of the committee.
R ESEARCH Q UESTIONS
The four basic research questions directed toward participants in the study were:
What sets your school or discipline apart from others and what are its core competencies?
What is important for students of the visual arts to learn in the 21st century?
What does collaboration look like at your school?
How are your art, design, and other academic programs organized and governed?
These questions are elaborated below.
M ISSION , AIMS , AND CORE COMPETENCIES
Tell us about your programs. What sets your school apart from others?
146
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
Describe the mission, aims, core values, guiding principles or top priorities of your
department. What approaches or practices are working best to help accomplish these
goals? What challenges do your programs face and how are you dealing with them?
T HE FUTURE VISUAL ARTS STUDENT
What is important for students of the visual arts to learn in the 21st century?
What trends or changes do you see in the Visual Arts and higher education?
How are your programs responding to anticipated future trends and changes?
How is your school utilizing technologies old and new?
I NTERDISCIPLINARY AND COLLABORATIVE WORK
What does collaboration look like at your school?
How are collaborative/interdisciplinary projects or courses encouraged and facilitated?
Where does the collaboration take place?
What do your foundations/core curricula look like?
When do students begin to specialize into a major and how do you sort them? What
opportunities do students have to access courses outside their area?
What kinds of disciplinary boundaries exist, how are mediums and methods
experiencing hybridization?
A RT , DESIGN , AND ACADEMIC ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE
How are your academic programs organized and governed?
How does this affect students and faculty?
How does your faculty deal with disagreements?
R ESEARCH S ITES
Research sites were chosen based on the reputations of particular programs, known
contacts, experience with the program or recommendation. It was a purposeful sample
designed to illuminate possibilities rather than make generalizations quantitative
generalizations about the field. The sites included:
New York: Parsons School of Design, New York University, Pratt Institute, Columbia
University, Hunter College, Queens College, Fashion Institute of Technology
California: Laguna College of Art, Otis Art Institute, Art Center College of Deign
Laguna College of Art and Design, California State University at Fullerton, California
State University Northridge.
Illinois: University of Illinois at Champagne-Urbana, University of Illinois at Chicago,
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Colorado: University of Colorado, Boulder
Pennsylvania: Carnegie Mellon
147
GRAHAM & BARNEY
Texas: University of North Texas, Denton
Utah: Brigham Young University, Utah Valley University
Canada: University of British Columbia
Results
A number of themes emerged from the study. They are grouped in the categories of
use of media and medium, collaboration, learning approaches, and organization.
M EDIUM , MEDIA , AND THE USE OF MEDIUMS
We observed a general direction toward an attitude of medium neutrality, where
disciplines are defined less by their use of medium. The ability to navigate fluidly between
mediums was seen as an important learning outcome for artists and designers. The
movement toward medium neutrality is manifest in a number of different approaches.
a. Disciplinary ‘gates’ to enter into the department: Students enter into the department
via a media or process designation, but after entrance students are simply visual arts
students ( See Pratt, although some areas retained tracks here, Columbia graduate
school in studio, Hunter, and SAIC).
b. Cross disciplinary study BA/BFA: Students can create their own area of focus, moving
across areas (See University of British Columbia, SAIC).
c. Cross disciplinary teaching: Faculty can propose to teach any course in any semester
(Hunter and NYU).
C OLLABORATION AND TRANS - DISCIPLINARY STUDY
Collaboration is often mentioned as a philosophical objective that is difficult to
implement at the university level because of the high degree of disciplinary focus, which is
often manifest in rank and advancement requirements that tend to emphasize expertise
and specialization within one field. Some approaches to interdisciplinary work included
co-curation of exhibitions, peer-to-peer teaching, and team-taught courses that model
disciplinary practices for students.
a. Departmental Theme: Expanding the Studio idea of work based on ideas, issues, or
themes, an entire department works on a theme throughout the semester and within
all coursework. Examples would be systems, play, etc. Application of departmental
theme would be up to each faculty member. This approach might involve a show or
display of the work at some point.
b. Freshman Seminar Lab Tours: First year students are given a tour of all of the
resources, labs, work areas at their disposal. Training could include whatever they
need to know in order to access them.
c. Identify Available Interdisciplinary: Describe existing courses in the departments or
university that are available for interdisciplinary study and publish or promote them to
students throughout the department.
148
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
d. Encourage Inter-disciplinary Work: Students are encouraged to engage across
disciplines through special scholarships, grants, student show awards, gallery
exhibitions, etc.
e. Department Interdisciplinary Grants: Provide grants for faculty and student teams
who work across disciplines.
f. Open Labs: Configure all labs schedules to allow for significant open lab access.
g. Senior Level Interdisciplinary Course. Faculty teams teach a course specifically
designed to engage students outside their area in a project or theme class.
h. Visiting Lecturer Fellowship: Invite visiting artist or scholar for a year or semester,
who will focus on trans-disciplinary investigation.
i. Studio Environments: Shuffle studio spaces, mix people up around the various
facilities instead of having isolated studios.
j. Shuffle Faculty Offices: Shuffle all of the faculty spaces, mix people up among
different areas instead of having isolated disciplinary or individual office and studio
spaces.
k. Fine Arts Press: A press as a vehicle for faculty/students from various disciplines to
produce limited edition, collectible work together (see the Red Butte Press at the
University of Utah).
L EARNING APPROACHES
This area included learning how to learn, rather than specific technologies or
processes; cross-curricular learning beyond disciplinary boundaries and curricular
flexibility that adapts to learner needs.
a. Cross-area Critiques: Students work is critiqued outside of their area (see Pratt,
Hunter, School of the Art Institute of Chicago).
b. Cross-area Mentorship: As is often done in graduate thesis committees in other
disciplines, students are assigned to or select to advisors outside of their area on
specific research projects.
c. Peer-to-peer Teaching: Students can teach students within their courses, but also
teach students from others. This could take place through collaborative projects
between courses.
d. Modular Curriculum. Curriculum accommodates students wishing to move within
areas of focus. For example, a student wishes to study photographic techniques within
photo but then moves into studio to develop a fine art photographic focus. The
curriculum is divided into ‘chunks’ which allows the students to construct their own
curriculum in modules (see Carnegie Mellon).
e. Lived Curriculum/Emergent Curriculum: The curriculum is co-constructed by the
students and faculty who are currently involved in a specific course. Students or faculty
enter with a theme or concept and the curriculum arises in relation to student
questions and faculty interests.
149
GRAHAM & BARNEY
f. Studio Environments: Students learn from cross-pollination of practices, cultural
production, and through proximity based on how studios are designed and organized.
g. Amateur Courses: Advanced students take courses outside the comfort of their own
discipline in an effort to force new perspectives, express a unique point of view, and
approach problems with a different skill set. This approach values the outsider or
amateur perspective.
g. Cross disciplinary Teaching: Instructors facilitate thematic exploration and inquiry
instead of determining the specific skills, techniques, purposes, and philosophical
approaches chosen by individual students.
h. Improvised Technologies: Using technology outside of its original or intended
context.
J. Public Practice: This is connected to service learning and identifies and facilitates
student opportunities to engage in public art and public projects outside of the
university.
C RITICAL THINKING
This area includes the importance of art studies in relation to history, critical and other
theoretical perspectives, context, discourse, audience, curatorial ideas and exhibitions.
One objective of this area is to develop student autonomy and self-sufficiency.
a. Core or Foundation Inquiry Courses: This is a course or courses that emphasize critical
thinking, inquiry methods, and visual problem solving. Topics might include curatorial
studies, art criticism, philosophy, critical theory or visual culture readings and theory.
These courses are designed to orient students towards critical thinking, rather than
discipline specific techniques or mediums (see Fashion Institute of Technology core
class).
b. Core or Foundational Research/Theory Course: This is a survey of various theoretical
frameworks, the research methods that come out of these frameworks, and the
aesthetic philosophies and artistic practices that relate to them.
S OCIAL PRACTICES , COMMUNITY , AND SERVICE LEARNING
a. Lived curriculum/emergent curriculum, see learning approaches e.
b. Cross-disciplinary service learning and service design. Students work in teams built
from various areas, graphic design, photo, art education, studio, history, illustration,
etc., going out into the community and finding organizations that can use specific
services. Students learn within these spaces.
c. Placed-based practices. Learning about a specific location and then creating in
relation to self, community, histories, and disciplinary practices and politics.
C OMPLEXITY AND SYSTEMS THINKING
This area includes holistic perspectives, deep ecology, place-based education,
networks, and relationality as a part of art and design.
150
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
a. Departmental theme. Introduce courses or themes that focus on complexity and
systems thinking. Students learn to think holistically rather than in discipline specific
terms.
b. Lived curriculum/emergent curriculum: See learning approaches e above.
c. Placed-based practices: See social practices c above.
d. Time-based practices. These include New Genres: documentation, ephemera,
documented performances, video, etc.
I NTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION , INTERTEXTUALITIES , LITERACIES
a. Cross-area critiques and mentorship for students: See learning approaches a above.
b. Writing and artistic social practices: Students could take an English course
specifically tailored to artistic practice (See Emily Dyer’s collaborative courses with D.
Barney at BYU).
c. Core inquiry course: See critical thinking a. (See also the research from the Literacy
Research Study, a group of educational researchers at BYU where an expanded notion
of ‘texts’ are described and the literacies surrounding these texts are explored via
disciplinary practices (Barney et. al in press).
d. Interdisciplinary studio: An inter-disciplinary work space that could foster
collaboration, facilitate use of equipment from other disciplines, etc. (CCA has the Craft
Lab, which may serve as a model).
e. Department center for interdisciplinary study: A formalized department center for
collaboration of all types. For example, see Bradley Agency, Ad Lab, etc. It could
function as a part of curriculum or be a separate entity.
I NTERDISCIPLINARY BA DEGREE
a. Interdisciplinary BFA degree: In addition to the regular BFA requirements, add the
possibility of an inter-disciplinary BFA degree. Consider disciplines both in and outside
of the college e.g. Biology/illustration; Writing/Graphic Design, etc. (UVU. Carnegie
Mellon).
b. Interdisciplinary MA degree. Consider the possibility of an inter-disciplinary MFA or
MA degree that might include disciplines both in and outside of the visual arts
disciplines, e.g. biology/illustration; writing/graphic design, etc. Add emphasis in areas
that would like to participate in an MA degree but do not currently have one.
c. Flattened departments: No more areas, students are free to graze at the entire VA
buffet, with pre-requisites as the only barrier. Specific BFA emphasis could still exist,
but with more movement allowed or encouraged among disciplines.
d. Summer programs for high school-age students: This is a program that serves as a
practicum for pre-service art education students (see University of Illinois at Chicago
Spiral Workshop). These programs are also used for recruiting students. They also
involve faculty members in creating innovative and experimental curricula.
151
GRAHAM & BARNEY
e. Saturday or after school programs for secondary students: These programs can serve as
l lab school for any areas to collaborate and test out curriculum and pedagogical issues.
This also provides a practicum experience for pre-service education students as well as
serving local high school-aged students.
f. Team teaching/interdisciplinary team teaching: Bringing more than one perspective
to curriculum.
Discussion
Collaboration
Research described a number of academic trends that included hybrid teaching, multidisciplinary, and team teaching. Other approaches included panel critiques with
representation from multiple areas and collaborative approaches being modeling by team
teachers. Throughout our research and campus visits we have seen a significant emphasis
placed on the value of interdisciplinary teaching as an approach to collaboration. Many
schools spoke of the benefits of team teaching, both as a way of creating more dynamic
classroom environments and as a way of aligning the visions and goals of their teachers.
Additionally, many schools with separate studio and applied programs maintained strong
collaborative ties by allowing open access to one another’s courses as electives.
Several schools incorporated innovative teaching programs allowing students to work
closely with mentors and artists in off-campus settings. For example Columbia has a
mentorship program that invites prominent artists to take small groups of students on
open-ended research excursions across the country. Hunter has a similar course called
Artist’s Institute that invites one artist per semester to structure an experimental project
and invites students to work together outside of the classroom. Another structure that
facilitated collaboration was the implementation of interdisciplinary panels for critiques.
These provide students with a range of feedback while engendering a greater
understanding among professors as to the views and opinions of their peers. As indicated
by a survey of alumni, students perceive a strong need to increase interdisciplinary study
across all areas within the department.
Structure: Organization and Governance
We surveyed dozens of institutions, including both art schools and universities, in order
to get a sense of the kinds of structures at work in institutions with visual arts programs.
Many institutions have separate departments for each of their areas (photography, art
history, and so forth); this is certainly the case in larger and highly esteemed art schools
(SAIC, Pratt) and universities (Northwestern, Columbia). We saw examples of institutions in
which there was a large Art & Design program (such as University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign) that shared the same organizational structure as BYU’s Department of Visual
Arts, i.e. areas with program heads. Advocates of this organization talked about this
structure as helping them to realize their vision of breaking down the ‘degree’ program
and training artists in the broadest sense of the descriptor. Notably, these schools have a
number of programs with MA, MFA, and PhD programs. A few years ago at Parsons New
School of Design, they took 18 departments and turned these into 5 schools—a move that
152
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
was viewed by the two faculty we spoke with as concerned with administrative, rather
than philosophical, purposes.
Conversely, the University of Illinois at Chicago had just orchestrated a split of their Art
& Design program into a School of Art and Art History, a School of Architecture, and a
School of Design. This decision was reached after a sustained discussion of individual
area’s distinct vision, study, and even use of a mediator; it was decided that each program
should have the freedom to self determine their future and that this was best
accomplished when programs were separate entities. Some resources are shared,
including a business and technology staff, but otherwise, they are functioning
autonomously. There are many instances in which Art and Design function as separate
departments or schools (Laguna College of Art & Design; NYU). Similar sentiments were
expressed by faculty in several institutions with strong art programs (Hunter, Columbia),
who shared their belief that combined programs were disposed to chronic tension.
Governance
Unsurprisingly, we found a number of different governance models. In art schools, such
as the School of the Art Institute of Chicago or Fashion Institute of Technology, it is
common that each area is their own department, participates in a faculty senate, and
reports to deans who make allocations in terms of faculty positions and resources. At
larger institutions such as Columbia, some kind of permanent administrative assistant is
assigned to the faculty chair and his/her associate chairs. In university settings, an
executive council composed of two or so associate chairs and one chair seems to be
typical. At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, their School of Art & Design has
one director, two associate directors, and one assistant director of graduate studies who
serves as an executive council over their ten individual programs. This executive council
model is seen in other academic units, such as BYU’s Theater & Media Arts, where their
two programs essentially function as separate entities and is governed by a chair and two
associate chairs.
We have noted that the most contentious issue within the Department of Visual Arts at
BYU is the allocation of FTEs. Several programs indicated that FTEs remained in individual
departments after a faculty retire, thus alleviating concerns about losing faculty positions
(Hunter, Pratt). Some saw the practice of not awarding FTEs to growing programs as
evidence of academic inertia and reactionary tendencies (Cal State Fullerton). We saw
some instances in which chairs applied for positions to deans and then to provosts and/or
presidents (NYU, FIT). Several emerging trends were identified for organization and
governance. Trends that were identified as important included: medium neutrality,
collaboration, varied learning approaches, complexity and systems thinking and increased
forms of social practice. The design disciplines may need to approach these issues
differently and with sometimes with more urgency than other areas.
This suggests a closer collaboration among the applied disciplines is needed. Design
students need to navigate multiple mediums, rather than focusing on a single discipline.
Many function at the nexus of several disciplines such as a designer/illustrator. Other
emerging areas of study, such as camera-less photography are a hybrid discipline at the
intersection of animation, photography and design. Modular curriculum design, which
allows for a hybrid approach, while not sacrificing professional development is of great
interest to the applied disciplines.
153
GRAHAM & BARNEY
Conclusions
Preliminary conclusions of this study are framed as questions and recurring issues
rather than recommendations. There remain distinct philosophical, content, and
pedagogical differences between undergraduate art and design programs that tend to limit
cross-disciplinary experiences for art, design, and art education students. This study is still
in progress, and conclusions reflect an interpretation of layers of information including
anecdotal data that are still being added upon and analyzed. This paper is designed to
bring forward important questions within art and design education and the preparation of
art and design teachers within the context of university art programs, rather than
establishing final recommendations on the subject. The various descriptions of programs
are intended, at this point, to reference different stances toward pedagogical,
collaborative, and organizational issues.
Design faculty often cited the need for a rigorous foundational experience based on
principles and elements of design. They cite, for example, a foundations course that might
be structured according to a traditional Beaux-Arts and/or Bauhaus education model. This
notion of foundations is based on the idea that art or design is a visual language and that
this language is grounded in a visual grammar and vocabulary based on the principles and
elements of design. The idea of a foundation, derived from the Bauhaus, among other
places, asserts there are universal, abstract principles that underlie all art making, the
notions of universal design, and other approaches to design. These ideas as developed by
modernist artists and designers were expressed in the quest for a universal language of
design and formalism.
But postmodernism exposed this notion as naïve and oppressively colonial.
Postmodernism values the idioms, narratives and mediums of diverse cultures and
subcultures. The universal language of formalism has been replaced by the software
languages of Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, and After Effects (Lupton 2009). Universal
design has become a language integrated with technology used by an unprecedented
range of people. In practice, both artists and designers share this common language, as
framed by software. But even as disciplines overlap, particularly in the use of digital
media, college art and design programs, continue to exhibit significant philosophical and
pedagogical differences.
As distinct from design disciplines, art disciplines often articulate a different vision of a
foundations program, one that moves further from traditional models based on adherence
to principles of design and technique. These art foundations emphasize theory over
practice, philosophy over fundamental skills, and social experience over individual
discipline. The fundamental pedagogical practice becomes the critique (Lufton, 2009). It
was noted that often foundations year programs hire faculty who will define their
respective fields very narrowly to protect their own biases and influence students in their
attitudes, opinions, and definitions in an effort to sustain recruitment numbers in their
areas for the following year. This works to undermine broader opportunities for students
cross disciplines. A broader perspective would allow students to come to their own
conclusions about various art and design disciplines. For example, fine arts faculty tend to
stereotype illustration (and other design disciplines) as commercial art, eliminate
figuration from the definition of drawing, and demean the outlets for figuration as trivial
(Arisman, 2012).
154
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
References
Arisman, M. (2012). Teaching Illustration. New York: School of Visual Arts.
Barney, D. T. & Graham, M.A. (2014). The troubling metaphor of foundations in art
education: What foundations affords or limits in high school and college art
programs. Fate in Review 2013-2014
Barrett, T. (2007) Escaping the confines of the museum: Postmodern attitudes ideas,
approaches influencing postmodern artmaking. FATE in Review, Foundations in Art:
Theory & Education, 2006-2007.
Barrett, T. (2011). The importance of teaching interpretation. Fate in Review, 20102011.
Bergdoll, B., & Dickerman, L. (2012). Bauhaus 1919-1933. New York: Museum of Modern
Art.
Dockery, C. & Quinn, R. (2007). Finding balance in contemporary foundations
programs. Fate in Review 2006-2007.
Frigard, K., & Taylor K. (2013). Beyond the traditional and representational: Writing as a
tool for understanding contemporary art in foundation courses. FATE in Review,
Foundations in Art: Theory & Education 2012-2013, 34.
Graham, M. A. & Sims-Gunzenhauser (2010). Advanced placement in studio art and the
contested territory of college art foundations. Fate in Review, Volume 29.
Gude, O. (2004). Postmodern principles: In search of a 21st century art education. Art
Education, 57, 1, 6-14.
Gude, O. (2013). New School art styles: the project of art education. Art Education (66), 1.
Lupton, E. (2009, March). The re-skilling of the American art student. Voice: The AIGA
Journal of Design. Retrieved from http://elupton.com/2009/10/reskilling-the-artstudent/
Madoff, S. H. (2009). Art school (proposition for the twenty first century). Boston, MA: MIT
Press.
McKnight, J. (2013). Hybrid methods: How designer-artists solve visual problems. FATE in
Review, Foundations in Art: Theory & Education, 2012-2013.
Salazar, S. M. (2013). Laying a foundation for artmaking in the 21st century: A description
and some dilemmas. Studies in Art Education, 54, 3, 246-259.
Tavin, K., Kushins, J., & Elniski, J. (2007). Shaking the foundations of postsecondary art(ist)
education in visual culture. Art Education, 60, 5, 13-19.
Van Zande, R. (2011). Design education supports social responsibility and the
economy. Arts Education Policy Review 112, 1, 26-34.
155
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two
Pedagogical Schools in Industrial Design Education in
Turkey
Ilgim EROGLUa* and Cigdem KAYAb
a Mimar
Sinan Fine Arts University; b Istanbul Technical University
*ilgim.eroglu@msgsu.edu.tr
Abstract: In a recent prior study effects of students’ backgrounds on design
education were evaluated through distinctively different product design
undergraduate programs in Istanbul. In Turkey, product design departments
elect their students through either drawing exams where students’ visual
perception and expression skills are tested, or a national math and science exam.
In this regard, prospective design students concentrate on different subjects
prior to their graduate education. As there are studies supporting the idea that
thinking habits may affect problem solving decisions, it was investigated if a
difference between students’ capabilities and preferences in design process exits.
A previous study by authors among students showed that students that took
science based national examination prefered to use objective data, while
students taking the art based examination prioritized subjective problem solving
(Eroglu and Kaya, 2014). When product design stages were defined through
three different problem solving activities suggested by Dorst (2003), it was seen
that students with different backgrounds were comfortable with different
problem solving techniques. In this study, the subject is investigated further
through semi-structured interviews done with instructors who are familiar with
both of the systems. It was seen that instructors can detect difference in actions
of those two student groups.
Keywords: design education, studio, skill development, problem based learning
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
Background of the study
In Turkey, there are four industrial design departments which have been providing
undergraduate education for more than 20 years. These departments elect their students
based on a national math-based exam or aptitude tests. As the students’ acceptance
criteria are different in these departments, students’ education and study orientation prior
to industrial design undergraduate program may also differ. As some educational
psychologists suggest that thinking habits have an affect on problem solving skills (Resnick
2001, D'Zurilla et.al. 1971), it can be argued that the students’ background education may
influence their approaches to design processes. This study aims to explore if the industrial
design processes differ for students in relation to admission style and prior preparation.
Industrial Design Departments in Turkey
In Turkey, industrial design education dates back to 1971. The first four industrial
design departments with undergraduate education were founded in Mimar Sinan Fine Arts
University (MSFAU) in 1971 (URL-1), Middle East Technical University (METU) in 1979 (URL
2), Marmara University (MU) in 1985 (URL-3) and in İstanbul Technical University (ITU) in
1993 (URL-4).
These four universities have two distinct student acceptance procedures for industrial
design education in the country. ITU and METU accept students based on national LYS
(undergraduate placement examination) scores. MSFAU and MU accept their students
through a combined score of secondary school achievement scores (calculated by the
average of student’s high school grades), LYS, university’s general aptitude test and
department’s aptitude test. In the latter process, the final score is majorly affected by
department's aptitude test score. As the acceptance procedures are different, candidates’
main preperations before acceptance to the program are also not similar. Students who
want to attend MSFAU and MU mostly aim to improve their drawing and artistic skills,
while the candidates for METU and ITU mostly prepare themselves for LYS through solving
problems on subjects like mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. Also, their high school
education may also concentrate on different subjects. Students’ of METU and ITU are
mostly graduated from ‘Anatolian high schools’’ or ‘science high schools’’ science divisions,
while a significant amount of candidates of MSFAU and MU come from ‘fine arts high
schools’. Most of the candidates do not prepare themselves for both of the examination
techniques and they only prepare for one type of test (Ekmekçioğlu, 2012)
The differences of both approaches have been clearly stated and discussed in the
Turkish design education scene. However, the reasons have not been studied scientifically.
Clarifying the factors that form the two different approaches and their impact may both
raise consciousness in the design community and serve to improve design education.
Background’s Affect on Students’ Undergraduate
Education
According to related studies, artistic problem solving and mathematical problem
solving can have different characteristics. Ho and Eastman (2006) suggest that 2D and 3D
spatial abilities are inter-dependent while being independent from mathematical abilities.
157
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
Therefore they hint that mathematical thinking and visual capabilities may require
different problem solving habits. In addition to this, researchers who study mathematical
and artistic thinking stress different aspects about students that are familiar with those
two problem solving methods.
Some educational psychologists imply that thinking habits may affect problem solving
skills. Resnick (2001) supports the idea that intelligence can be thought and previous
mental activities have an effect one’s approach to a problem, as ‘..., one’s intelligence is
sum of one’s habits of mind’. D’Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) suggest that, problem solving
may also be described as a learning process. Therefore, successful problem solvers have a
tendency to adopt unknown phenomenon into subjects they are familiar with. In this
regard, studying the prior education on students can shed light to their approaches to
design processes.
Schoenfeld (1992) claims that studying mathematics is empowering. Mathematically
empowered students understand, gather and analyze quantitative data more easily to
make balanced judgements. He also implies that mathematical thinking can be applied
practically like in proportional reasoning for scale models. Mathematically empowered
students are suggested to be flexible thinkers who can deal with unique problems and
situations: ‘They are analytical, both in thinking issues through themselves and in
examining the arguments put forth by others’ (Schoenfeld 1992).
Visual arts students are different from science oriented students in terms of problem
formulating and solving behaviors. Caves (2000) suggests that artists’ problem solving
practices resemble scientific research as they both search for a new discovery to create
value and also a strategy to realize it; but visual artists formulate problems and solutions
internally. So, the problem is not certain. In most cases it can hardly be named as a
problem since insight is a factor. The creation may be based on a feeling or an issue before
a problem arises. Therefore, visual arts practitioners are different from other students as
‘...being serious and introspective, socially reserved, relatively indifferent to accepted
standards of behavior and morality, imaginative and unconventional in outlook, intensely
subjective and highly self-sufficient’ (Caves 2000). It is claimed in some of the researches
that one of the most common problems for visual arts students can be the transition from
problem solving to problem finding. When creating compositions within a given
description by their instructor, students need to define a solution to a certain problem,
whereas to succeed in a creative thinking process, they also need to formulate a problem
that is to be solved (Gibbons 2007).
Since students who have been studying science versus art may have adopted different
thinking skills as discussed above, it can be thought that students coming from diverse
backgrounds may have dissimilar approaches to problem solving in product design process
stages.
The different practices of students in these departments have also been observed by
the authors, who have been working in these schools as instructors. Also there are studies
that hint, students’ background may have an effect on their approach to bachelor studies
(Ekmekçioğlu, 2012).
158
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
Problem Solving in Industrial Design
There are several researches on problem solving in industrial design, some of which
supporting the idea that design problem solving has a complex structure, requiring
different problem solving skills.
Cross (1990, 2001) claims that characteristics of problem solving in design involves
dealing with ambiguity. Similarly, according to the seminal proposal of Rittel and Weber
designers deal with ‘wicked problems’ by nature. Wicked problems are hard to pin down
and describe (Rittel and Weber 1973, Buchanan 1992, Dorst 2011). The solution of a
problem may lead to formation of another question. Cross (1990) also argued that
designers can (1) create novel and unusual solutions, (2) study with incomplete
information (3) work with uncertainty, (4) employ their imagination to solve practical
problems (5) use drawings and other modelling media for problem solving. Also, in his
study it was emphasized that designers mostly apply a solution-focused strategy, while
scientists have a problem-focused strategy (Cross 1990, Norman 1990). In another study,
he supported this idea by stating that ‘...successful design behaviour is based not on
extensive problem analysis, but on adequate ‘problem-scoping’’.In later research, he
claimed that problem and solution should be explored together (Cross, 2004).
Dorst (2003) provided a more structure based approach on problem solving in design
deconstructing the concept of design problem into three kinds of sub-problems. He
claimed that design processes are gradual deals with ‘determined’, ‘underdetermined’ and
‘undetermined’ problems. Determined problems include ‘...‘hard’ (unalterable) needs,
requirements and intentions’ that should be discovered and analyzed by designers.
Determined problems can be solved by rational problem solving, whereas
underdetermined problems are defined by ‘...interpretation of design problems and the
creation and selection of possible suitable solutions’ which can only be done during the
design process through exposition of problems and possible solutions together (Dorst,
2003). Finally, Dorst (2003) declared that undetermined problems are mostly freely solved
by designers’ own skills, tastes, style and abilities. Dorst’s categorization forms the coding
scheme of students’ reports in this study. By looking at the definition of three categories as
‘determined’, ‘underdetermined’ and ‘undetermined’, it can be assumed that determined
problems will require more mathematical problem solving skills as they deal with more
objective criteria, while undetermined problems should require more artistic skills.
Underdetermined problems should stand somewhere in between as they both require
reasoning an interpretation, and they may differ in each design process.
Norman and Verganti (2014) provide a different perspective to problem solving in
design. They suggest that, in order to find radical innovative solutions to design problems,
designers should make a connection between different product meanings. Exploring new
ideas within a single product’s meaning will result with incremental innovative design
solutions (Norman and Verganti, 2014).
Students’ Preparation Prior to University Examinations
In a prior study, students were interviewed about their preparation to university
examinations and their tendencies in product design project courses (Eroglu and Kaya,
2014). One of the unpublished results of that study was about students’ studies before
they start their undergraduate studies.
159
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
31 MSFAU students and 31 İTU students were asked about how did they prepared
themselves to university examinations. All of the İTU students declared that they mostly
solved science based test problems. In those tests, the most included topics were
mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology. However, MSFAU students declared that
they focused on improving their drawing skills. When they were asked the context of their
drawings, students declared that they almost always draw figures in a context defined by
their instructors at the course they attended. The students who didn’t attend a course also
declared that they drew compositions within contexts either they have heard or saw
somewhere else.
It was observed by researchers own experiences that, most of the high school teachers
encourage students to explore alternative solutions for science based problems. On the
other hand, instructors who prepare students for arts based examinations encourage their
students to draw within the context they described, as well as it can be.
Research
In our research we made a survey between 7 instructors who had experience in
universities that elect students with either of the examination techniques. Instructors
could have experience in these universities either as instructor or as a student. Instructors
were chosen according to this criterion in order to let them make comparisons between
two different disciplines. Therefore, purposive sampling was used in this study (Robson,
2002). Backgrounds of the instructors are given in the table below.
Table 1. Backgrounds of the instructors
I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
Bachelors Degree from
MU
ITU
ITU
ITU
MSFAU
MSFAU
MU
Instructor at
MU/ITU
MU
MU
MSFAU
ITU
ITU
ITU
In this section, at first, structure of the research will be explained. Afterwards
evaluation of the results will be described.
Structure of the Research
Instructors were interviewed with open-ended questions to get an understanding
about differences between students’ design processes in two different disciplines. These
questions were: (1) ‘Can you summarize the design process of the students in these
universities?’ (2) ‘What are the aspects that students mostly struggle?’ (3) ‘Can you tell the
strong/weak aspects of final product designs of students?’ (4) ‘Do you think problems can
be eliminated through proper syllabus changes?’ Since it was an open-ended interview,
instructors sometimes jumped from topic to topic between questions. Therefore the
results for the first three questions will be examined together. Instructors’ opinions about
improvement of the education will be discussed separately.
After notes were taken from 7 interviews, thematic coding was used (Braun and Clarke,
2006). The questions about design stages were coded into categories mentioned below;
160
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
the main theme for coding were ‘determined’, ‘underdetermined’ and ‘undetermined’
problem solving techniques as described above.
Each question were made mandatory to answer.
Results of the Research
Here, at first results for students’ capabilities will be given. Insights of instructors about
improvement of university education will follow.
Results for Evaluation of Students Capabilities
The codes for the interviews could be defined either as a problem, or a strenght. Codes
were divided into two groups as ‘codes for students’ and ‘codes for universities.’
Codes for students are as follows;
Table 2. Codes for student
Code
Description of Capabilities
Problem Structure
S1
Intellectual
Determined
S2
Visual presentation
Undetermined
S3
Problem analyze and reseach
Determined
S4
Finishing of product
Undetermined
S5
Rationality of the product
Determined
S6
Time management in design process
Underdetermined
S7
Consistency in project process
Underdetermined
S8
Application of projects
Underdetermined
S9
Developing a product idea
Underdetermined
S10
Developing a form
Undetermined
S11
Management of product design process
Underdetermined
S12
Producing alternative product ideas
Underdetermined
S13
Novelness of product ideas
Determined
S14
Induction from detail solving
Determined
S15
Deduction from form
Underdetermined
S16
Technical drawing
Determined
161
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
S17
3D perception of products
Determined
S18
Conceptualizing and creating a scenario
Underdetermined
S19
Evaluation through model making
Underdetermined
S20
Detailing of the final form
Undetermined
S21
Solving production details
Determined
Codes for universities are as follows in Table 3. None of the listed university codes refer
to undetermined problem solving issues, as undetermined problem solving is a subjective
process by nature.
Table 3. Codes for universities
Code
Description of Capabilities
Problem Structure
U1
Interaction with students
Underdetermined
U2
Project brief
Determined
U3
Description of project process
Underdetermined
U4
Management of process
Underdetermined
U5
Providing alternative points of view
Underdetermined
U6
Objectivity in assessments
Determined
U7
Obtaining project outcomes
Determined
Codes detected for university that accepted students through scientific based
examinations (ITU) are as follows.
Table 4. Codes for ITU
Capabilities/
Obstacles
I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
Total
Determined Capability
S1,S3
S5
U2
S13,
S14,
S3, S5
S13, S3,
S5
S3,
U2,
S13
S1,
S1
Student 14
University
-2
U2
Student - 0
University
Determined Obstacle
U2
162
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
-2
Underdetermined Capability
S6, S7
U4,
Underdetermined Obstacle
U1
U3,
S9
U5,
S11,
U4
S18,
S19,
S11, S9
U3
U4,
U5
Undetermined Capability
Undetermined Obstacle
U4,
U1
Student - 7
University
-4
S12, U4
S2,
S2, S4
S10
S2
S10, S2,
S20
S20
S4
Student - 2
University
-6
Student - 1
University
-0
S2, S9,
S10,
S20
Student 13
University
-0
Codes detected for universities that accepted students through aptitude tests (MSFAU
or MU) are as follows. Code ‘positive’ stands for the capabilities, as code ‘negative’ stands
for obstacles.
Table 5. Codes for MSGSU or MU
Capabilities/
Obstacles
I1
I2
I3
Determined Capability
S3, S14,
S5, S1
I4
I5
I6
I7
Total
S17
U2,
U7
U7,
U6
S17
Student - 2
University
-4
S5, S3,
U6
S3
S21
S1,
S21
Student 14
University
-2
U4,
U7
U4,
S7, U1
U3,
U4
Student - 2
University
-8
Determined Obstacle
S1,
S3
U2, S3,
S13
Underdetermined Capability
U1,
S8
U3
Underdetermined Obstacle
U6,
U7,
U4,
S12,
S11
U5,
S11, U4
S18,
S12,
S19
Undetermined Capability
S2,
S4
S10, S4
S15,
S10, S2
S2, S10,
S4, S20
163
Student - 6
University
-5
S10,
S20
S2,
S20
Student 15
University
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
-0
Undetermined Obstacle
Student - 9
University
-0
As it can be seen from the results, instructors evaluate students that are elected with
scientific based tests as stronger in determined problem solving issues but weaker on
undetermined problem solving areas. Out of 16 mentioned determined problem solving
capabilities, only 2 were related to the universities’ education methods. Instructors
mentioned 13 undetermined problem solving obstacles, none of which were related to
university syllabus. Only one undetermined problem solving capability mentioned for these
students, and one determined problem solving obstacle was mentioned which was related
to the university’s education system.
When results for universities that elected students through aptitude tests were
evaluated, it was seen that none of the instructors mentioned any obstacle regarding
undetermined problem solving methods. However, undetermined problem solving
capabilities were mentioned 15 times. There were 6 determined problem solving
capabilities mentioned, 4 of which were university related. Determined problem solving
obstacles were mentioned 16 times, and 2 of them were university related. Therefore it
can be said that instructors mostly evaluate students that are elected through artistic
examinations as capable of solving undetermined problem solving methods, but
problematic in terms of dealing with determined issues.
When results for underdetermined problem solving are compared, instructors mention
11 capability, and 8 obstacle for ITU. Most of the obstacles are university centered.
Departments that elect students through aptitude tests seem to have more problems with
underdetermined problem solving issues, as instructors mention 11 obstacles and 10
capabilities. However, since the numbers are rather close for each student group,
capabilities for underdetermined problem solving can be investigated further.
Instructors Insights on Improvement of Industrial Design
Education in Departments
The instructors were asked whether weaknesses they mention could be improved
through changes in department syllabuses. There were both positive and negative
responses.
Some of the instructors mentioned that, a change of understanding was necessary.
Without a change in understanding a change of syllabus would fall short to address
problems. The following citations from interviews indicate the necessity of change in
understanding.
‘I don’t think it can be solved through syllabus changes. A students’ drawing skills can
be improved if only they exist at the beginning…’ (I7)
‘A change in syllabus would be meaningful and important if they come with a change of
understanding… if a syllabus fits for a certain understanding, then it can be regarded as a
good syllabus’ (I4)
164
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
‘A radical change and a mentality change should be applied… Project courses can be
taught with more hours in a design studio environment to get better results.’ (I1)
‘Tests are not quite beneficial as the industrial design practice still has connections with
crafts’ (I6)
There were also instructors who mentioned that students can benefit from changes in
syllabus.The following citations from interviews indicate that a change in the syllabus can
solve the weaknesses they mention.
‘ITU was quite weak in terms of visual presentation, it could be improved with more
course hours on these subjects… Students (of MU) can be provided with a deeper
understanding of research techniques’ (I2)
‘The way that syllabus applied may be changed to get better results from project
courses’ (I3)
‘Syllabuses can be made more up to date… Artistic environment in a university may
affect students’ perception.’ (I5)
These insights provide varied views on how industrial design can be improved in
universities that accept students with different backgrounds. There are instructors
claiming that change of an understanding could have a greater effect than a change in
syllabus. It may be inferred that the way students are elected can be regarded as a part of
an understanding, as some instructors hint that the way students elected has an effect on
the skills they can build during their education.
Discussion and Further Studies
Findings of this study support the idea that students coming from different
backgrounds have a different approach to product design process. This result also supports
other studies done previously in the field (Ekmekçioğlu, 2012).
One of the contribution of this work is analyzing the differences among students,
through different types of problem solving methods that are seen in product design
process. This way, different students’ behaviours are coded and evaluated in relationship
with their backgrounds. It was seen that students that are accustomed to mathematical
problem solving were more comfortable with determined problem solving, as both of
these problem solving techniques mostly deal with objective data. On the other hand,
students with an artistic background struggle with determined data, as they are more
accustomed to undetermined problem solving practices.
Interview with instructors also hint two different approaches to logic and action of
students during a design process. Students with artistic background mostly express and
develop their ideas through drawings, sometimes in expense of a prior research study.
Their actions may be evaluated through reflective practice as in crafts, where the object is
designed through making; by doing visual experimentation on the object to develop a
product. On the other hand, students with a scientific training background tend to follow a
more linear approach; they start with a research and scenario building activity and try to
build a form out of their findings. Most of the time the form itself comes out of a
functional detail solving process.
165
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
As stated in the beginning of the article, student background is one of the factors
shaping the difference between science-based universities and art-based universities
delivering industrial design education. Such demystification may help educators to cover
the missing parts in the curriculum.
In further studies, two different approaches identified in this research may be
theorized as ‘a crafting approach’ versus ‘research based approach’ to problem solving to
understand students’ activities better in order to build a stronger link with their
backgrounds. Most of the students who prepare to artistic examinations make hands-on
drawings within given contexts on daily basis. This approach may be discussed with crafts
activities, where form is explored and developed in a certain context by drawing and
making. Here, problem formulation may be as important as its solution. To understand the
structure in artificial world, analytical physical observation is necessary. This can be
regarded as problem formulation. Afterwards the artificial world is replicated by drawing.
This can be regarded as problem solving. This kind of holistic and kinesthetic exploration
maybe the reason why some students feel more comfortable when tackling with
undefined problems. Opposite to this, students who prepare for scientific examinations
concentrate on finding a suitable solution to a concrete problem. Sometimes students are
encouraged to build logical connections between several contexts (like formulas or basic
principles) in order to find a solution to a determined problem. This differences may lead
to different design approaches that are explored by Norman and Verganti (2014) within
incremental and radical innovative design concepts.
The differences between students’ preparation activities may be documented through
interviews with their high school instructors, who prepare them for university exams. Their
instructors’ definition of success may provide a clue about the way students head
themselves. This way, their approach to a design problem may be analyzed better to
evaluate their product design outcomes. Another exploration may be done through
interviews with independent evaluators to understand the characteristics of students’
projects from different universities. This maybe done through blind review of project
presentations of students from these universities. Since different design approaches are
defined in literature (Norman and Verganti, 2014), a stronger relation may be built
between students activities prior to university education and their product design project
outcomes.
References
Braun, V.; Clarke,V. 2006. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology. 3. 77-101.
Buchanan, R. 1992. Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues. 8(2), 14-19.
Caves, R. E. 2000. Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce.. Harvard
University Press.
Cross, N. 1990. The Nature and Nurture of Design Ability. Design Studies. 11:3, 127-140.
Cross, N. 2001. Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. 17:3,
49-55.
Cross, N. 2004. Expertise in Design: An Overview. Design Studies. 25:5, 427-441.
Dorst, K. 2003.The Problem of Design Problems. Expertise in Design. Design Thinking
Research Symposium 6. 17-19 November. University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
166
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
Dorst, K. 2011. The Core of Design Thinking and It’s Application. Design Studies. 32, 521532.
D'Zurilla, Thomas J.; Goldfried, Marvin R. 1971. Problem solving and behavior modification.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol 78(1), Aug 1971, 107-126.
Ekmekçioğlu, D. 2012. Bir Meslek İki Farklı Profil: Türkiye’de Endsütriyel Tasarımı
Eğitimindeki Farklı Öğrenci Kabul Sistemleri ve Yansımaları. ITU Graduate School of
Science Engineering and Technology, Unpublished Master Thesis.
Eroğlu,I; Kaya, Ç. 2014. A Study on Effects of Student Admission Methods on Students’
Design Practices. DesignEd Asia Conference 2014, 2-3 December, Hong Kong.
Gibbons, H. 2007. Teaching Dance: The Spectrum of Styles. AuthorHouse, Indiana.
Ho, C.; Eastman, C. 2006. An Investigation of 2D and 3D Spatial and Mathematical Abilities.
Design Studies, 27. 505-524.
Norman, D.A.; Verganti, R. 2014. Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research vs.
Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues. 30:1, 78-96.
Resnick, L. 2001. Making America Smarter: The Real Goal of School Reform. In Costa, (Ed)
Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking: Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development
Rittel, H.W.J, and Webber, M.M. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy
Sciences. 4,155-169.
Robson, C. 2002. Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner,
Blackwell Publishing
Schoenfeld, A. H. 1992. Learning to Think Mathematically: Problem Solving, Metacognition
and
Sense Making in Mathemetics, In: D. Grouws (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Mathematics
Teaching and Learning, New York: Macmillan.
URL 1 http://www2.msgsu.edu.tr/msu/pages/502.aspx
URL 2 http://id.metu.edu.tr/en/metu-department-of-industrial-design/department-ofindustrial-design
URL 2 http://eut.gsf.marmara.edu.tr/genel-bilgiler/
URL 3 http://www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr/en/history.html
167
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design
Education
Maarit MÄKELÄ* and Teija LÖYTÖNEN
Aalto University, Finland
*maarit.makela@aalto.fi
Abstract: Within art and design, education material experimentations are an
integral part of learning processes. However, the attention to materiality in
educational studies has been rather limited. In this study, we discuss materiality
in design education and explore the relation of materiality to learning, that is,
how learning is entangled with or an effect of the engagement with the
material. We base our review on an MA course called Design Exploration and
Experimentation (DEE) organised at Aalto University, School of Arts, Design and
Architecture, Finland. The paper is based on ethnographic notes and
documentation gathered from the participating design students from the course
during a five-year period of time, including courses from 2010 to 2014. By
describing some critical elements, the paper sheds light on the role and
relevance of materiality in learning within design education. Based on the study,
we propose that physical environment and materiality have agency in learning
processes and that together they create a performative learning space. In such a
space, learning becomes a more unpredictable and experimental process,
opening up new, emergent possibilities.
Keywords: Design education, material experimentation, learning, curriculum
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Introduction
Learning is a concept central to education, but it is still extremely slippery and even
abstract in meaning. On the one hand, learning has been understood as a solely individual
process: an individual is conceived of as the basic unit of knowing, and learning as a
process in which the individual agent acquires knowledge. On the other hand, learning has
been understood as a process of socialising into a community, and to function according to
its socially negotiated norms (Sfard, 1998; Lave & Wenger, 1991). Thus, it is now a
commonplace in educational theory to understand learning as more than the purely
individual, cognitive and acquisitive process. Notions of learning as socio-cultural
participation that is embedded in particular joint activity, tools and routines have become
widespread in educational writings and practices (Fenwick et al. 2011, pp. 5-6).
In addition, learning as socio-cultural participation has been elaborated into
understanding it as knowledge creation. Here, learning focuses on activities organised
around the systematic and deliberate pursuit of creating or developing something new –
such as concepts or design artefacts (Paavola & Hakkarainen 2005; Hakkarainen et al.,
2004). Alongside these developments, a notion of practice as an enactment of and a
medium for learning has been argued. This ‘practice turn’ weaves learning together with
action; that is, learning is entangled with the everyday activities in a kind of knowing-inpractice manner (e.g. Gherardi 2011; Gherardi & Strati 2013; Nicolini 2012). Despite these
new re-conceptualisations, an element still often relegated to the background in
educational theories and practices is the material part of learning, that is, how learning is
entangled with or an effect of the engagement with the material, both human and nonhuman (Fenwick et al., 2011; Fenwick & Nerland, 2014).
Within art and design, education material experimentations are an integral part of
learning processes. However, the attention to materiality in educational studies has been
rather limited. Related studies (Welch et al., 2000; MacDonald & al. 2007; Anning 1997)
show that rather than using sketching, novice designers explore their mental images using
three-dimensional materials. For example, Malcolm Welch & al. (2000, p. 142) discovered
that designing for simple three-dimensional forms may start from sketching, but modelling
is often used when developing the idea further. Furthermore, they considered materiality
important when generating and communicating ideas as it provides an informal and
supportive way to develop the ideas further.
In this study, we elaborate the discussion on materiality especially within a university
context. By describing some critical elements within a specific design course, this paper
sheds light on the role and relevance of materiality in learning, especially in design
education. We base our review on an MA course called Design Exploration and
Experimentation (DEE) organised at Aalto University, School of Arts, Design and
Architecture, Finland. The core idea of the intensive eight-week course is to support
students in managing their own creative processes, for example via documentation,
reflection and discussions. For most students, material experimentations play a significant
role in the formation and framing of the concept and the expected final artefact.
The DEE course has been previously discussed in two publications. In their study, Krista
Kosonen and Maarit Mäkelä (2012) discuss the overall purpose and structure of the
course, and examine how the platform supported one student in framing and managing his
individual creative processes. They describe how one student experimented with weaving
169
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
and woodwork, with the final output of the course resulting in a weaving house, a
combination of looms and house. Concurrently, when connected to the reflective process,
the making of the construction enabled the student to negotiate his identity as a designer
in a profound way. Kosonen and Mäkelä conclude that by offering both freedom and
structure, the course encouraged the students to experiment with new materials and
media, but also personal topics while working (ibid., 237).
Camilla Groth and Maarit Mäkelä (2014) in their study on the knowing body in material
explorations during the DEE course suggest that the students’ previous material
experiences gathered through the body, guided them in material explorations even before
the actual physical manipulation of the materials began. For example, tactile impressions
and images of materials were key elements both in the choice of materials as well as in
making sense of the materials and their behaviour. They describe how the manipulation of
materials helped to resolve complicated spatial design problems as the design was taken
into the lived experience through material prototypes. They propose that physical material
explorations strengthen the students’ confidence in managing new materials and offer
them a wider toolkit to work with in their future endeavours. 19
In our paper, we focus on a novel perspective to the Design Exploration and
Experimentation course. Instead of looking at the material experimentations as such, we
will explore the relation of materiality to learning, that is, how learning is entangled with
or an effect of the engagement with the material. We begin by providing a brief overview
of the course. Thereafter, we describe the methodological approach of the study, namely
at-home ethnography. Based on insights gained through this approach supported by the
DEE students’ written reflections, we then give some specific accounts that show the
critical role that materiality and physical organisation of the environment played in the
learning process. We conclude by briefly discussing the challenges for university teachers
in relation to materiality in educational processes.
Design exploration and experimentation as an
educational platform
The DEE course was designed in 2009 to complement the Industrial and Strategic Design
education in the Design Department at Aalto University School of Arts, Design and
Architecture Helsinki, Finland. At that time the Master programme’s curriculum was
lacking proper studio-based practices, and individual design projects had been mainly
replaced by group assignments. In our view, this resulted in a too narrow concept of both
design and learning, highlighting a linear process of problem-solving exercises where a
potential solution is specified and an outcome is achieved through a series of processes,
such as specifying, researching, prototyping, testing, refining, and evaluating. As noted by
19
In addition to the aforementioned studies a special issue in Studies in Material Thinking (2014,
volume 11) was dedicated to design education in higher education. The papers suggest the gradual
emergence of new directions in design education, which position the designer and design itself as a
more flexible and relevant response to continuing global changes. The many articles illustrate on the
one hand some notions on the materializations of design education and on the other hand the
relation of learning within natural environments.
170
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Patrick Dillon and Tony Howe (2007, p. 71), together these processes constitute one kind
of design model, which also affects design education.
We believed that the design students could benefit from handling processes typical to fine
art. They often proceed through the personal, unique expression of each individual
student, highlighting exploratory ways in design, which are fluid, sometimes chaotic, often
complex and frequently involving a large element of uncertainty (see also McDonnell 2011,
p. 569; Dillon & Howe, 2007, p. 71.) Hence, one of the aims in the DEE course was to bring
together art and design, and experiment how artistic and ‘designerly’ ways of working can
feed one another (Kosonen & Mäkelä 2012, p. 229).
We use the term ‘platform’ to emphasise that the course utilises the premises offered by
the university profoundly: the students receive support from the professor, lecturer and
course assistant involved, who have their background either in industrial design or studiobased design disciplines and design research. Other professionals, including different
workshop facilitators, such as studio masters in wood, glass and ceramics, are also invited
to help the students in their experimentations. For enhancing the material
experimentations, the platform utilises different physical environments, including the
diversity of studio environments that the university offers. The other important physical
environment is a trip to a destination. Thus, the platform builds on extensive mutual
interaction with different stakeholders both inside and outside the university.
The foundation of the DEE course can be related to the field of practice-led research
initially developed within art and design universities. In the design context, practice-led
research was originally closely connected to studio-based doctoral degrees with the
intention of opening up and studying creative processes from within by a designerresearcher herself (e.g. Mäkelä 2003; Turpeinen 2005; Nimkulrat 2009). As Kosonen &
Mäkelä (2012, pp. 228 and 236) have noted, the course can be considered an educational
implication of practice-led research, in which research and learning is intertwined. It
emphasises the use of hands-on work and the dialogue between a person and medium.
The overall structure of the DEE platform
The creative process during the DEE course is supported by providing a framework
including numerous assignments related to becoming inspired, documenting the process
and then reflecting upon it. The course begins by introducing the predefined themes,
including the course topic and the destination of the related five-day excursion. This
prepares the ground for initiating the creative processes, during which the students create
concrete artefacts based on their interests, their self-defined individual design tasks and
means for achieving the desired outcomes.
From its inception in 2010, the eight-week DEE course has been arranged five times,
each consisting of approximately 12 students. The international groups of male and female
participants have represented different design fields, most of the students having their
educational background in industrial design. However, the course has also gathered
students from other design fields, such as textile, spatial and furniture design, as well as
from the field of fine arts. The students have been from early twenties to late thirties of
age and represented seventeen nationalities.
171
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
The course begins with the students presenting themselves and their take on the
selected course theme20 of the respective year. This gives the students some
understanding of the group that they are going to work with. Thereafter, the students are
divided into smaller groups to prepare presentations on the geographical and cultural
features of the location of the forthcoming excursion 21. The aim of the trip is to generate
inspiration around the selected theme, gather related information and also to create group
cohesion.
After the excursion, the course progresses following a repeated weekly structure. It
forms a supportive framework for individual creative processes: Mondays, Wednesdays
and Fridays are reserved for individual work, enabling the students to develop their ideas,
reflect on their process, and complete assignments; Tuesdays and Thursdays are for
collective activities: sharing and discussing the progress of the evolving creative process,
followed by feedback from peers and teachers. In addition, these days are reserved for
lectures and discussions as well as for visits to local museums and galleries. To enable
proper documentation and reflection, the students document their experimental processes
in three steps. Working diaries are kept throughout the course for working on emerging
experiences, ideas and thoughts. Weekly reflections are assignments through which the
students reflect on and describe their progress, problems, insights and other issues related
to their creative processes on a weekly basis. The reflection is a one-page compilation
based on the more thorough working diary. The final reflections conclude the students’
creative processes. Related insights and critical reflections on the entire learning process
are encouraged. The aim of the documentation and reflection is to make the creative
process visible, allowing the student to return to any part of the process afterwards (see
also Mäkelä & Nimkulrat, 2011; Pedgley, 2007).
At the beginning of each week, the students hand their weekly reflections over to the
teachers. This allows the teachers to keep track of the sometimes sensitive and fragile
creative processes, and offer suitable support when necessary. In weekly presentations,
students share the status of their individual processes with the whole group. After reading
the weekly reflections, the teachers are prepared to give relevant feedback to the students
in the discussions that follow the student presentations. The entire design of the DEE
platform supports a collective learning process. The course allows the participating
students to share their own and follow their peer’s creative processes, as well as to reflect
on their working approach and progress in relation to the others. Throughout the course,
there is also the possibility for personal tutoring or mentoring with the teachers.
Having now illustrated the background and overall structure of the platform, we move
on to describe the methodological approach of our study.
Methodological approach
This paper is based on teaching practice from 2010 to 2014 in the DEE course with five
different groups of design students. During this time, one of the authors, namely Maarit
Mäkelä, has been deeply engaged with the course. She also, with lecturer Simo Puintila,
initially designed the course and has taught in it in each year. The other author, Teija
20
The theme has changed each year, and thus far they have included The Roots of Culture (2010),
Identity (2011), Family (2012), Faith (2013) and Journey (2014).
21 The destination has changed yearly, varying from northern Finland (Sodankylä 2010, Luosto 2014),
to southern Finland (Espoo 2012) and eastern Finland (Karelia 2011, Heinävesi 2013).
172
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Löytönen, a teacher and scholar in university pedagogy in the arts at Aalto University,
joined the process of writing this paper by focusing on methodological issues and
theoretical discussions. Throughout the five DEE courses, Maarit Mäkelä made careful
observations of students by following their processes in shared discussions, and one-toone tutorials. The observations are supported by rich data from the courses, including
students’ working diaries, written weekly reflections, final reflections and visual
documentations of related exhibitions. This paper draws from the field-based
ethnographic data that was assembled throughout the years: it is thus an ethnographic
account of the relation of materiality to learning within the DEE course. Ethnography here
is understood as:
a process of creating and representing knowledge (about society, culture and
individuals) that is based on ethnographers’ own experiences. It does not claim to
produce an objective or truthful account of reality, but should aim to offer versions of
ethnographers’ experiences of reality that are as loyal as possible to the context,
negotiations and intersubjectivities through which the knowledge was produced. (Pink,
2009, p. 8; see also Pink, 2007, p. 22)
The ethnographic approach in this study can be specified as at-home ethnography
(Alvesson, 2009, 2003; see also Halstead et al., 2008; Löytönen, forthcoming) in the sense
that we describe a cultural setting to which we belong. As Mats Alvesson has noted (2009,
p. 160), at-home ethnography draws attention to one’s own cultural context, but, rather
than placing oneself and one’s experiences at the centre, it is concerned with what goes on
around oneself. In this sense, at-home ethnography differs from other ethnographical
approaches, such as autoethnography (e.g., see Holman Jones et al., 2013). At-home
ethnography, then, is ‘a study and a text in which the researcher-author describes a
cultural setting to which s/he has a ‘natural access’ and in which s/he is an active
participant, more or less on equal terms with other participants’ (Alvesson, 2009, p. 159).
Hence, our roles, in addition to those of teachers and scholars, include being ‘observing
participants’ (Alvesson, 2009, p. 159), and the observations concern the question of what
goes on during the Design Exploration and Experimentation process.
At-home ethnography can be approached in several empirical ways. One approach
follows a more traditional way of doing ethnographic fieldwork, which consists of planned
and systematic data collection, where the research interest is decided upon in advance. In
our study, we are following a less structured form of at-home ethnography, one that uses
an emergent-spontaneous study that begins when something interesting occurs. With such
an approach, the researcher explores something familiar in a new light: ‘The idea is that a
consistent, long-term scan of what one is experiencing produces a more extended set of
incidents or an especially rich and interesting event calling for analysis’ (Alvesson 2009, p.
165).
In our study, Maarit’s observations during the DEE course and our joint informal
ponderings around the question of learning in design education led us to go through the
students’ documentations and reflections in detail from the perspective of materiality in
relation to learning. Our ethnographic description explores something quite familiar yet
seen in a new light. Thus, some specific incidents – acts, actors, events, and situations –
that made us realise the specificities of the materiality within the learning processes are
brought into focus (Alvesson, 2009, p. 165). As Alvesson continues: ‘The trick is more a
173
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
matter of accomplishing a description and insightful, theoretically relevant ideas and
comments out of the material’ (p. 162). At-home ethnography in this study therefore
constitutes theoretical developments that are well grounded in experiences and
observations within and on the DEE process.
Materialising learning in design education
The overall purpose of the DEE course is to create a challenging environment for action
where the student has the courage to experiment with one’s ideas with a brave and openminded attitude. The learning outcomes of the course are not about specific artistic or
design skills or knowledge. Instead, they focus on the learning process, during which the
student is expected to: develop control over the creative process by documentation and
run it according to the schedule; combine a creative process and free expression in a way
that by the end of the course the student is capable of introducing concrete artefacts
related to the chosen topic; and be able to reflect on one’s own creative process in a
written form.
The core of the course, thus, is an open-ended process that supports material
experimentations and free expression around the given theme. The approach is
characteristic to artists, who aim to keep the creative process open, reframing it several
times, and letting it be influenced by surprises and insights that take place during the
process (Kosonen & Mäkelä, 2012, p. 230). In the course context, design experimentation
begins to make sense as the creative process proceeds and the students begin to
crystallise their ideas in visual and material formats. Towards the end of the course, the
focus switches from experimentation to careful planning and realisation of the selected
idea (ibid., p. 232-233). This results in the creation of the final artefact and its presentation
in the public exhibition (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Different steps in Linda’s food-related creative process from the DEE 2014 course:
showing material experiments in a group meeting (a); constructing the work from dyed
crackers (b); the exhibition in Design Forum Showroom Helsinki (c). Photos Maarit Mäkelä
(a) and Krista Kosonen (b and c).
In the following section, we will describe some specific incidents and phenomena to
illustrate how, through the diverse assignments and working sites, the material becomes
an integral element in the learning processes. Instead of specific learning outcomes, we
will focus on the learning process, since the course aims to enhance the handling of the
creative process by the various means described earlier. We also find it challenging to
174
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
depict learning through actual changes (or new understandings) in artistic or design
knowledge and skills within such a short period of time. However, it is possible to delineate
some specific incidents within the process, that is, in the ways the students actually
worked and in the encounters with the self-defined materials.
Physical environment matters
One of the most important components of the DEE platform is the five-day excursion to a
theme-related location. It consists of visits within the local surroundings and lectures
related to the theme of the platform as well as to the destination. During the excursion,
teachers and students share thoughts and ideas in informal settings, such as in the sauna
and during dinners (Kosonen & Mäkelä 2012, p. 231). The main purpose of the trip is to
provide an inspiring and safe environment that supports the students in initiating their
creative processes and, throughout the course, in discussing the emerging concerns
related to their diverse processes.
As an example of how the environment has an effect or agency in the learning process, we
will next provide a more detailed account from the excursion that took place in 2013. The
main reason for selecting the destination, Heinävesi, was that it is considered a site where
spirituality and religious monuments are a fundamental part of the local culture. Thus, this
particular eastern part of Finland offered suitable premises for the topic of the course,
which was Faith. During the excursion, we visited the New Valamo Orthodox monastery
and the Lintula Holy Trinity Convert.
The group was accommodated in an old primary school consisting of two big lecture rooms
and a kitchen. The building was situated in a small village and was surrounded by a
meadow, a sauna and a nearby lake. The place served as a base camp to explore the
surrounding cultural and natural environment. The surrounding environment also enabled
a diversity of informal outdoor activities (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Igloo (a); Part of the group enjoying outdoor activities in front of our basecamp building in
Heinävesi (b); Sauna (c). Photos Lewis Just (a) and Jaana Lönnroos (b) and Nina Chen c).
In her final reflection, Nina, a Canadian student, reported the significance of the
excursion, and particularly the sauna experience, in the following way:
What I found most interesting and valuable in this expedition were the opportunities to
bond with other classmates. We did a lot of activities together, building an igloo, building a
175
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
snowman, Saunaing, Avantoing22, Making Karjalanpiirakka23 and more… The most
memorable moment on this trip was our nightly saunas. It was a ritual where we… all
together in the sauna bathe, reflect on the day and converse about anything… I realized
that this significant event of being nude in front of the people that I barely know somewhat
allowed me to truly be myself. It was not until the very last night of the trip where we went
to the community sauna… that… I become aware of the liberation that the sauna
experience has given me.
Sauna was part of the course programme but, in addition, the surrounding
environment inspired students to get involved in initiative activities. In his final reflection,
Lewis, who came from Scotland, reports on how he became involved in building an igloo
(Figure 2a):
When in Heinävesi there was time to have for our own… With the help of another student…
we started constructing an igloo… The next day we finished building the igloo and the
locals who were hosting us generously offered a reindeers hide so that we could sleep in
the igloo and not get cold.
In Lewis’ case, the exciting experiment with nature gave direction to his entire project.
He decided to continue with the thoughts he encountered when seeing the extravagance
of the relics and artefacts in Valamo Monastery’s private museum. In his final reflection, he
reports that:
I wanted to take the relics of the Orthodox Church and recreate them to fit with the
teachings of the religion. My aim was to make the aesthetics fit with the philosophy. I
decided to redesign a cross, a chalice and an incense burner the way Jesus would have
made them.
During the course, Lewis spent many periods surrounded by nature for redesigning the
selected artefacts, first in the Helsinki region and finally three days in Nuuksio Park – a
natural park near Helsinki. The new artefacts were made from wood that he selected
directly from the forest (Figure 3). He crafted the wood using manual labour. In his final
reflection, he reports on the unique experience he encountered during the excursion: ‘It all
felt a bit surreal, being in the middle of a forest, alone, naked in a sauna ‘working’ on a
project’.
22
23
A hole in the ice for winter swimming.
A traditional Finnish pie from the region of Karelia.
176
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Figure 3
First carving experiments with wood in the Helsinki region (a); Crafting an incense burner
from wood found in Nuuksio forest (b); Redesigned artefacts in Aalto University’s Atski
Gallery (c). Photos Lewis Just.
Nina’s and Lewis’ reflective comments illustrate how the specific physical environment had
an effect not only on the theme of the course (Faith) and the chosen material (wood) but
also on the learning processes and ways of working. Lewis’ entire DEE project was based
on his encounters with the environment and the informal outdoor experiences in
Heinävesi. For Nina, the most valuable thing was bonding with other classmates in
informal settings, especially in the sauna. For her, this offered an opportunity to connect
with others within the learning community, and these intimate relations made her realise
herself as a person, ‘to truly be’ herself.
The experiences described above are not aimed at generalising the learning within the DEE
course. Instead, the students’ subtle descriptions made us aware of the significance that
the physical environments and the social arrangements might have within the course. In
fact, Na’ilah Suad Nasir and Jamal Cooks (2009), in their study on learning settings,
identified three core resources that influence learning: the material, relational and
ideational resources. By ‘material resources’, they refer to the physical environment where
an activity takes place, and by ‘relational resources’ to the positive relationships with
others within the activity. The ‘ideational resources’ refer to ‘the ideas about oneself and
one’s relationship to and place in the practice and the world, as well as ideas about what is
valued or good’ (ibid., p. 47).
Physical environments and spaces, then, have affordances to learning processes: they not
only create inclusions or exclusions but also open or limit the possibilities for new
practices, knowledge(s), networks and relationships to emerge (see also Fenwick et al.,
2011 p. 11). When students connect to each other within a specific physical environment,
space and/or practice, they come to define themselves as members of the learning
community and the practice itself – such as design. These connections may arise
spontaneously within the practice, but they can also be crafted, for example, by arranging
opportunities for informal activities – such as organising the course-related journey and
including the site specific features, such as the sauna.
Matter matters – Case Gabriela
Gabriela, whose background is in industrial design and whose roots are in Uruguay,
participated in the 2013 excursion as well. Not having tight connections to any religion, she
found the visits to the monastery and the nunnery uncomfortable. In her final reflection,
this issue was reported more explicitly:
… which was striking to me, is that everything was ruled and scheduled, from timetables to
ceremonies, silence time or amount of glasses of wine. There was no space for spontaneity,
and I saw the nunnery’s bee’s wax fabric as a materiality of it.
The experience reminded Gabriela of Paul Klee’s series of works Imperfect Angels, as
these angels had humane features and were thus imperfect in their nature. By following
this idea, Gabriela decided to create her own series of imperfect angels by utilising the
beeswax material she faced in the nunnery. In her final reflection, she writes that her work
177
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
had two approaches, one being emotional and the other more rational, that is, to ‘liberate
the bee’s wax and let the material be in a more free way that in the candle shape’. When
starting the material experimentation with the wax, Gabriela had only an initial idea for
the work. At the beginning of her working process, she felt frustrated, as she discovered
that she could not control the material, nor the evolving shape (Figure 4). In her fifth
weekly reflection, she writes:
The beeswax is not a docile material at all. I hated it in some moments and the results I
obtained were not what I was expecting. Anyway I found something interesting in it… I
would say that working with beeswax is easy to reach imperfection, and to lose the control.
This is a fact that I found important: going on from my comfort zone and realizing that I
was not able to control the material is quite disturbing but also fascinating. Assuming the
loss of control is a way of assuming imperfection.
After accepting the essence of this unfamiliar material and finding some new
techniques to cope with it, her attitude toward the working changed. In the sixth weekly
reflection, she writes that:
… accepting accidents as enhancer and not as limiting, allowed me to both develop the idea
I was working with and enjoy the process of materialising the idea. In a way I feel more free
moulding now, and instead of trying to force the material to achieve a predesigned shape, I
try to find a balanced dialog between the material where both guide each other.
She realised that when working with the material, she was able to better understand
the requisite ways of working that she was searching for. After finishing some bodies for
the angels with beeswax, she started material experimentation for finding suitable
material and technique for the wings. The most interesting results came out of porcelain,
and she decided to equip the entire ‘population of angels’ with porcelain wings. Her aim
was to develop a thin porcelain structure as it would allow her to play with the material’s
transparency. In her final reflection, she reports on how she combined a variety of
materials with porcelain to create a diversity of textures:
I have been challenging the porcelain in order to obtain very thin pieces allowing me to play
its transparency. At the beginning I tried different ‘traditional’ techniques but later I started
to explore whatever appeared in my mind. I decided to let spontaneous and ‘out of rules’
experiments take their own way, and they were endless.
Figure 4
Beeswax candles in the nunnery in Heinävesi (a); Moulding melted beeswax (b); Broken
angel with porcelain wings (c). Photos Lewis Just (a) and Gabriela Rubini (b and c).
178
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
It is evident that Gabriela’s working process enabled her to find, experiment and adopt
new ways of working that were based on accident and freedom. Furthermore, the courage
to adapt to the new attitude and the readiness to accept the unique results this approach
provides increased as her creative process proceeded. Based on Gabriela’s case example,
we suggest that the material experimentations are integrally entangled in her creative
process: starting from the very beginning, this entanglement proceeds via thinking and
sketching towards the final artefact (Figure 5). That is, the material formation does not
come after the ideation as a separate phase of giving form to the emergent idea. In fact,
the materiality is simultaneous with and intrinsic to the creative process itself: materiality
resists or imposes challenges and constraints on her ideas, ways of working and attitudes
(see also Gherardi & Perotta, 2013, p. 240).
Figure 5
Gabriela’s installation Imperfect Angels in Aalto University’s Atski Gallery. Photo Sami
Kiviharju.
In Gabriela’s experimentation, the shape was the consequence of the moulding experience
with the beeswax, and she discovered that the material gave her more than what she had
expected. The final work, then, emerges from the process of experimenting with
materiality, feeling the materials and allowing the material to guide the creative process
towards the final artefact. Thus, the material had an active role in Gabriela’s creative
process: it had a kind of agency. Tara Fenwick et al. (2011, p. 4), in fact, point out that
material things are performative and not inert – they are matter and they matter.
This thought is in line with the notion of vital materiality, a power that cannot be
separated from matter and where materiality is seen as the interface between human and
the (non-living) physical world (Bennett, 2010, p. 56). A craftsperson, or anyone who has
an intimate connection with matter, encounters a creative materiality with incipient
tendencies and propensities, which are variably enacted. The direction in which this power
179
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
takes the creator depends on what types of other powers, emotions and bodies are
present in the process. In Gabriela’s case, this means that while working in the studio, she
was able to develop a deep understanding of the ‘vitality’ of a material, and thus had a
productive ‘collaboration’ with it (see also ibid., p. 60).
Conclusions
The aim of this study has been to open up discussion on materiality within higher
education. By describing some critical elements within a specific design course, we have
given examples of the possible roles and relevancies that materiality might have within
learning processes, especially in design education. The key argument of this paper is that
pedagogical relationships go beyond the teacher and the curriculum, and that the agency
of materiality has a pedagogical effect. Thus, we propose that materiality teaches in its
own way, and the design of the learning setting has an important role.
One of the key elements in the learning setting is that the students find their material
experimentations meaningful. Laamanen and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen (2014, 150) in their
study on constraining an open-ended design task in the context of textile education
describe how the students experienced uncomfortable feelings related to crafting when
they had no end result or other clear goal in mind. The students taking part in the Design
Exploration and Experimentation course have not reported similar feelings; thus, we
believe that in our case the open-ended experimentation is conceived of as meaningful.
We propose that this is due to the fact that the students are expected to create an artefact
to be presented in the final exhibition. In this respect, we believe that even though the
timeline of the course is tight, the exhibition has a crucial role as it has acted as an
important driver for the individual processes.
During their learning processes, the students are in relation to other human
participants, that is students and teachers, as well as to the prescribed curricular contents
and assignments. In addition to these relationships, the students develop relations to the
nonhuman, wider material world. In our case, the most important material world consisted
of a variety of self-defined materials, such as beeswax, porcelain and wood. With the
above described case examples, we have demonstrated that matter can have an
unanticipated or unexpected contribution to the learning processes – and, as evident in
our case study, to the final artefacts.
In addition to the pedagogical agency of matter, we propose that physical environment
as part of the material world also has agency, thus creating a performative learning space.
We consider this space not ‘a static container into which teachers and students are
poured, or a backcloth against which action takes places, but a multiplicity that is
constantly being enacted by simultaneous practices-so-far’ (Fenwick et al., 2011, p. 11).
Hence, the performative learning space affects learning in its own right.
With this study, we want to challenge the current notions of learning and curriculum,
which often focus on predefined and prescribed learning outcomes with the emphasis on
specific subjects, contents, procedures or behaviours (Davis & Sumara, 2007; Osberg &
Biesta, 2008). We hope that with our study we have been able to offer insights for thinking
about learning through material sensibilities, that is, through becoming sensitive to diverse
material agencies within learning processes.
In this study, we have focused on the agencies particularly related to matter, space and
place. With such an understanding, learning becomes a more unpredictable and
180
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
experimental process, opening up to new, emergent possibilities beyond the already
known. Instead of contributing solely to transmitting knowledge and skills, the teacher’s
role then is to create conditions for the emergent and evolving learning – and to be
prepared to learn herself, alongside the students.
Acknowledgements: We thank all the DEE students, who kindly allowed their
diaries, drawings and written reflections to be examined in this study. We are
also grateful to Simo Puintila and Krista Kosonen for their valuable comments
that enabled us to better explicate the DEE learning environment. This
research was funded by the Academy of Finland (project numbers 266125 and
253589).
References
Alvesson, M. (2003). Methodology for close up studies – struggling with closeness and
closure. Higher Education, 46(2), 167–193.
Alvesson, M. (2009). At-home ethnography: Struggling with closeness and closure. In S.
Ybema, D. Yanow, H. Wels & F.H. Kamsteeg (Eds.), Organizational Ethnography:
Studying the complexity of Everyday Life (pp.156 –174). London: Sage.
Anning, A. (1997). Drawing Out Ideas: Graphicacy and Young Children. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education 7, 219-239.
Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant Matter: A political ecology of things. London: Duke University.
Davis, B. & Sumara, D. (2007). Complexity Science and Education: Reconceptualizing the
Teacher’s Role in Learning. Interchange, 38 (1), 53-67.
Dillon, P. & Howe, T. (2007). An Epistemology of Presence and Reconceptualisation in
Design Education. Interchange, Vol. 38/1, 69–88.
Fenwick, T.; Edwards, R.; Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging Approaches to Educational
Research. Tracing the sociomaterial. London: Routledge.
Fenwick, T. & Nerland, M. (2014). Introduction. Sociomaterial professional knowing, work
arrangements and responsibility. New times, new concepts? In Fenwick, T. & Erland, M.
(eds.) Reconceptualising Professional Learning. Sociomaterial knowledges, practices and
responsibilities. London: Routledge.
Gherardi, S. (2011). Organizational learning: The sociology of practice. In M. EasterbySmith and M.A. Lyles (eds.) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge
Management (2nd edn). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Gherardi, S. & Perrotta, M. (2013). Doing by Inventing the Way of Doing: Formativeness as
the Linkage of Meaning and Matter. In Carlile, Paul R.; Nicolini, Davide; Langley, Ann;
Tsoukas, Haridimos (eds.). How Matter Matters. Bjects, Artifacts and Materiality in
Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gherardi, S. & Stati, A. (2013). Learning and Knowing in Practice-based Studies. Surrey, UK:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Groth, C. & Mäkelä, M. (2014). The knowing body in material exploration. The 5th Art of
Research Conference, 26 – 27 November. Helsinki, Aalto University.
Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S. & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked
expertise: Professional and educational 23 perspectives. Advances in Learning and
Instruction Series. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
181
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
Halstead, N., Hirsch, E., & Okely, J. (2008). Knowing How to Know. Fieldwork and the
Ethnographic Present. New York: Bergham Books.
Holman Jones, S., Adams, T. E., & Ellis, C. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of Autoethnography.
Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Kosonen, K. & Mäkelä, M. (2012). Designing Platform for Exploring and Reflecting on
Creative Process. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 45, 227-238.
Laamanen, T-K. & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2014). Constraining an open-ended design
task by interpreting sources of inspiration. Art, Design & Communication in Higher
Education 13 (2), 135-156.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Löytönen, T. (forthcoming). Collaborative Inquiry in a Socially Shared Contextual Frame,
Striving Towards Sensible Knowledge Creation on Dance Education. Teachers College
Record.
MacDonald, D.l. & Gustafson, B. & Gentilini, S. (2007). Enhancing children’s drawing in
design technology planning and making. Research in Science & Technological Education
25 (1), 59-75.
McDonnell, J. (2011). Imposition of order: A comparison between design and fine art
practices. Design Studies, 32 (6), 557-572.
Mäkelä, M. (2003). Saveen piirtyviä muistoja. Subjektiivisen luomisprosessin ja sukupuolen
representaatioita. [Memories on Clay: Representations of Subjective Creation Process
and Gender] Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki.
Mäkelä, M. & Nimkulrat, N. (2011). Reflection and Documentation in Practiceled Design
Research. In Koskinen, I. & Härkäsalmi, T. & Mazé, R., & Matthews, B. & Lee, J.-J. (Eds.)
Making Design Matter!, Proceeding of The 4th Nordic Design Research Conference, 29 –
31 May 2011, NORDES, 120-128.
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice Theory, Work and Organization. An Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Nimkulrat, N. (2009). Paperness. Expressive material in textile art from artist’s viewpoint.
Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki.
Osberg, D & Biesta, G. (2008). The emergent curriculum: navigating a complex course
between unguided learning and planned enculturation. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
40 (3), 313-328.
Paavola, S & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor – An emergent
epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education 14, 537-557.
Pedgley, O. (2007). Capturing and analysing own design activity. Design Studies 28(5), 463483.
Pink, S. (2007). Doing Visual Ethnography (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Pink, S. (2009). Doing Sensory Ethnography. London: Sage.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one.
Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13.
Suad Nasir, N. & Cooks, J. (2009). Becoming a Hurdler: How Learning Settings Afford
Identities. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 40, 41-61.
Turpeinen, O. (2005). Merkityksellinen museoesine. Visuaalinen kriittisyys
kulttuurihistoriallisen museon näyttelysuunnittelussa. A meaningful museum object.
182
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Critical visuality in cultural history museum exhibitions. Helsinki: University of Art and
Design Helsinki.
Welch, M. & Barlex, D. & Sook Lim, L (2000). Sketching: Friend or Foe to the Novice
Designer? International Journal of Technology and Design Education 10, 125-148.
183
This page is intentionally left blank.
— Chapter 2. —
Design Thinking, Management
and Design Education
This page is intentionally left blank.
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product
Development For School Age Children
Aija FREIMANE
Art Academy of Latvia
aija.freimane@lma.lv
Abstract: Design thinking is determined as one of the must have abilities for
every profession in the XXI century. New product development is a prerogative of
professional designers and engineers, trained to use design thinking, design
research and new product development methods to solve problems, to create
solutions or to face challenges. Research testifies application of professional
designers’ design thinking and new product development training methods in
school age children informal education. Case study analyses problem based
design brief and sustainability personification assignment performance,
effectiveness of applied methods’, process and results in two audiences - 12-14
years old primary school age children and professional design students to find
out the effectiveness and applicability of design thinking, new product
development and design process teaching methods in dissimilar groups.
Results of the case study validate that professional designers’ design thinking,
new product development and design process training methods can be
successfully applied in primary school age education as creative problem solving
and design thinking methods to educate pupils. The paper proposes a question:
what are the future of professional design education and the role of professional
designers, when all professions will be trained to use design thinking as a critical
method?
Keywords: design thinking, design methods, school age children
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
AIJA FREIMANE
Introduction
This study has been driven by the concern to verify feasibility of professional design
training, design thinking and new product development methods effectiveness in
nonprofessional – school age children audience informal education. Could the best
practice of informal education be implemented in the general education of home
economics and technology curriculum as skill and crafts based learning process based on
design thinking and new product development? Could the training of school age children in
design be the possibility to shape knowledgeable user and design audience in the future?
Case study reflects and testifies design thinking and problem based new product
development methods in primary school age children informal education. It verifies
capability of children to innovate new products, as well as systemically perceive and
empirically experience design thinking. This paper questions design concepts as solutions
by school age children and design students performing the same briefs as the case studies.
Methodology
The paper reflects two action research design development case studies based on
design thinking, design process and design methods’ analysis. Action research design
development case studies were performed in years 2012-2015 as:
‘Sustainability personification assignment applying empirical experience’;
‘Problem based new product development’ assignment describing applied methods’
and process (Abbing & van Gessel, 2010).
Both identical case studies as design brief assignments were assigned in two audiences:
The brief ‘Sustainability personification assignment applying empirical experience’
was assigned to the 1st year design master students, whereas ‘Problem based new
product development’ brief was assigned to the 1st year design bachelor students
(age between 21-25 years). Briefs were assigned in the study process;
Primary school age children (age between 11-14 years) without special art and design
education. Both briefs were assigned at informal education during children summer
creativity workshops. Children in these workshops participate annually but for the
first time were doing design thinking and new product development assignments.
Design thinking and problem based design process were used in two design briefs. The
study reflects design process and designed results of both, completely dissimilar
audiences. Innovativeness and the use of technology in new product development by
children were correlated to professional design students and products designed by design
engineers.
Is design thinking a prerogative of design
professionals?
Design is an action - the process, plan and the result - a man-made object or service
(artefact). In design both the 'thinking' and 'doing' are important. If doing as a process of
planning and starting something new, is the design, and, design thinking as a curiosity of
188
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
people have been inherited (Cross, 2011, p. 3), then every day we create a number of
designs for daily and future activities. Planning is systemic thinking and acting process.
Design thinking as creation of personal experience (Lockwood, 2010), is empathetic and
human centered activity, based on co-designing and participation (Mootee, 2013, p. 32). It
forms us not only as human beings, but also creates a framework and system for our lives.
Current political-economic-social system has strengthened not only resource-intensive
production-consumption system but also created enormous poverty where 3.5 million of
the world’s poorest are as wealthy as the world's 67 richest people (Moreno , 2014).
Hence opposite to the competitiveness, pressure individualism and discrimination, design
thinking becomes as one of the must-have abilities for every profession in the XXI century.
Although design thinking is characterized as a set of human qualities and skills, which,
applied professionally, allows better and more strategically designing human-centered
products, services and strategies. Though design thinking as a professional designers’ term
has developed in the Western world, the basic principles of design thinking can be found in
the folklore of national cultures. Empathy and thinking of the consequences of one’s
action, not only in the short term but in the long term, are wisdom of many nations. Wellknown proverbs say: ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ and ‘Do what
you do, ponder tip’ - think about the consequences of your actions. These two examples
shows that empathy and human-centered principles as cultural and traditional values have
long been formulated before design thinking was formulated in the last century. Oral
histories of nations are evidence of an ancient practice which was forgotten in the era of
industrialization, urbanization and individualism. Renaissance of local and national
identities as new vernacular design contradicts to global unification. Nation, that is aware
of its cultural and spiritual values, is practicing it and teaching it to the younger generation,
is design thinking nation.
‘Design thinking develops creativity, sensitivity, refines and strengthens social ties’
(Mootee, 2013, p. 64). Curiosity, early manifestation of creativity, sensibility and
friendliness are natural learning and socialization process of a child. Children’s inborn
ability and desire to explore the world is ‘an action-oriented interdisciplinary 'learning by
doing approach' and challenging problem-solving activity’ (Mootee, 2013, p. 54). Design
thinking as cognition and expression of human, team spirit and empathy, has become a
term created by one profession as designer’s apriori skill and ability.
Problem-based new product development and
design process – the basis for an action research
methodology
The view, that ‘new product development is a prerogative of professional designers
and engineers, trained to use design thinking, design research and new product
development methods to solve problems, to create solutions or to face challenges’ (Cross,
2011), it is not correct. The statement defines that design thinking is capability of
professional designers. It contradicts to the view that design thinking as human and
cognitive activity is congenital. There are countless examples that new and innovative
products have been designed by developers without professional design education. It is
189
AIJA FREIMANE
explicit that new product development is not a prerogative of professional designers and
engineers.
New product development is described as a process by which new products are
brought to the market (Ulrich & Epinger, 2004). Product development is more driven by
business, than fulfill the needs of people. The primary goal of product development is
diversification of markets and creation of competitiveness. It is witnessed by the fact that
‘many international Management Programs have capitalized the value of design upon
potential business solutions and strategies’ (Wrigley & Bucolo, 2013).
New product development can be implemented in several ways:
As design process applying creative design thinking, idea generation, product concept
development, modeling and detailing;
Marketing analysis and market research.
The analysis of new product concepts developed by children and students
demonstrates that innovation also occur in the new product development if based on
human needs, not only business or market diversification. It is proven, that ‘Necessity is
the mother of invention’.
Although the simplest design process is described as a three-step system – ‘breaking
problem into pieces, putting the pieces together in a new way and testing to discover the
consequences of putting the new arrangement into practice ‘ (Jones, 1992, p. 63),
designers apply several design and social science methods in new product or service
development, creating solutions of strong or weak defined design problems (Buchanan,
1989). Design that solves the problem partially or incompletely is described as ill-defined,
tame or wicked problems (Rittel, 1972). ‘Wicked problems cannot be simulated in a
laboratory settings’ and fundamentally it is designed so that the problem description
‘correspond to a statement of a solution’ (Rittel, 1972). From the one side the wicked
problem brief leaves the space for creative design expression, from the other – it is opened
to the misleading interpretation.
Design process is prescribed into define, develop and deliver phases. In the first phase
design is specified, in the second - ideation and product development, and the third phase
is linked with product promotion to the market and user. Extensive product development
process outlines preliminary phase, design phase, embodiment and detailing phase and
implementation phase (Eger, Bonnema, Maarten, Lutters, & Van der Voort, 2013, p. 21).
The first two phases are described as a product development to design a model. Detailed
design brief is described by design process, limited to a specific goal of new product
development and identified with external conditions with which the design must be
compatible.
190
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Case studies: Design thinking and new product
development for school age children
Design thinking as empirical experience of sustainable
development – ‘Sustainability personification assignment
applying empirical experience’
Empirical experience assignment of sustainable development reflects sustainability
triple bottom line. Social, environmental and economic (The Economist, 2009) aspects
were supplemented with the political aspect as a powerful of forming global and local
system. Correlation of four complex factors was introduced in empathetic role play by
becoming representative of social, economic, environmental and political groups.
Design students and children where divided into 4 groups of 4-5 persons. The roles –
society, environmentalists, businessmen and politicians were appointed to the each group.
The society, representing social factor of the triple bottom line, was presented as local
community of three generations. Ecological aspects of the triple bottom line were
represented by the group of environmentalists; economy was represented by the group of
businessmen, and political decision making was represented by the group of politicians.
Every participant as an individual, becoming the representative of the group, was asked
to act according to the assigned group role. Businessmen had to visualize the preferred
world from the point of the most profitable ‘lord’ and global business development. The
business person had to think only about its main goal – to enhance profit. The group
representing the society visualizes and creates the world that best suit to the needs for at
least three generations. For this group it is important to fulfill social values, educational
opportunities, recreation and quality of life in balance of job opportunities. The group of
environmentalists visualizes and plans the world from the environmental protection and
ecological conservation aspects, by thinking how to keep unpolluted air and environment,
wild flora and fauna, and safeguarding natural capital. Those, who represent politicians,
visualize the world from the view point of political ideology, its aims, rules and sustained
system.
In the empathetic role-play assignment there was possible to identify the values of an
individual as a micro in relation to the group as a macro view point.
Results of ‘Sustainability personification assignment applying
empirical experience’ brief
Sustainable development personification assignment for four years led to the
conclusion that, both social and environmental activist groups and politician and
businessmen groups have common values, objectives, needs and feasible behavior that
unites these groups ideologically. The assignment affirms that the world in existing
sustainable development definition is assumed from two opposite poles. The
representatives of the society and environmental activists visualize and plan the future
from human – micro view point as ‘bottom-up’ perspective, the politicians and business
group representatives visualize and see people and ecology as resources for profit, using
macro or ‘top-down’ approach. Politicians and business people perceive sustainable
development as an opportunity to ‘get more’ from close political-economic ties as short
term benefit. Society and environmental activists recognize sustainable development as
191
AIJA FREIMANE
'sufficient' model led by empathy and altruism. These two opposite views are personalized
by adults, students and children. It is reflected in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Sustainable development personification; Design master students (age 25) of the Art
Academy of Latvia, 2012, assistant prof. A.Freimane
Exception of sustainable development personification was the only one reflected by
children group who created the world from principles of social entrepreneurship. They
believed that business should share the profit with people. It is reflected in Figure 2.
Figure 2 Sustainable development personification: 11-12 years old children, visualised in Children’s
Creativity camp, 2013, led by A.Freimane
By practicing sustainable development personification assignment, both, young
designers and children, understood that continual life quality and well-being depends on
balancing all interests, values and needs of involved parties. Interests and needs of the
dominator in short-term cannot be superior to long-term interests of the society.
192
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Sustainable development personification assignment enabled young people to
understand mutuality of political-economic and social-environmental aspects in the
formation of present and future sustainable development. Subsequently this assignment
should be performed in the real political and business audiences, asking them to visualize
sustainable development of a desired world and future from the point of view of society
and environmentalists by using empathy and design thinking approach.
‘Problem based new product development’
Design brief ‘Problem based new product development’:
Dental caries is breakdown of teeth. It is caused by demineralization of tooth hard
tissue as a result of bacterial fermentation of organic acids, accumulated on the tooth
surface exposure by produced food residues. When demineralization exceeds potency of
saliva and other factors of re-mineralization, dental caries is initiated. The study of US
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research in 2014, draw to a conclusion that
there are 92% percent of adults with caries in permanent teeth in the age group of 20-64
years, regardless of educational background (http://www.nidcr.nih.gov, 2014). It indicates
that diversity of products developed as a market diversification or the business goals
create the fluxion of products rather than solutions of problem - reducing causes of tooth
decay. Therefore there is a need to design a solution of increasing dental caries and
preventive oral hygiene.
The goal of problem based new product development was defined as wicked problem
design brief. External conditions were glossed in order to be able to analyze the work
progress. Both audiences, in the second - develop or design phase, were asked to think and
to act behind prescribed design brief and to include in the product development
technologies. External conditions had to be revealed for the sake of innovativeness.
The same brief was performed in two audiences, in groups of 3-4, using specifically
prescribed methods: expert interviews to become familiar with the sector; brainstorming
as part of creative design development and stimulates to produce many ideas as quickly as
possible (Jones, 1992). The methods did not include research of user needs. The
assignment was performed in five hours, followed by the product concept presentation.
In the first - 'define' or 'preliminary phase', children and students analyzed their
personal experiences and performed express telephone interviews with experts -dentists
or dental hygienists in order to learn about dental problems, causes that creates caries and
current opportunities to avoid them both preventively or medically. In the second - 'define'
or 'design phase' groups performed conceptualization of ideas and modulation of selected
product. Both audiences were encouraged to apply technologies in the new product
concept development process. Without this children and students designed product
concepts were more traditional. Although the wicked design brief leaves the space for
creative imagination, it does not encourage directly thinking outside of the box.
The results of children and student designed new product concepts are presented in
this paper as cases numbered 1-5. Since the children audience performed particular
assignment beforehand, they did not know anything about students designed new product
concepts. Unlike children, students, shortly before product concept presentations, got to
know children developed product concepts. It crucially changed the final performance of
the product case 5 that was inspired by children's futuristic nanotechnology in case 4.
193
AIJA FREIMANE
Results of ‘Problem based new product development’ brief
Case 1 (product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative
workshops organised by NGO ‘Creative partnership’, year 2014) – figure nr.3:
Scanner defines the level and composition of bacteria in the mouth, dental plaque and
formation of dental caries by the content of saliva and tooth. The scanner reports on the
necessity to visit dentist or hygienist timely and have an option to treat teeth with rays to
prevent and to reduce tooth cavity. The function of the scanner is powered by a renewable
energy and smart technologies.
Figure 3 Scanner, product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative workshops
organised by A.Freimane, year 2014
Case 2 (product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor students of the
Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015) – figures nr.4,5,6:
A scanner - pH calculator by quantum flow controls pH level of the mouth. The scanner
normalizes and balances the acid level after meals, snacks, sweets, coffee, sweetened
beverages and prevents tooth enamel decay during the day. Scanner conserves and
preserves an adequate microflora and oral microbial system.
The scanner - pH calculator is powered by ambient thermal energy, making the device
economic, human-centered and eco-friendly. Device is compatible with a smartphone and
special application, offering user-interactive and self-control option of the oral hygiene.
Figure 4 Scanner - pH calculator, product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor
students Emils and Ilva of the Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015, assitant prof. A.Freimane
Case 3 (product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative
workshops organised by NGO ‘Creative partnership’, year 2014) – figure nr.7:
194
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Toothbrush notifies the time with the built-in timer of how long the teeth are needed
to be brushed. Listening to the music ensures that teeth brushing process is fun and
excited. Toothbrush electronics is provided by rechargeable accumulator that collects
energy from the electrical devices in the surrounding.
Figure 5 Product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative workshops organised
by A.Freimane, year 2014
Case 4 (product developed by 9-year old children in the Children Creative workshops
organised by NGO ‘Creative partnership’, year 2014) – figure nr.8:
An inhaler is a product, (space or area) where 'good' bacteria that destroys the 'bad'
bacteria can be breathed in to prevent oral cavity and to provide oral hygiene. The flow of
‘good’ bacteria will be provided by nanotechnology. Small molecules can be inhaled for the
specific oral care purpose. In the model children visualized the fight between ‘good’ and
‘bad’ bacteria.
Solution of the problem was developed after oral hygiene products’ commercials on
the TV, where ‘good’ bacteria are fighting with the ‘bad’ ones. This topic is explored
already since 1960, for example, Colgate video adverts (https://www.youtube.com).
Figure 6 Bacteria fight, concept developed by 9-year old children in the Children Creative workshops
organised by A.Freimane, year 2014
Case 5 (product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor students of the
Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015) – figure 9, 10:
Dental decoration ensures oral pH stabilization by exploring nanotechnology.
195
AIJA FREIMANE
Figure 7 Dental decoration, product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor students
Elina, Signe and Didzis of the Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015, assistant prof. A.Freimane
A particular product concept was developed after group presentations inspiring by the
product concept in case 4. In a short time the tooth ornament was conceptualized with
nanotechnologies.
Wearable technologies as products developed by
professional designers and design engineers
New product development concepts of both audiences are related to use of
technology. Wearable technologies designed by professional designers and design
engineers present the measure of innovativeness in children's developed new product
concepts. Google glasses (http://www.healthcare.philips.com, 2014) and Google’s smart
contact lenses (Gownder, 2014) that monitor the blood glucose level (Figure No. 11, 12,
13) are the products characterized by high innovation and technology impact on human
healthcare. If children designed product concepts are developed further, the final artefact
would be close to the professional ones. It is possible to assure, that innovative new
product development process as conceptualization and modulation can be performed by
school age children.
Figure 8 Google glasses and Google’s smart contact lenses, 2014. Source: http://blogs.forrester.com;
http://www.healthcare.philips.com
Conclusion about applied methods and case study
results
Design thinking and new product development methods applied in the training of
professional designers can be implemented in the informal education process for training
non-professionals i.e. school age children.
196
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
The study confirms that children are able to create new and innovative product
concepts and to understand the systemic approach to design thinking. There were no
sharp differences between children's and student-designed solutions performing the same
design briefs.
Both audiences were able to perceive assignments, to apply assigned methods and to
innovate with no significant differences. However, school-age children in the work process
were more playful, opened and futuristic. They perceived the task without tension of being
evaluated or assessed. The new product development process of children is characterized
by experimentation and adoption of mistakes. In contrary, students thought more about
appropriate result and how the result will look like. Most probably students’ creativity was
limited by sense of being assessed as the new product development assignment was
performed in the study process.
In both audiences design thinking and new product development methods were
combined with creative thinking methods. Discussions were important in the working
process to create informal atmosphere, playfulness, a personal and empathic approach by
asking questions e.g. how the product will be used, what kind of feelings, emotions and
experiences it should create, what problem the product solves. For personalization of
children design thinking acting in the other`s role was a moment of natural imagination
and role-playing. Co-working and collective motivation in children’s auditorium was
natural, common and sincere.
Design thinking and new product development methods can diversify the curriculum of
informal school age children education. As informal education is much more flexible, there
is only professional design initiative needed to start design thinking and new product
development training modules.
The curriculum of formal or general educational is determined by the governmental
bodies. National Centre for Education is responsible for state general education standards
as well as interest-related education, including performing arts and technical leisure time
education as ‘formation of national identity and national awareness, maintenance and
inheritance of traditions and cultural values, creative self-expression, talent and selfdevelopment, socialization and improvement of knowledge and skills acquired in formal
education’ (http://visc.gov.lv/en, 2015). However, since the design historically is close to
the arts and crafts movement, its implementation into ‘home economics and technology’
standard would be meaningful. Learning of handicrafts and crafts techniques as basic
product modelling skills could be trained on the basis of design thinking as solving
problems, creating solutions or facing challenges. In such way schools would help to
educate a knowledgeable design audience and user.
The study reflects that design thinking is not only the prerogative of designers. Design
thinking can be successfully practiced by school-age children. The innovation process
happens when the new product development is based on finding problem solutions or
fulfilling human needs, not only on business or market diversification goals, even in the
school-age children audience. Natural creativity, curiosity, openness to the new and the
ability to work together is what allows children to experience design thinking and create
innovative solutions close to professional ones.
The paradigm shift of thinking and action is needed to increase innovativeness capacity
of the young generation and to sustain coherent planning system. If the new generation
were educated in design thinking now, in 20-30 years it would be possible to assess impact
197
AIJA FREIMANE
of design thinking on the society, business and politics towards more sustainable socioeconomic model.
The study confirms that wicked problem design brief, is also incomplete, and leaves the
space for interpretation and creative expression. For better results, external factors should
be clearly articulated in the formulation of design brief. Therefore wicked problem new
product development brief is not the best one in the training of non-professionals or
school-age children.
Results of the case study validates that professional designers’ design thinking, new
product development and design process training methods can be successfully applied in
primary school age education as creative problem solving method to educate pupils in
design. It is necessary to exercise empathy, systemic thinking, behaving according to the
purpose, visual imagery and associative thinking skills, performance modeling, as well as
skills of crafting, future casting and the impact of technology in order to democratize
design thinking.
A good practice of design democratization experience in informal education should be
implemented in standards of formal or general education. By educating new generation in
design thinking we shape a future society as we see it today. However, it should be
researched further whether the present design thinking methods will reach the goals and
needs of future society. What are the future of professional design education and the role
of professional designers, when all professions will be trained to use design thinking as a
critical method?
Design thinking, design research and new product development methods as tools to
solve problems, to create solutions or to face challenges could be included in a paradigm
shift of educational and behavioural system. Various culture and nation wisdom
accumulated for centuries can be the basis for design thinking and responsible user
education in the XXI century.
References
Abbing, E. R., & van Gessel, C. (2010). Brand-Drivven Innovation. In T. Lockwood, Design
Thinking (pp. 131-143). New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Buchanan, R. (1989). Declaration by Design: Rhetoric, Argument and Demonstration in
design Practice. In V. Margolin, design Discourse. History, Theory, Criticism (pp. 91-109).
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking. Oxford: Berg.
Eger, A., Bonnema, Maarten, Lutters, E., & Van der Voort, M. (2013). Product Design. The
Hague: eleven, international publishing.
Gownder, J. (2014, Januar 17). http://blogs.forrester.com. Retrieved from
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables:
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables
http://visc.gov.lv/en. (2015, January 28). Retrieved from http://visc.gov.lv/en/hobby/:
http://visc.gov.lv
198
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
http://www.healthcare.philips.com. (2014). Retrieved from
http://www.healthcare.philips.com/main/about/future-of-healthcare/:
http://www.healthcare.philips.com
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov. (2014, September 5). Retrieved from
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/DataStatistics/FindDataByTopic/DentalCaries/DentalCariesAd
ults20to64.htm: http://www.nidcr.nih.gov
https://www.youtube.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFydzXFcA-Y: https://www.youtube.com
Jones, J. C. (1992). Design methods. New York: John Wley&Sons, inc.
Lockwood, T. (2010). Design Thinking. New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Mootee, I. (2013). Design Thinking for Strategic Innovation. New Jersey: Wiley.
Moreno , K. (2014. gada 3. March). http://www.forbes.com. Ielādēts no
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/
Rittel, H. (1972). On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the first and second generation.
Bedriftsokonomen, 390-396.
The Economist. (2009, November 17). Triple bottom line. It consists of three ps: profit,
people, planet. The Economist, p. http://www.economist.com/node/14301663.
Ulrich, K., & Epinger, S. (2004). Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wrigley, C., & Bucolo, S. (2013). Teaching New Product Development to Design Led
Innovation. DRS//CUMULUS 2013, 2nd International Conference for Design Education
Researchers (pp. 1843-1855). Oslo: DRS//Cumulus.
199
From Design Thinking to Art Thinking
Jessica JACOBS
Columbia College Chicago
jjacobs@colum.edu
Abstract: As the problem-solving methodology of design thinking has gained
legitimacy in business and educational environments, I suggest we also think
about incorporating ‘art thinking’ into approaches in the classroom and the
workplace. To study what skills and techniques can be useful in other disciplines,
we can first review the stages of the creative process which are centered around
preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. Within those stages, we
can tease out specific elements unique to the artistic process that can be
particularly useful, including research and planning, problem creation, intuition,
frameworks, production, switching between modes of thinking, critique and
acceptance of failure and ambiguity. Thinking about incorporating these
elements and strategies in business environments and other disciplines can
expand possibilities for creativity and innovation.
Keywords: design thinking, creativity, management, business, paradigm
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Introduction
Recent studies indicate that employers are increasingly concerned about a perceived
lack of creativity in the workplace. In an American Association of Colleges & Universities
survey (2013) of employers, 92% felt that innovation is essential to their company’s
continued success, and 71% felt that more curricular emphasis should be placed on
innovation and creativity (p. 4). According to an IBM study (2010) of CEOs, more than 60%
said that the top quality that they were looking for in employees is creativity. The
movement to emphasize creative skills is strong enough that schools such as Buffalo State
College and Eastern Kentucky University are offering more courses and degrees in creative
studies (Pappano, 2014). As hiring managers are more focused on creativity and
innovation, we should continually look for ways to expand these approaches to all
curricula in our varied educational disciplines and environments.
With the problem-solving methodology of design thinking being implemented in some
business and educational environments, I suggest we also think about incorporating art
thinking into approaches in the classroom and the workplace. The classic stereotype of the
artist is an undisciplined, intoxicated savant who works only when the muse strikes. On the
contrary, an analysis of the work processes of artists demonstrates that most are highly
disciplined workers with a unique ability to create and focus on problems and develop
successful solutions. Art thinking overlaps with design thinking in several areas, but has a
special emphasis on intuition, problem creation, metacognition, critique, and reflection.
The cognitive skills of artists can be framed within a methodology that can be successfully
utilized in non-art disciplines and environments.
Current discourses in design thinking
While design thinking has been popularized in business articles and books, its definition
lacks consensus. The worlds of academia and business often don’t connect on this issue as
well (Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla, & Çetinkaya, 2013, p. 122). Design thinking related to
a designer’s process has been discussed in academic circles for decades while design
thinking as applied to management has only been discussed for about fifteen years (Hassi
& Laakso, 2011, p. 3). In their comprehensive review (2013) on the literature to date on
design thinking, Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla and Çetinkaya posited that design thinking
means different things in different contexts, often divided by theory (academia) and
practice (management) (p. 123). Also, there are different ways to describe the process and
its components, but they are not necessarily in conflict. Design thinking can be thought to
embody two categories of distinction: ‘designerly way of thinking’ and ‘design thinking’
(Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013, p. 122). The authors labeled ‘designerly thinking’ as the
more academic discussion of the professional designer’s practice and non-verbal
processes. The second category of ‘design thinking’ takes place in mainstream
management literature outside a design context. It is basically a simplified version of the
‘designerly way of thinking’ (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013, p. 123). Within the
academic or ‘designerly way of knowing’ discussion, the authors identified five subdiscourses of theory that examine designers and designerly thinking as the creation of
artifacts, reflexive practice, problem-solving activity, way of reasoning/making sense of
things, and creation of meaning (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013, p. 124).
201
AIJA FREIMANE
Design thinking practices utilize activities such as iterating, visualizing, thinking by
doing, using a human-centered approach, using convergent and divergent modes of
thinking, and collaboration (Hassi & Laakso, 2011, p. 5). The thinking styles of design
thinking include abductive reasoning, reflective reframing, utilizing a holistic view of the
problem, and practicing integrative thinking (Hassi & Laakso, 2011, p. 6). Finally, the
mentality or mindset of the design thinking framework includes being experimental,
tolerant of ambiguity, optimistic and future-oriented (Hassi & Laakso, 2011, p. 6).
From the management perspective, the design thinking paradigm coalesced with the
publication of Peter Rowe’s Design Thinking in 1987 and was subsequently refined and
popularized through the rise of IDEO and Tim Brown’s article on design thinking published
in the Harvard Business Review in 2008. Since that time, the discussion of design thinking
metholodies and how they can be applied to management has grown steadily. In this
paradigm, design thinking is a problem-solving methodology for developing innovative
solutions. Innovation is ‘the result of hard work augmented by a creative human-centered
discovery process and followed by iterative cycles of prototyping, testing, and refinement’
(Brown, 2008, p. 89).
In The Design of Business, Roger Martin helped to further clarify the design thinking
process and approach as applied to management. Martin’s premise is that design thinking
attempts to bridge the gap between purely analytical and intuitive thinking. It is meant to
help refine and focus knowledge while still generating innovation (Martin, 2009, p. 24).
‘Design thinking is the application of integrative thinking to the task of resolving the
conflict between reliability and validity, between exploitation and exploration, and
between analytical thinking and intuitive thinking. Both ways of thinking require a balance
of mastery and originality’ (Martin, 2009, p. 166).
As some non-design disciplines have become familiar with the design thinking
metholodogy, applying it in business and in classrooms, I suggest we broaden our view to
include art thinking. Artists and designers can see patterns in complex information (such as
‘big data’) and connect it to the human experience. John Maeda spoke of this inclusion of
artists when he said:
I am encouraged by the potential that artists and designers have to make real changes
in the world. Artists and designers have a powerful role in this expansive universe—to
take all the complexity and make sense of it on a human scale. (Martin, 2009, p. 153)
Maeda takes care to include artists in the pattern seers. How can an artist’s creative
process augment the design thinking metholodogy? We can begin this inquiry with a
review the analyses on the creative processes of artists.
Creative process analysis
There has been considerable investigation of the creative process of artists, notably
The Art of Thought by Graham Wallas (1926), Applied Imagination by Alex Osborn (1963),
The Universal Traveler by Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall (1974), Notebooks of the Mind by
Vera John-Steiner (1985), Creating Minds by Howard Gardner (1993), Creativity by Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi (1996), and more recently, The Rise by Sarah Lewis (2014). Most of these
inquiries focus on elucidating working models of the creative process which have many
similarities to the design process.
202
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Defining stages
Graham Wallas was one of the first to describe the stages of the creative process which
he labeled preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification (Wallas, 1926).
Throughout these stages, he highlights the interaction between rational thought and the
imaginative subconsious.
In the preparation stage of the process, artists are developing the skills and experiences
that will inform their ideation. In addition to developing technical skills, successful artists
hone their conceptual skills while immersing themselves in the domain of both their field
and the world around them. ‘Artists agree that a painter cannot make a creative
contribution without looking, and looking, and looking at previous art, and without
knowing what other artists and critics consider good and bad art’ (Cziksentmihaly, 1996, p.
47). In addition, many artists undertake extensive research, either as part of an ongoing
practice or deducated to a specific project.
In the incubation stage, artists begin to synthesize their research and domain
knowledge. As artists develop ideas, they undertake ‘efforts at selection, condensation,
and interpretation—which characterize the work of visually talented individuals as they
link their impressions into a landscape’ (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 24). Moments of inspiration
are often described in magical, mysterious terms; however, they are actually the product
of creating the space to allow the mind to make connections between various inputs.
In the illumination stage of the process, conceptual development coalesces for the
artist as he or she synthesizes diverse source material to make connections and develop
concepts. The artist calls upon domain knowledge and an inner catalog of references to
build a new understanding. Memory, experience, emotion and creative effort interact as a
new idea is developed (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 73). Edward Weston wrote eloquently of this
process in his own work:
One does not think during creative work, any more than one thinks when driving a car.
But one has a background of years – learning, unlearning, success, failure, dreaming,
thinking, experience, all this – then the moment of creation, the focusing of all into the
moment. So I can make 'without thought,' fifteen carefully considered negatives, one
every fifteen minutes, given material with as many possibilities. But there is all the eyes
have seen in this life to influence me. (Fondiller, 1980, p. 280)
Finally, in the verification stage of Wallas’ process, an artist must put his or her work
out into the world. Artist John Baldessari referenced this stage when he said, ‘Art comes
out of failure. You have to try things out. You can’t sit around, terrified of being incorrect,
saying, ‘I won’t do anything until I do a masterpiece’ ‘ (Thornton, 2008, p. 52).
In his 1953 book Applied Imagination, Alex Osborn elaborated on Wallas’ four stages by
adding an orientation stage at the beginning as well as stages for analysis and ideation. The
orientation stage is to become aware of the problem and highlight it. Osborn’s additional
analysis stage allows for assessing existing material to determine useful information.
Osborn ends with evaluation, which is quite similar to Wallas’ verification stage. Thus, his
seven stages include orientation, preparation, analysis, ideation, incubation, synthesis and
evalution (Osborn, 1953).
As outlined in The Universal Traveler, Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall’s model is similar to
the previous models but takes it a step further by creating a prescriptive process that can
be applied as a process to other problems and disciplines. In their model, the preparation
203
AIJA FREIMANE
phase becomes ‘Accept the situation (as a challenge)’ and then ‘Analyze (to discover the
‘world of the problem’)’. The incubation phase asks users to ‘Define (the main issues and
goals)’. The illumuniation phase becomes ‘Ideate (to generate options)’, ‘Select (to choose
among options)’ and ‘Implement (to give physical form to the idea)’. As in the previous
models, the evaluation phase is also described as ‘Evaluate (to review and plan again)’
(Koberg & Bagnall, 1974).
In Notebooks of the Mind (1985), John-Steiner’s research used first-hand interviews
with artists to develop a list of common traits and approaches to the creative process. In
her analysis, she is less prescriptive than Koberg and Bagnall. Instead, she described two
broad stages. The first stage is more intuitive and instinctual in which the artist is just
getting ideas out on paper. The second stage is one of reflection, categorization, analysis
and interpretation (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 23). In some ways, this reflects the ‘leftbrain/right-brain’ approach to the creative process.
In Creativity (1996), Czikszentmihalyi summarizes the steps of the creative process
using similar terminology of preparation, incubation, insight and evaluation. Then he adds
a fifth step of elaboration—the translation of the idea into reality, where the artists does
the work. He makes a key distinction that not all of these stages occur in order, and some
will overlap. In Czikszentmihalyi’s description, the creative process has traditionally been
described as taking five steps: preparation, incubation, insight, evaluation, and elaboration
(Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 78-79).
In The Rise, Sarah Lewis (2014) takes a more philosophical approach to the creative
process, focusing on individual stories of passion, naïveté, failure, and accepting the
unknown. Lewis emphasizes the work ethic involved in an ongoing creative practice. Artists
are comfortable with the constant push forward and the lifelong struggle towards a further
goal (Lewis, 2014, p. 23). Lewis also examines how artists sometimes strategically take a
naïve stance towards their work. Artists consciously try to adopt the mindset of the
amateur in order to see things fresh and avoid getting locked into a routine (Lewis, 2014,
p. 151).
Common themes run through these analyses, specifically the idea that the creative act
is a constant interplay between process and product. In the creative process, the stages
are not finite—one can expect interplay between all of them. Art thinking is a multi-stage
process that begins with bursts and fits of ideas and ends with analysis, interpretation and
communication of a cohesive whole.
From design thinking to art thinking
In recent years, we have seen a increasing pedagogical emphasis on creativity and its
elevation to a level equal to or beyond critical thinking in its importance in learning
outcomes. In 2001, Bloom’s taxonomy was revised to situate ‘create’ as the highest of
higher-order learning skills (Krathwohl, 2002, p. 215). The need for creative thinking has
also been championed in popularized business best-sellers such as Daniel Pink’s A Whole
New Mind in which he states that the ‘MFA is the new MBA’ (Pink, 2005, p. 74). There are
clear overlaps in the creative processes of both designers and artists. If we use a working
model of design thinking as formulation (understanding and observation), representation
(definition), moving (ideation and prototyping), evaluating (testing) and managing, we can
204
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
observe the close parallels with the artistic process of preparation, ideation, illumination,
implementation and evaluation.
How might we propose ways in which the process components of artistic thinking can
be extrapolated into strategies applicable in other disciplines? If we take the same
approach as efforts to systematize design thinking processes, we can strategize about ways
to bring the creative processes of artists, or art thinking, into other environments. Beyond
the variations of describing the process, there are common components within each phase
that deserve special attention. For both design and art processes, there is a strong
emphasis on immersion, iteration and reframing of the problem. I propose that art
thinking doesn’t necessarily diverge from design thinking, but the process lingers at a few
key stages in the process, including research, problem creation/analysis, intuitive ideation,
making descriptive to depictive analogies, switching between modes of thinking (metacognition), critique, failure and reflection.
Preparation stage
Within the various descriptions of the preparation stage (which includes orientation,
incubation, definition and analysis), the elements of research, planning, and problem
creation can be singled out as possessing transferrable potential to other disciplines.
RESEARCH AND PLANNING
Both Czikszentmihalyi (1996) and Gardner (1993) emphasize the importance of
understanding the domain in which one is operating. The artist comes to know their own
domain and become expert with it, both in its traditions and areas for possible problems or
new explorations. Artists are then willing to cast out in new directions while less creative
types are content to adhere to what is already known (Gardner, 1993, p. 33). Diving deeply
into a new domain is essential for truly creative growth and innovation. Artists are
continually scaffolding onto previous art forms and paradigms of artmaking (Turner, 2006,
p. 19).
Design thinking incorporates this domain immersion as well. From the management
perspective, Brown (2009) calls this this inspiration phase, while from the academic
perspective, Dorst (2004) labels it the formulation phase. Research is a standard of
learning to thinking critically within a discipline and immersion, and planning is a key
component of the design process. However, artists are more likely than designers to linger
in this phase, thinking about the domain and the problem before jumping to the solution
(Cross, Dorst, & and Roozenburg, 1992, p. 8). Applying art thinking to the research process
can call for less goal-oriented work and more room to explore paths that might not lead to
fruition. It can also allow for different methods of recording research, such as visual
notetaking, scrapbooking, online journaling or blogging. In an educational or business
environment, a student or worker could be allowed to spend time in this stage to assess
what information is valuable and worth pursuing, an important component of learning to
think critically and creatively.
PROBLEM CREATING
The designer’s ability to continually frame and reframe a problem is a central
component of the design process and design thinking (Dorst, 2004, p. 133). While
designers search for new problems, the search is usually within the context of the design
205
AIJA FREIMANE
brief. Artists, on the other hand, are unique in their driving force of self-generating their
‘problems’ (Cross, 2001, p. 5).
Research indicates that designers jump quickly into developing a solution without
examining the problem thoroughly. In fact, it may be that the problem or proposal needs
to be reframed (Cross, 2001, p. 8). Studies also demonstrate that designers generate more
varied solutions when the problem is precisely defined. So while a designer’s tendencies
are to immediately begin iterating and developing solutions, they may be better off
examining the problem further before moving into the solution phase of the process
(Cross, 2001, p. 9).
Unlike design thinking, the artist is more comfortable creating and reframing the
original problem and less focused on a solution (Cross, 2001, p. 5). This can be valuable
when inventive thought is needed. Artists are adept at creating challenges for themselves,
asking new questions of their work and applying new constraints to it. Rather than
immediately focus on solving a problem as quickly as possible (which can often lead to
traditional, non-innovative solutions), art thinking can encourage people to take the time
to think more deeply about the problem at hand. Artist Chuck Close said:
See, I think our whole society is much too problem-solving oriented. It is far more
interesting to [participate in] ‘problem creation’—it’s more interesting than problem
solving. You know, ask yourself an interesting enough question and your attempt to
find a tailor-made solution to that question will push you to a place where, pretty soon,
you’ll find yourself all by your lonesome—which I think is a more interesting place to
be. (Fig, 2009, p. 43)
Gardner notes that cognitive researchers have described creative individuals as those
who ‘identify and solution ‘spaces’ that appear promising; search within these spaces for
approaches appropriate to the problem at hand and for leads that may pay off; evaluate
alternative solutions to problems; deploy resources of energy and time to advance their
program of investigation in an efficient manner; and determine when to probe further and
when to cut losses and move on, and more generally, reflect on their own creating
processes’ (Gardner, 1993, p. 22). Along the same lines, both John-Steiner (1985) and
Lewis (2014) discuss the visual thinking process of artists and how artists use it to generate
challenges and goals for their work. ‘Reframing our projects as a problem to solve happens
through creating a series of amended pictures. This inner pictorial process helps us adjust
our goals. It occurs not just with artistic practice, but also through visual thinking’ (Lewis,
2014, p. 189). Being open to a new approach to viewing and constructing a problem is a
transferrable skill to a variety of disciplines and business applications which can lead to
increased creativity and innovation.
Ideation stage
Following the preparation stage, the ideation stage includes intuition, making
connections, association, holistic thinking, conceptualizing, developing frameworks, and
switching between modes of thinking. When assessing strategies that may be easily
transferrable, we can focus on intuition and conceptualization using analogical thinking.
206
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
I NTUITION
The ideation stage is the area that people most associate with artistic thought and how
it can be used to generate creative ideas. Most successful artists are in touch with their
intuition. Ideas don’t always come from a brief or an assignment, but they spring internally
from combined experiences and domain knowledge. While one may think of creatives as
having an ‘aha!’ moment, it is more often the case that they are making connections and
associations between embedded knowledge. In fact, the idea of a creative leap is better
described as a key moment of bridging between problem and solution (Cross, 2001, p. 10).
This bridge also be thought of as a two-stage process with an initial intuitive, emotive
phase as well as a more analytical, iterative second phase (John-Steiner, 1985). In other
discipline settings, we should allow for these stages and respect that not everything that
arises from these processes will lead to fruition. Techniques and strategies can be
employed to foster intuitive and associative thinking. Projects should be facilitated in a
way that allows for increased room for exploration prior to evaluation.
Sketching is a means of tapping into intuition and is an area that can be further
explored in other fields and disciplines, even in business and science. Artists use the
process of sketching to refine existing ideas and develop new ideas, helping them to make
connections and relationships that are otherwise not evident verbally or through other
explorations (Fish & Scrivener, 1990, p. 118). In creating a body-to-mind connection,
sketches allow the artist to translate descriptive information into depiction. These
depictions can then be analyzed at a higher cognitive level and lead to more depictions.
‘This descriptive-to-depictive translation process is a one-to-many mapping instrinsic to
inventive thought’ (Fish & Scrivener, 1990, p. 118).
/ NEW LANGUAGES
With their skill in translating abstract ideas and forms into concrete communications,
artists give shape to how we view the world (Turner, 2006, p. 5). As the goal of many
artists is to probe the nature of the human condition, they are continually translating their
ideas to metaphor and analogy in order to communicate their ideas or ‘problems’. Our
most successful artists often develop new symbol systems or languages of expression
(Gardner, 1993). While designers also develop symbol systems and work in metaphor, this
is a particular point of emphasis for artists. As applied to other disciplines, it may be
worthwhile to dive deeper within this phase of ideation. The act of mapping of knowledge
from one domain to another can be systematized as a strategy that can be central to
innovative developments in business and entrepreneurship as well (Ward, 2004, p. 174).
In his article ‘The Associative Basis of the Creative Process’, Mednick (1962) focuses on
the ideation and illumination stages of the creative process and posits that ideas take
shape through associative processes. He outlines three ways of achieving a creative
solution including serendipity (in which the contiguous, sometimes accidental appearance
of stimuli which elicit these associative elements), similarity (in which the similarity of the
associative elements or the similarity of the stimuli elicits these associative elements), and
mediation (the means of bringing the associative elements into contiguity with each other
along with the prevalent use of symbols) (p. 221-222). Like John-Steiner, Mednick’s
emphasis is on the process by which disparate elements become connected in moments of
creative enlightenment. These associative processes can be taught and fostered in other
disciplines as well.
TRANSLATING ABSTRACTION
207
AIJA FREIMANE
Illumination stage
Following the developments of the incubation stage, there is an illumination stage of
the creative process where the artist has an insight, refines his or her concept, takes action
and categorizes potential solutions. When applied to other disciplines, it can be especially
valuable to focus on prolific production, meta-cognition and flow.
PROLIFIC PRODUCTION
As with design thinking, the illumination stage of art thinking allows for prototyping
and iterating ideas. This can be useful in other disciplines, fostering the acceptance of
failure as an option that may in fact lead to better solutions. In studying the working
process of successful artists, a continual theme is constant, routine, and prolific
production, sometimes without a finite goal. With that production must come a healthy
acceptance of failure. Not every piece will be successful, but it will lead to another piece
that might move closer to the goal of solving the problem that the artist created.
Prolifically creative people have been shown to produce more bad works that are not
revered. Their output is greater overall, producing more works of greater quality as well as
works of lesser quality (Gardner, 1993, p. 27). Within other disciplines, we might allow for
more opportunities for this kind of prolific production.
& META - COGNITION
All studies of the creative process highlights the artist’s ability to move between
different modes of thinking within a given situation. The creative mind can quickly switch
between modalities of thought such as visual, verbal and aural (John-Steiner, 1985, p. ix).
Artists use different types of mental abilities to be creative and generate ideas and then to
refine and execute those ideas (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 213). Designers also shift often
and rapidly between different modes of activity and thinking during creative periods
(Cross, 2001, p. 13). ‘Six out of a total of eight times a novel design decision was made, we
found the subject alternating between these three activity modes (examining-drawingthinking) in rapid succession’ (Cross, 2001, p. 13). In addition, strategically taking a naïve
stance is an important mode for artists that can be useful in other disciplines. Artists
consciously try to adopt the mindset of the amateur in order to see things fresh and avoid
becoming locked into a routine (Lewis, 2014, p. 151). In other disciplines, we should
structure projects to allow for multiple modes of thinking that are by various turns lateral,
strategic, holistic, creative, reflective, reactive, analytical, and naïve.
Embedded within these different stances and modes of thinking is the ability to view
one’s own work in a meta-cognitive fashion. This is a skill of designers, but it is especially
acute for artists as their problems are self-generated and can only be assessed against the
artist’s conception of the problem. Through meta-cognitive thinking, the artist has
knowledge and control over his or her cognitive processes. He or she must constantly be
aware of what is known and unknown while developing a strategy for further inquiry.
Rather than continually focusing on a solution (as a designer might), the artist has the
incentive to reflect on the problem for a more prolonged period of time.
MODES OF THINKING
F LOW
Czikszentmihalyi has written extensively on the ideal state of ‘flow’ for artistic creation.
‘The optimal experience is what I have called flow, because many of the respondents
208
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
described the feeling when things were going well as an almost automatic, effortless, yet
highly focused state of consciousness’ (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 110). This state is
achieved by finding an optimal balance of familiarity and expertise with challenge and the
unknown. Not only are artists and others more productive in these states of flow, they are
happier while performing their work. To achieve the proper level of challenge, artists are
comfortable with pushing themselves to this ‘edge’ of the unknown, or just beyond what is
comfortable in order to generate new ideas (Austin & Devin, 2003, p. 123). A track for
future research might be to explore how other disciplines or business environments be
more cognizant and encouraging of these creative flow states.
Implementation stage
The implementation stage involves synthesis, adjustment, and further learning,
refinement and interpretation. When thinking about valuable new applications to other
fields, we can focus on an acceptance of ambiguity and failure.
AMBIGUITY
An important difference between artists and management models is that artists are
generally more comfortable with ambiguity. This is something that can be useful
throughout the developmental stages in the classroom and increasingly data-driven
business environments. Indeed, Loevinger’s most mature stage of ego development is a
tolerance for ambiguity (Loevinger, 1987). Both designers and artists are comfortable with
ambiguity, which can be evident in the sketching process. In writing about Goel’s work on
designers’ processes of conceptual transformations, Cross (2001) notes the ambiguity
inherent in sketches as a positive feature of sketching as a tool (p. 11).
When one is immersed in the development of ideas and concepts, there are some
things that cannot be known. Without a client to serve or a finite ‘problem’ to solve, artists
may be more tolerant of ambiguous solutions and non-productive explorations. Becoming
comfortable with that reality is a skill that will translate to other disciplines and in the
workplace. Students who are uncomfortable with this are often reluctant to move forward
and test an idea, restricting their capacity for learning. In a business setting, a company
may be too late to market with a possible innovation because their tolerance for ambiguity
was too low, making them risk-averse to an extent that it hinders their growth. On the
contrary, artists are more tolerant of ambiguity which allows them step back and make
connections between and assessments of ideas (Lewis, 2014, p. 183).
FAILURE
Another key area in which the creative process of artists can prove valuable in other
fields is the acceptance of failure. As an integral part of their process, artists are
accustomed to trying an idea and failing. One doesn’t know how the problem he or she
created can be solved, so trial and error is vital. As Gardner (1993) demonstrated, great
artists produce a prolific amount of good work as well as bad work (p. 27). While designers
are comfortable with iteration and failure within the context of the larger project or design
brief, artists operate in an uncertain and limited marketplace, often attempting problems
and solutions for which there is no audience or acceptance. ‘In this pursuit there are no
guarantees or even reliable guides; the creator must trust his or her own intution and must
be braced for repeated and unrequited failures’ (Gardner, 1993, p. 34).
209
AIJA FREIMANE
Recent research shows that an embrace of failure and the growth mindset is the key to
growing and innovating. In a fixed mindset, the student or worker believes that talent is
innate, and failure such as getting a bad grade is to be avoided. This failure represents an
insurmountable setback that means one is not talented enough. On the other hand, with a
growth mindset, the only failure is not growing and fulfilling your potential. Those that
exhibit the growth mindset are more likely to improve their performance over time
(Dweck, 2006).
Evaluation stage
The evaluation stage involves critique, failure, adjustment, verification, adjustment,
evaluation and reflection. When translating this to other environments, it can be most
useful to implement more critique and reflection.
C RITIQUE
Perhaps the most important component of the creative process that is sorely needed in
other fields is the power of the critique. This applies to both giving criticism and receiving
criticism. Artists work in solitary modes but then seek feedback and collaboration. Through
critiques or collaborative circles, artists are trained in seeking feedback on their work in
progress (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 105). Critiques help artists learn to receive all different
types of feedback, figuring out what to accept and what to reject. As artists listen and
respond to opinions, they build their own internal sense of what guides them and how to
grow (Lewis, 2014, p. 186).
In the ideal setting, the critique serves as a valuable tool within the continuity of an
artist’s practice (Buster & Crawford, 2009). Research indicates that challenging criticism
and spirited debate stimulate creativity and lead to more innovative solutions (Nemeth,
Personnaz, Personnaz, & Goncalo, 2004). The critique functions as a collaborative tool to
test ideas, helping an artist to refine a concept and determine execution. Through critique,
artists learn to articulate and express concepts, test new ideas, receive feedback, and
iterate again. ‘Many of us need to rebuild a safe place where we can display our work to a
small group of trusted colleagues, get feedback, and refine…or abandon as needed’
(Burkus, 2014). Art critiques are different from design critiques in that the conversation is
so closely tied to the artist’s internally driven intentions rather than an external client
brief.
Related to the critique and potential for failure, it is important for people to feel safe in
these environments. Having safe spaces to take risks and fail are important for innovation.
Ill-timed or negative feedback could send things awry (Lewis, 2014, p. 49). Critiques in the
classroom and workplace must be constructed and taught with care and respect. In
addition, working as part of a group requires a strong sense of self, strong enough to be
able to be selfless and see the group’s needs as greater than your own. Artists who work
collaboratively must work this way on a daily basis in order to develop a functional product
(Austin & Devin, 2003, p. 127).
REFLECTION
Creatives are continually reflecting back on what they are producing and using those
assessments to move forward with their work. This is often built into their daily working
process and speaks to the dialogue between process and product (John-Steiner, 1985, p.
210
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
5). As designers are continually framing and reframing their work, so too, are artists.
Beyond the completion of a finite project, an artist must continually reflect on their body
of work within the arc of a career. Artists are expert in self-reflection on what they have
done, seeing it from a higher-order cognitive perspective (Turner, 2006, p. 5). As an artist
develops a body of work and assesses it, so too should a student or worker be given the
opportunity and tools to assess their own work on the path towards improving it.
Reflection is another area in which meta-cognition skills come to the fore. Artists
understand the need to step back from a project, regroup, and reassess from an objective
point of view (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 156). During the sometimes painful verification phase,
artists can be thought two employ two types of meta-cognition, both internal and external.
‘The first type involves verifying or measuring the product against an internal standard—
the original purpose of the creative enterprise and the mental image formed during
illumination. The second type of metacognition involves verifying the product against an
anticipated external standard—a would-be audience’ (Armbruster 1989, p. 180). This
meta-congition skill can be learned and perfected with more practice and experience.
Artists become especially attuned to responding to both internal and external standards,
and this awareness could be useful in other disciplines (Armbruster 1989, p. 180).
Conclusion
In conclusion, a comparison of the creative process of designers and artists illustrates
key areas of overlap and distinction. Both use key methodologies that allow for stages of
preparation, incubation, illumination, implementation and verification. Just as there are
clear, convincing examples that demonstrate the applicability of design thinking in the
classroom and workplace, we can expand our methodologies to include art thinking. There
are some key points of emphasis unique to artists that may be especially transferrable to
other disciplines. Artists are expert at self-generating and solving problems that may have
been previously undetected. They are comfortable with ambuiguity and failure and
continue to pursue their creations. They are adept at critiquing each other’s work and
possess the ability to reflect on the arc of their own work from a meta-cognitive
perspective. Utilizing some of these approaches and applying them alone or as an
extension of design thinking has the potential to expand learning in various disciplines as
well as innovation in business environments.
Future research might then strategize how to expand upon apply these processes in
specific disciplines. In an educational environment, all of these elements and strategies can
help students mature developmentally and engage with subject matter from a more
critical, creative, and engaged perspective. The creative process could be pulled out into
individual components in the classroom, or more effectively, used as an arc for a project or
an entire class. Projects can be constructed to allow for more freedom to discover
connections and iterate new ideas. Just as in the classroom, the ability to critique ideas in
the workplace would be invaluable to developing innovative new solutions. As businesses
look to hire more employees are creative, we have a responsibility to infuse some of these
techniques into all of the disciplines in which we teach. Creativity is a skill that can be
developed, practiced and improved upon over time.
211
AIJA FREIMANE
References
American Association of Colleges & Universities. (2013). It takes more than a major:
Employer priorities for college learning and student success [Survey]. American
Association of Colleges & Universities. Retrieved from
https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2013_EmployerSurvey.pdf
Armbruster, B. (1989). Metacognition in creativity. In J. Glover, R. Ronning, & C. R.
Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity, (pp. 177-182). New York: Plenum.
Austin, R., & Devin, L. (2003). Artful making: What managers need to know about how
artists work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, R. (2009). The design of business. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.
Burkus, D. (2014). How your friends affect tour Cceative work. 99U by Behance. Retrieved
from http://99u.com/articles/21521/in-praise-of-the-creative-support-group
Buster, K. & Crawford, P. (2009). The critique handbook. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: Results from protocol and other empirical studies of
design activity. In C. Eastman, W. Newstatter, & M. McCracken (Eds.), Design knowing
and learning: Cognition in design education. Oxford, UK: Elsevier, pp. 79–103.
Cross, N., Dorst, K. and Roozenburg, N. (Eds.). (1992). Research in design thinking. The
Netherlands: Delft University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
Dorst, C. H. (2004). Investigating the nature of design thinking. Proceedings
from Futureground: Design Research Society, International Conference 2004. Australia:
Monash University.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Ballantine Books
Fig, J. (2009). Inside the Painter’s Studio. New York : Princeton Architectural Press.
Fish, J. & Scrivener, S. (1990). Amplifying the mind’s eye: Sketching and visual cognition.
Leonardo, 23(1), 117-126.
Fondiller, H. (1980). The Best of Popular Photography. Watson-Guptill Publications.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating Minds. New York: Basic Books.
Hassi, L. & Laakso, M. (2011). Conceptions in design thinking in the design and
management discourses. In the proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Design
Research, IASDR 2011, Delft, Netherlands.
IBM (2010, 03 Feb 2015). IBM 2010 Global CEO Study: Creativity Selected as Most Crucial
Factor for Future Success [Survey]. Retrieved 03 Feb, 2015, from https://www03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/31670.wss
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J. & Çetinkaya, M. (2013, June). Design thinking: Past,
present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.
John-Steiner, V. (1985). Notebooks of the mind. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico
Press.
Koberg, D., & Bagnall, J. (1974). The universal traveler: A soft-systems guide to creativity,
problem-solving, and the process of reaching goals. Los Altos, California: W. Kaufmann.
Krathwohl, D. (2002, Autumn). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into
Practice, 41(4), 212-264.
Lewis, S. (2014). The Rise. New York: Simon & Shuster.
Loevinger, J. (1987). Paradigms of personality. New York: Freeman.
212
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Mednick, S. (1962, May). The Associative Basis of the Creative Process. Psychological
Review, 69(3), 220-232.
Nemeth, C., Personnaz, B., Personnaz, M., & Goncalo, J. (2004). The liberating role of
conflict in group creativity: A study in two countries. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 34, 365–374.
Osborn, A. (1963). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem
Solving. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Pappano, L. (2014, Feb 5). Learning to Think Outside the Box: Creativity Becomes an
Academic Discipline. The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/education/edlife/creativity-becomes-anacademic-discipline.html
Pink, D. (2005). A Whole New Mind: Why Right-brainers Will Rule the Future. New York:
Penguin Group.
Turner, M. (Ed.) (2006). The Artful Mind: Cognitive Science and the Riddle of Human
Creativity. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Ward, T. (2004). Cognition, Creativity and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing,
19, 173-188.
213
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Ying HU*, Yinman GUO and Renke HE
Hunan University, People's Republic of China
*whoing@gmail.com
Abstract: Since people pay more attention to intangible services, service design
has emerged as an approach to creating compelling and valuable user
experiences. In order to understand the service design process and find out more
efficient way for education, this paper presents an observational study of the
ideation process in team-based service design. Eighteen participants undertook a
creative design on a new reading service. Through protocol study and data
visualization, their design process and interaction have been analysed
quantitatively and qualitatively. As a result, difference mechanism of solving
design problems between novice and expert has been identified. And evidence of
team-based ideation in service design has been discovered. For education, the
results provide guidance for how to train novices’ thinking and reflecting
towards an expert and how to set up team to achieve a high-quality outcome.
Keywords: service design ideation; mutual triggers effects; novice and expert;
reflective practice
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Introduction
This study focuses on the ideation period of service design - the initial stage of
structuring a complete design concept. Service design is particularly interesting as the
rapid development of the information industry has resulted in objects in design field
gradually changing from tangible products into intangible service. During this conversion,
the concept of service design has emerged. Service design that beneficially creates new
services or promotes existing services is a new cross-disciplinary and comprehensive field,
which facilitates customer satisfaction through a more useful and familiar experience, and
is also effective for the organizations (Moritz, 2005) . In contrast to other design areas,
which produce tangible media (e.g. industrial design), service design relies on both tangible
and intangible media to create more brilliant concepts. The service design process is
always iterative, and starts from a holistic view of the system and its processes (Vinay &
Simona, 2014). To conclude, nowadays, people endeavour to develop the design from
‘products’ to ‘things’, from elements of individual systems to integration of system
relationship comprehensively, and more significantly, from internal factors of system to
integration of external factors. Therefore, service design not only provides tangible
products but also enhances the values through emphasizing improvements of the service
concept. Without focusing on the beauty of, for example, a sketch or a 3-D model, the
evaluation of a service concentrates wholly on the novelty of the concept itself.
Design education, compared with commercial design activities, is mainly propelled with a
purpose of helping students to grow from novices to experts. The creativity in such a
setting has been divided into two types according to Kirton: adaptor and innovator (Li, Hu
and Galli, 2012). The latter is inclined to ignore present norms and rules and raise
audacious ideas, since the former one is focused on improving current situation. In this
sense, a design educator is closer to cultivate the innovator type of creativity.
Consequently, the research here discusses service design in the field of education, focusing
on the most mysterious process in designing - the generation of concepts. We have kept
using protocol study to analyse this process in a two-person team. In the previous work,
seven design patterns are concluded which is in the team level (Hu Y. Guo Y., Ji T., He R. &
Galli F., 2014). In this paper, we go deeper into the interaction in the pair to see how they
stimulate each other and push the design work forward.
Background and context
Service design and physical products design
Services are different from physical products. Service design is the activity of planning
and organizing people, infrastructure, communication and material components of a
service in order to improve its quality and the interaction between service provider and
customers. The purpose of service design is to meet the needs of customers or
participants, so that the service is user-friendly, competitive and relevant to the
customers. The nature of services means that they are intangible and complex
experiences. There is a wide range of definitions for services (Moreno, Hernandez, Yang, et
al, 2014 ; Cook, Goh, & Chung, 1999 ;DISR, 1999 ; Gadrey, Gallouj, & Weinstein, 1995 ),
which broadly speaking consist of the overall interface and experience which is a
215
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
combination of the experiences of all touch points (Moritz, 2005) . It could be a
mechanism, a policy, a website, or an APP, which has no boundaries and can exist
everywhere. Furthermore, the task of service design is always open and without limits.
Team-based design activity research
Group design is very common in the practice of experienced designers, but most
studies to date have focused on individual designer’s activity. Valkenburg and Dorst (1998)
explored design teamwork based on Schön’s paradigm (Schön, 1983). But Lawson still
called for studying it in a real design environment, in which the task is studied in the
context of a diversity of real backgrounds. Team based design activity research focuses on
information seeking, ideation and design review, in which designers are empirically
assessed on global and discipline-specific concept development.
Novice and expert
Many studies on the structure of the design process demonstrate that it does not
follow strict rules. Due to the complexity of the service design process, there do not exist
any precise and fixed formulas. Educators of design are very clear about this fact. What
makes them interesting are the keys to successful generation of a creative concept and
excavation of design strategies of experts. Design experts use heuristics highly efficiently in
service design process and this is a significant difference that distinguishes them from
novices. By observing and studying expert patterns, heuristic teaching methods targeted at
novices could be practically developed, which help them to create diverse and innovative
concepts when confronted with different design problems and situations.
Similarities and differences between novice and expert designers are conceptual in
early stages of the design process and how they take advantage of the overview of
strategic knowledge. From individual learning strategies of design to their skillful mastering
of design knowledge, they eventually form their own modes of application of various
heuristics.
Experimental approaches
The thinking process of design cannot easily be captured; likewise, design knowledge
and innovative methods are always tacit. The study of design process is usually
accomplished by protocol study. Through the method of think aloud, participants are
required to speak out while he/she is doing a specific task. First rigorously proposed by
(Simon, Ericsson, 1984), protocol analysis has been widely used in social sciences, including
psychology and sociology. In the domain of design, protocol analysis is used in usability
test and design education to know person’s thinking. After doing semantic analysis of
recorded utterance, the thinking process of designers would be perceived.
For example, Gero and Neill (1998) presented a detailed approach to design protocols
and introduced their coding scheme and coding method. To explore reflective practice of
the teams, Valkenburg and Dorst (1998) surveyed two design teams’ activities by coding
captured video of the Philips Design Competition in Delft University. Atman, Chimka, Bursic
and Nachtmann (1999) used protocol analysis to assess the various methods to teach
design, and to understand the differences between freshman and senior engineering
students. All these studies above discussed the concrete practical procedure of applying
216
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
protocols, and described the distinctions between novice and expert by visualizing the
abstract designing process and the design activity of a team.
Introduction of experiment
We invited 18 designers to take our Protocol analysis (Table 1). Participants were given
120 minutes to finish a design task, which was designing a reading service. A reading
service could be an intangible service, like book exchange system, or services with tangible
touchpoint, like App related to reading. After the preliminary screening questionnaire, we
ensure that each subject has a certain reading experience, but did not have experience to
design reading service, which would ensure the fairness and consistency in this design task.
Their design activities were videotaped.
Table 1 Experimental approaches
Content
Data Collection
Data processing
Coding System
Data Analysis
Data Output
Design stages& steps/
Mutual trigger effect
Verbal protocol experiment, ‘think aloud’
Individual video, Segments
Design stages and steps
ATLAS.ti,
C++ Statistical calculations,
Data visualization
Design stages& steps cluster characteristics/
Mutual trigger effect mechanism
Participants
The 18 designers are from college or companies, they are students, teachers and
professionals. No matter how professional they are in service design, all of them have
some experience in service design (at least in design), from courses or the real project.
According to the amount of time they spent on design, the 18 designers were split up into
9 pairs (Table 2), to achieve the diversity of pairing. Through our test before the formal
experiment, we found out that if two designers had a huge gap on knowledge and
experience, like a senior in company and a junior student in college, the design process
would be wholly dominated by the senior designer, with little participant from the junior
student. Thus, although our goal is to achieve the most diverse mix when we paired them,
we avoid a wide difference between them.
Table 2
P1
P2
Participants of the protocol analysis.
Designer
Grade
Duration Time on
service design
F/M
D1
3rd year graduate
5 years
M
D2
1st year graduate
3 years
F
D3
1st year graduate
3 years
F
D4
1st year graduate
3 years
M
217
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
D5
1st year graduate
1month
F
D6
4th year undergraduate
2 years
F
D7
2nd year undergraduate
—
F
D8
3th year undergraduate
1 year
M
D9
3rd year graduate
3 years
F
D10
4rd year undergraduate
2 years
M
D11
Senior designer
7 years
F
D12
Manager of UX
10 years
M
D13
Founder
9 years
M
D14
2nd year graduate
3 years
F
D15
3rd year graduate
5 year
F
D16
1st year graduate
1 year
F
D17
Designer
6 years
M
D18
Senior researcher
10 years
F
Coding system
There are two famous paradigms in design research, which are rational problem solving
theory (Simon’s) and reflective practice (Schön’s). The rational problem solving approach
considers problems to be solvable by ‘rigorously applying general principles, standardized
knowledge (based on rigorous scientific research) to concrete problems’ (Schön, 1983),
(dorst , thesis 1997). ‘Schön’s theory is based on a constructionist view of human
perception and thought processes: through the execution of ‘move-testing experiments’
(involving action and reflection), a designer is actively constructing a view of the world
based on his/her experiences.’(Valkenburg & Dorst, 1998) Overall, rational problem solving
is good at studying a rational and clearly defined and structured problem, analysing the
rational search process, discovering the knowledge of design procedures, which usually
used as in the field of optimization theory and the natural sciences. However, reflective
practice is good for studying ill-defined problems – the design process that is analysed is
always described as a reflective conversation. Reflective practice studies what designers
do, when, and how, so it usually used in the field of the social sciences. Due to the
attributes of service design problems and the features of concept design process, we
finally chose the latter.
Based on reflective practice (Schön, 1983) , we adopt the fundamental coding scheme
from Valkenburg and Dorst’s protocol study (1998), which was upon Schön’s theory as
well. However, the three design stages-’Naming’, ‘Moving’ and ‘Reflecting’- reflect
different models of designers’ thinking at a macro level. Subdivisions of the three may
promote the deeper exploration of each activity. Hence, we draw more detailed subclasses
218
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
from Atman & Turns (2001) and Finke, Ward & Smith (1992), building up a two-layered
subclass.
In order to get more detailed information, we code the protocol by using the deepest
subclass on coding scheme, such as Problem Definition, instead of Naming, and Generating
Analogy, rather than Generating Ideas. Since we have two coders to code protocols,
segments have been tested for Kappa coefficient to reach good agreement on the coding
scheme. The two coders were tested three times. Each time, we chose a segment that had
a wide variety of attached codes. The results of the three tests are 0.21 (fair agreement),
0.58 (moderate agreement) and 0.86 (very good agreement) in sequence. We adjusted the
coding scheme when every result had been obtained. We kept those codes that have High
coefficient (0.61-1.00). For those codes that have moderate coefficient (0.41-0.60), we
defined the meaning of them more clearly and combined them where appropriate. For
those codes that have Low coefficient (0.00-0.40), we considered that they are improper
and need revision. In this process, we merged GS and GL to GSL, redefined DEC, clarified
the scope of RS, RF and RA, and regulated that where there was ID/RND, there was
PD/RDP. And the final coding scheme is presented above (Table 3).
Table 3 Coding system
Design Activity
Code
Description
Example of dialog
Stages
Naming
NA
Look for relevant targets in
design tasks.
Identification
ID
Identify the design goal and ‘It’s for young people to
of Need
driver.
kill time during the
commute.’
Problem
PD
Define design issue; confirm ‘Now we are designing
Definition
limit, principle, and
a service which only
rereading design
uses words, and it
requirement.
should be fun.’
Moving
MV
Not only try to solve
problem, but also try to
explore the appropriateness
of construction.
Gathering
GATH Seek for the information,
‘I forgot the name of
Information
which is required but has
that App, let’s find it.’
not been provided.
Generating
GEN Generate possible
Ideas
solutions, and list all kinds
of alternative.
Generating GA
Refer to existing case study ‘There is another way
Analogy
(such as user’s needs,
we can use, which is like
technology platform,
the pop-up comments
business model and so on), on the online video.’
proposing new solutions.
Generating GSL
Look for the information
‘I prefer Netease
Searching
you need in the existing
Newsreader because it
and Relation
databases and interrelate allows users to
219
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
Generating GC
Compound
Generating GM
Mutation
Generating GP
Principle
Modeling
MOD
Decision
DEC
Communication
COM
Implementation
IMP
Reflecting
REF
Reflecting
Need
RND
Reflecting
Design
Problem
RDP
Feasibility
Analysis
FEAS
Reflecting
Scenario
RS
Reflecting
Function
RF
them.
subscribe, as well as
Xianguo.’
Compound some existing
concepts into a new
concept.
Discard all references,
generate completely new
concept.
‘Let add some social
things in it.’
‘How about there is a
pool, in the pool, there
are readings which fit
your situation.’
Depend on core design
‘I would like to make
principles which themselves things as simple as
adhere to.
possible, because this is
the trend.’
Describe how to model
‘When you open the
concepts, and how to
App, it will get your
realize them.
location automatically,
but users need to add
tags which they are
interested in.’
Make decision during the
‘Let’s go this direction.’
design process.
Define design solutions to
others, and write down
design brief.
Produce a physical product Draw low-fidelity
or prototype.
interface, make
prototype, etc.
Reflect the moving before,
in order to know how to do
next
Reflect user’s need.
‘How about go back to
the user part? Let’s
think again about their
true needs.’
Reflect design problem, its ‘But I feel we tend to
definition and range.
‘share’ function again
while we develop this
idea.’
Feasibility analysis: whether
it meet the limits and
design principles?
Reflect concepts by
‘I’m afraid that user
transferring scenario.
can’t finish all the
contents.’
Reflect its function and
‘If it can be searched by
logic.
picture, thus, it
definitely can … ‘
220
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Reflecting RA
Assumption
Evaluation
EVAL
Reflect program’s
realization on market,
business model and
technology.
Evaluate all alternatives.
‘Is it too difficult on the
technology part? If we
don’t keep this part, will
it affect our business
model?’
Make a table to see the
differences.
Please note that this protocol is a translation of a Chinese design team, and that a
faithful translation of a transcribed protocol is nearly impossible. The designers express
their thoughts and ideas in ambiguous words and (incomplete) phrases that are hard to
translate into their English equivalents. The translated text is therefore not very
representative: many of the subtleties of the language are lost in the translation process.
Therefore the presented transcript has limited value outside the context of this study.
These problems did not affect our original data processing, since that was all done in
Chinese.
Data setup
The concept of reflective practice insists that design belongs to a kind of practice which
has the characteristic of reflection-in-action (Schön, 1983). The reflection is that people
think, respond and reflect what they are doing actively and positively during their actions.
In our previous work, we regarded every pair as a whole to see their thinking pattern and
strategy. Some other scholars also view them as a whole or see them separately in their
research. However, different from individual work, team-based work has the distinguishing
feature that team members contribute to the whole team and people share the same
information, learn from each other and generate new ideas. Thus, after two coders
finished the coding process of 18 designers’ videos, we took two set of data in each pair on
the same page to analyse their reaction. In order to find the deep reason why they behave
like this and why they get this outcome, the answer may exist in their reflection to each
other. Our setting of two people per team is also easy for us to explore the influence
between them.
To identify out mutual trigger effects, we firstly calculated the times that they trigger
each other. We define ‘trigger’ as, if Designer 1’s words are followed by Designer 2, that
means Designer 1 triggers Designer 2. Combined with the coding before, we could get
more detailed information, that what type of Designer 1’s words triggers what type of
Designer 2’s words. Taking the time that people need to contemplate into account, we
included two situations. Figure 1 shows that one person follows another seamlessly. From
this figure, we could see that Designer 1’s words belonging to category ‘RF’ triggers
Designer 2’s words of category ‘PD’. Figure 2 shows that one person follows another with a
short pause. From this figure, we could know that Designer 1’s words belonging to ‘RS’
triggers Designer 2’s words of category ‘GSL’.
221
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
Figure 1 The first situation-overlap mode.
Figure 2 The second situation- interval mode.
Trigger is mutual, which means in the whole process, designer 1 triggers designer 2
sometimes, and designer 2 triggers designer 1 sometimes. Thus, for each pair, we have
two charts. Table 4 is one of charts from Pair 5, showing the how D10 (the first row)
triggers D9 (the first column). Or, in other words, it shows how D9 is triggered by D10.
Table 4 The data of Pair 5 – how D10 (row) triggers D9 (column).
D10
ID
PD
GATH
GA
GSL
GC
GM
GP
MOD
DEC
COM
IMP
RND
RDP
RS
RF
RA
EVAL
ID
4
6
0
4
9
1
0
0
8
7
0
0
1
2
7
2
2
0
PD
6
16
1
9
18
1
0
0
18
17
2
0
6
9
24
7
5
0
GATH
3
6
5
1
8
0
0
0
4
10
0
2
1
6
7
2
3
0
GA
3
4
2
1
2
0
0
0
4
9
0
1
1
3
5
8
2
0
GSL
7
19
10
12
27
0
0
0
33
19
0
1
1
13
37
22
14
0
GC
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
GM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
GP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MOD
6
13
3
2
11
1
0
0
13
16
1
0
1
8
26
6
1
0
DEC
4
12
0
3
5
0
0
0
10
26
2
9
3
9
22
8
4
0
COM
1
2
2
3
2
0
0
0
10
5
1
1
2
4
12
8
5
0
IMP
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
12
8
1
4
2
6
21
14
6
0
RND
1
4
0
0
6
0
0
0
6
9
1
0
1
4
7
4
3
0
RDP
5
11
1
2
10
1
0
0
9
18
2
1
2
7
9
5
4
0
RS
6
16
2
4
10
1
0
0
16
25
3
2
5
10
31
10
5
0
222
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
RF
3
8
5
1
5
0
0
0
12
12
3
3
2
7
26
7
1
0
RA
0
1
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
2
0
5
0
2
4
4
1
0
EVAL
1
3
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Figure 3 The info grahpic of Table 4-– how D10 (row) triggers D9(column).
Through visualizing, we could see the result more clearly through the histogram (Figure
3). The horizontal axis is the front one (D10), who leads to the words from the later one in
the vertical axis (D9). Since yellow is naming phase, green is moving phase and red is
reflecting phase, the info graphic clearly shows that what kinds of activities from D10 most
likely trigger what kinds of activities for D9. By this means, we get 18 info graphics (Figure
3) which show how each one is triggered by their partners.
Figure 4 An overview of several info graphics.
Data analysis-mutual trigger effect
Through the 18 info graphics, we can easily identify the difference in designers’ times
and network’s level of mutual triggers effect.
223
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
Cross-stage mutual trigger effect
Compared to junior designers, senior designers are more likely to initiate their
partners’ cross-stage design activities, like A’s naming stage activity initiate A’s partner’s
moving or reflecting stage activities. The difference between junior designers (D7) and
senior (D14) are very clear. Seniors have more control of at what time using what kinds of
information to stimulate their partners.
Figure 5 Novice D7 is weak in cross-stage mutual trigger effect
Figure 6 senior D14 is very strong in cross-stage mutual trigger effect
Different sensitivity to stimulation
Experts are more sensitive on mutual stimulus than novices in the ideation discussion.
Comparing Figure 7 and Figure 8, the info graphics show that the pair of D13 and D14 are
more active than D8 and D9. We could propose that senior designers are more sensitive to
partner’s activities, in the aspect of connecting, improving their ideas and making
decisions.
224
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Figure 7 D9 and D10’s performances.
Figure 8 D13 and D14’s performances.
Experts’ proficiency in reflecting stage
Experts’ activities can cause partners a higher frequency of showing reflecting
activities, which is positive to improving ideation to final concept. From the Figure 9, we
could see junior designer D7’s reflecting activity has a low degree of being triggered by
junior designer D8. In Figure 10, the reflecting activity of D5 has a medium degree of being
225
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
triggered. In Figure 11, D13 has a much higher degree in the reflecting activity triggered by
senior designer D14.
Figure 9 Novice D7 performance triggered by D8
Figure 10 Novice D5 performance triggered by D6
226
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Figure 11 D13 performance triggered by D14
Similar trigger mode in the same group
Moreover, designers’ skill level is consistent with their ability to mutually trigger their
partners. Team members which are similar in mutual trigger effect mechanisms due to
mutual effect in mind activity, are valuable to inspire to cooperation between experts and
novices. We could explore the sharing possibility of mutual trigger effect experience.
Limitation and discussions
One limitation of this work is that we observed the short-term ideation process, with a
small number of designers, which is a huge challenge to understand the real design activity
happening in design practice. Professional growth for service designer is a long and
delicate process, which impacted by various factors, including life experience, motivation
etc., that means it requires long-term tracking and research in order to clarify the clue.
Team member’s background to service ideation:
Service design is a multidisciplinary field. We find the important and positive role of
multidisciplinary team mentioned many times in the retrospective questionnaires. We
found in our experiment data, that the team combinations with different discipline
designers were more easily able to transition design stages and steps freely, which may be
thanks to the differences in their disciplines and backgrounds resulting in different angles
of thinking making it easier to pull away from the thinking patterns of a single discipline.
The study has implications for service design education (students, team leaders and
teachers):
Novice and expert have difference mechanism to solve design problems. Imaging and
leaping among different sections of activities happens to experts. For novice, they
incline to linear way of thinking and structuring problems. About the frequency of
being triggered, experts have a much higher level than novice. When designer
receives partner’s information, expert could give more feedbacks and produce more
positive outcomes. Considering the trigger results, experts have higher level in
227
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
reflecting stage. Therefore, more cross-stage activity, high sensitivity and more
reflecting could be recognized as three aspects of an expert.
Although novice and expert have different level in cross-stage activity, sensitivity and
reflecting, novice have the possibility to be trained and upgraded in team-based
design practice. Since we find out the two designers in a pair present the similar
mode, it means there is a homogenization between them. The less experienced
designer in the pair could be influenced by the more experienced designer silently.
Expert have a leading and teaching effect in a team. This could be applied in the
future’s design education.
Conclusion and future work
From a series of experiments, we discussed our verbal protocol findings of service
ideation process from thinking pattern, design strategies, drive type and mutual trigger
effect through comprehensive analysis of qualitative and quantitative. In this paper we
focus on mutual trigger effect in team-based design activities. This study conducts an
analysis of the concept of derivative activities through reflective practice theory and Dorst
proposition framework approach, which contains two emphases: analysis on design stages
(naming, moving and reflecting) and design steps; analysis and comparison on mutual
trigger effect in team. We limited the study to two-persons units for group collaboration in
our protocol, which is easier to analyse compared with three and more people design
team, which is more common in industry.
Based on what have been found, it can lead to guidelines or toolkits for teachers or
students to use in their ideation process. Future work will explore more methods and
technologies to collect quantitative data, for example, to combine the sketching and
concept diagram into the current study, detect brain waves (e.g. alpha, beta waves which
indicate different mental states), analyse speech intonation (e.g. to identify ‘ah-ha’
moments), gesture analysis (e.g. to identify points of engagement and disengagement with
the creative process), and other more advanced and rich data collection, analysis, and
mining methods. Of particular interest would be the comparison of different kinds of data
points and how they correlate with points of ideation.
Acknowledgements: This project is funded by Chinese Ministry of Science and
Technology (Project code: 2012BAH85F02), International Science &
Technology Cooperation Program of China (2012DFG70310) and supported by
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
References
Atman, C., Chimka, J., Bursic, K., & Nachtmann, H. (1999). A comparison of freshman and
senior engineering design process. Design Studies, 20, 131-152.
Atman, C. J., & Turns, J. (2001). Studying engineering design learning: Four verbal protocol
studies. Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education, 37-60.
Carmel-Gilfilen C, Portillo M. (2012). Where what’s in common mediates disciplinary
diversity in design students: A shared pathway of intellectual development. Design
Studies, 33(3): 237-261.
228
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Cash P J, Hicks B J, Culley S J. (2013). A comparison of designer activity using core design
situations in the laboratory and practice. Design Studies, 34(5): 575-611.
Cook, D., Goh, C., & Chung, C. (1999). Service typologies: a state of the art survey.
Production and Operations Management, 318-338.
DISR. (1999). The Australian service sector review 2000. Canberra: Department of Industry,
Science and Resources.
Dorst K. (1997). Describing design a comparison of paradigms (Doctoral dissertation). The
Netherlands: Delft University, 151-163.
Ericsson K A, Simon H A. (1984). Protocol analysis. MIT-press.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and
applications. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Gadrey, J., Gallouj, F., & Weinstein, O. (1995). New modes of innovation: How services
benefit industry. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 4-16.
Gero J.S. & McNeill T. (1998). An approach to the analysis of design protocols. Design
Studies, 19, 21-61.
Hu Y. Guo Y., Ji T., He R. & Galli F. (2014). Design patten and strategy in ideation.
Proceedings of 19th DMI International Design Management Research Conference,
London.
Lawson B. Schemata. (2004). Gambits and precedent: some factors in design expertise.
Design Studies, 25(5): 443-457
Li L., Hu Y. and Galli F. (2012). An Improvement In Method:From User Study First To First
To Fast Concept Design First. Proceeding Of The 2nd International Conference on Design
Creativity, Glasgow, UK.
Moreno, D. P., Hernandez, A. A., Yang, M. C., Otto, K. N., Hölttä-Otto, K., Linsey, J. S., &
Linden, A. (2014). Fundamental studies in design-by-analogy: A focus on domainknowledge experts and applications to transactional design problems. Design
Studies, 35(3), 232-272.
Moritz S. (2005). Service design: Practical access to an evolving field (3rd ed.). Cologne,
Germany: Köln International School of Design, 1-61.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New
York: Basic Books.
Sonnentag S. (1998). Expertise in professional software design: a process study. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 83(5): 702–715.
Valkenburg R, Dorst K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design studies,
1998, 19(3): 249-271.
Vinay V, Simona M. (2014). Introduction to Service Design. Available from
http://www.cipu.dk/upload/centre/cipu/pss%20130307/vinay.pdf.
229
Educating By Design
Marcello MONTORE* and Ana Lucia LUPINACCI
ESPM-SP (Brazil)
*mmontore@espm.br
Abstract: This work reports and discusses a unique pedagogical experiment
conducted in the course Project II – Corporate Identity, taught in the second
semester of the Graphic Design undergradute at Escola Superior de Propaganda
e Marketing (ESPM-SP) in São Paulo, Brazil. In 2006, ESPM partnered with the
Center for Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Technology (CIETEC) – the largest
incubator of technology companies in the country. The students at ESPM-SP
design corporate identities for incubated companies, taking into consideration
formal, functional and symbolic dimensions. This work includes:
creation of logo; creation of corporate stationery, namely: personal business
card, letterhead, envelopes and folder; and development of a Corporate Identity
Manual.
Reconciling critical academic training and preparing students for entry into the
world of work is characteristic of this Graphic Design undergraduate. To bring
together pedagogical goals with real world design activity, we adapted and
implemented a methodology capable of dealing with this unusual set of different
and often conflicting needs. In eight years of unbroken partnership, students
have created identities for 202 companies and research has shown that 80% are
using or intend to use them in the near future.
Keywords: corporate identity, graphic design pedagogy, methodology
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Educating by Design
Introduction
This paper describes and discusses a pedagogical experience conducted by the Graphic
Design Undergraduate at Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing (ESPM-SP), in São
Paulo – Brazil. This unique experience aims at connecting academic training and
professional life. In 2006, ESPM-SP set up a partnership with the Centre for Innovation,
Entrepreneurship and Technology (CIETEC), the largest business incubator in the country.
Students attending Project II – Corporate Identity, an eighteen-week, four-hour-a-week
course at the second semester of their academic training, design corporate identities for
companies incubated at CIETEC. Semiannual surveys conducted by CIETEC have allowed
the evaluation of its results.
For CIETEC, this partnership aims to allow entrepreneurs, in the beginning of their
activities, rely on consistent and professional corporate identities, that is, to provide a
coordinated and coherent image to their businesses without incurring prohibitive costs in
this early stage of their corporate lives.
As for ESPM-SP, one of the main features of its undergraduate is the reconciliation of
academic background, and the preparation of students for the world of work. It is attained,
among others, by having design professors with business experience, by the treatment of
subject matters in classes, by organizing and stimulating students to attend paralel
activities related to design and by setting up partnerships with diverse institutions.
For the influent thinker Donald Schön, practical and reflective thinking is a key aspect
of education, in which the role of personal perception and intuition makes up a kind of
skillfull practice appointed by him as reflection-in-action, that is, ‘thinking what they are
doing while they are doing it’ (Schön, 1987. Kindle edition). General expressions revealed
in actions are not always verbally explained. Still, at that time there is already construction
of a tacit knowledge24. Thus, it suggests questions, thoughts and reflections that are only
possible within those actions – it would not happen out of practice. Constituent parts of
this practice are: the process, the outcomes, and the awareness of the one who thinks and
reflects on the task. As Schön affirms, ‘our thought turns back on the surprising
phenomenon and, at the same time, back on itself’ (Schön, 1987. Kindle edition).
On the review and restructuring of this practical knowledge, that is, reflection-inaction, unexpected changes of direction of thought may occur. It is pretty different from
applied knowledge, which takes into account an explicit conceptual and practical basis,
thus enabling a connection for solving the problem at hand.
It is important to note that Schön grounds his work in the theory of inquiry created by
the North-american philosopher John Dewey, which emphasizes learning by doing.
24
Tacit knowledge is a concept found in the epistemology of Michael Polanyi. It works out the idea of
knowledge construction incorporating perceptual aspects to the rationalization and objectification of
knowledge, as clues and inferences. Thus, Polanyi places the explicit and tacit dimensions as
participants of this construction. Using the metaphor of the iceberg, the emerged or visible part is
the explanation, for instance verbalization – oral and written. About the immersed part, that is, the
tacit dimension, he shows that there is indeed knowledge on what has not been, or can not be
explained. It is particularly revealing in design, once the languages used for this knowing-in-action
are manifold, thus, requiring different representation skills.
231
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
He has to see on his own behalf and in his own way the relations between means and
methods employed and results achieved. Nobody else can see for him, and he can't see
just by being 'told,' although the right kind of telling may guide his seeing and thus help
him see what he needes to see (Dewey apud Schön, 1987. Kindle edition).
Based on the concepts by Schön discussed above, the process of coaching and learning
how to make and refine projects was structured and broadly thought of at ESPM-SP. In so
called educating by project, teachers and students engage in actions of different natures,
both have their specific perspectives and they assign their own meanings to those actions.
In addition to quests for creative and technical solutions, students develop attitudinal
skills, that we believe HEIs should also focus on to better prepare future professionals.
Educating by project
The project courses in Graphic Design Undergraduate at ESPM-SP have been founded,
as far as possible, on students' practical experiences. The proposed methodology aims to
exploring aspects of educating by projects at college, mainly in courses focused on visual
education, and emphasize the role of integrated and or interdisciplinary projects.
The idea of Universities as the greatest symbols of institutions dedicated to research
and theory, brings immediate parallel to organizations and companies devoted to the
practical world, what we may call the reality of the market. The intersection of both worlds
in the construction of knowledge, in spite of outstanding actions in this direction, it is still
dilemma and discomfort for many academics and many HEIs in the country.
The notion of designing, comprehensive in relation to other topics and areas beyond
design itself, always refers to becoming, to an idea of future that has its purpose and
ethical dimension on actual actions. As Brazilian theorist of education Nilson Machado
says, ‘The project is not a simple representation of tomorrow, but of a future to be
created, of a tomorrow to be materialized, of an idea turning into action’ (Machado, 2004,
p. 5. Our translation).
Projecting enables the continuous and complex exercise of looking at a scenario and
see ourselves as part of it, and also makes us wonder about the values that make us belong
to it. The idea of a projected action is two-way: scenarios and values, external and internal,
collective and individual. Therefore, projecting is to formulate and to problematize from
boundaries such as cultural, aesthetic, economic, social, marketing and technological,
adjusting them in a search for meaning in between these dualisms.
In its broadest sense the idea of projecting grounds its conception and action for the
design activity, combining methods, practices and, of course, actions. This is what we seek
in the pedagogical experience presented and discussed in this paper, that is, a contribution
to a broader understanding of design as an idea of projecting as explained before and,
above all, how to educate by design.
Educating by design embodies different perceptions, approaches and conceptions of
knowledge that it becomes fundamental to establish a scope. Here, we refer to formal
education and to higher education in particular. Although the focus on the thoroughly
understanding of the design field may be characterized by the project, it is in a more
humanistic and at the same time singularized perspective, that we approach what Boutinet
232
Educating by Design
in his Anthropology of the Project (2002) considers the two founding aspects of the whole
project:
Symbolic dimension, for him the value of project's existence; and
Technical dimension, for him the value of project's effectiveness.
The symbolic dimension relates to meaning and the sense it triggers. The technical
dimension relates to its materiality, justifying the action of every project.
Anthropologically, projecting provides a cognitive anticipation and a continuous transit
between the individual and the recognition of otherness.
This view has contributed to reflections and actions concerning the Undergraduate, the
search for its vitality and consistency and a consequent criticism. From the beginning, its
pedagogical proposition had a structural axis of semiannual project courses. Its conceptual
grouping of contents, methodologies and activities pervade every semester and provide a
multitude of experiences and partnerships such as CIETEC's.
ESPM-SP – CIETEC: partnership and project objectives
Since 2004, when the Graphic Design Undergraduate began, the syllabus of Project II –
Corporate Identity proposed the design or redesign of corporate identities for small
companies. The students were responsible to contact and to convince the owners of those
companies to participate in the project. From 2006 on, CIETEC has been providing
entrepreneurships, which have a non-professional corporate identity or none at all. The
student's job includes:
creation of logo and corporate identity;
design of stationery namely: personal business card, letterhead, envelopes and
folder; and
development of a Corporate Identity Manual.
From the academic point of view, the aim of this work is to give students a real world
work experience still in early stages of their training (second semester of the Graphic
Design undergraduate) with the guidance of a professor. We adopted Schön's practical and
reflective knowledge as the founding element of pedagogical strategies to deal with this
partnership in the best possible way.
In this process, students assimilate the need for intense and permanent dialogue with
their ‘clients’, that is, the entrepreneurs. Thereby, they become able to understand the
activity of graphic design as troubleshooting in communication which takes into
consideration the aesthetic, functional, technical, strategic and symbolic dimensions, thus
promoting differentiation and relevance to their client's businesses images.
A broader comprehension of the design process, the dialogue with students and the
professor – who is also a practitioner designer –, make the entrepreneurs better
understand and value the activity of designers as strategic partners. Therefore they
become able to spread this relevant notion to their peers. That kind of understanding has
been reported in periodic evaluations performed by CIETEC (shown below), and also
through oral testimonies of entrepreneurs. Those who participated in this experience claim
that they actually changed their understanding regarding the design activity and its huge
potential as a strategic tool for businesses. They come to the conclusion that design
233
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
implies the solution of problems using a proven methodology, which aims to enhance the
outcomes and optimize communication, away from the widespread and wrong idea that
designers are subject only to inspiration. As stated by Alina Wheeler:
The brand identity process is a proven and disciplined method for creating and
implementing a identity. It is a rigorous process demanding a combination of
investigation, strategic thinking, design excellence, and project management skills. It
requires an extraordinary amount of patience, an obsession for getting it right, and an
ability to synthesize vast amounts of information. [...]
The process is defined by distinct phases with logical beginning and ending points,
which allow decision making at the appropriate intervals.[...] The process, when done
right, can achieve remarkable results (Wheeler, 2003, p. 54).
These remarkable results is what we seek to achieve in this partnership. The work
process is what ‘assures the client that a proven method is being used to achieve business
results’ and thus, ‘sets expectations for the complexity of the process’ (Wheeler, 2003. p.
55).
Our perception is that the students feel challenged and stimulated by the prospect of
having their designs effectively implemented. Hence, their commitment to outcomes have
been greater than that observed when their work will have no actual use to clients (we are
comparing results from 2004-2006 classes – before the partnership with CIETEC –, to 20062014).
ESPM-SP and CIETEC evaluate the partnership on a semester by semestre basis. The
partnership frequently undergoes review, revisions and improvements. On 16 semesters,
that is, until 2014 we have created corporate identities for 202 companies, what results in
an average of 12 companies attended per semester.
Pedagogical contents
To implement the concepts of Schön explained above and to optimize the student's
projects, the course's contents are structured in three teaching units, namely:
Conceptual
Theoretical and practical classes in which students do exercises and read texts about
the subject matter. The professor explains and discusses the concepts and procedures for
developing corporate identities. These lessons cover the following contents:
the history of creating corporate identities;
concepts for the creation and evaluation of corporate identities;
seminars based on texts selected by the professor, which complement and reinforce
the conceptual contents taught in class;
terminology;
design methodology; and
creative processes.
234
Educating by Design
Procedural
Parallel to the conceptual approach, students learn and develop technical skills to
create graphic symbols, logotypes and logos, and to develop stationery. They face the
importance of coherent and structured corporate identities through the companies´
multiple points of contacts with its audiences. These lessons cover the following contents:
logo creation for a fictitious company (as an exercise);
technical aspects of a logo design, such as minimum size and clear space;
creation of stationery: business card, letterhead, envelopes and folder for the
fictitious company; and
presentation of cases of actual corporate identities and preparation for the
development of a Corporate Identity Manual.
Attitudinal
In scheduled meetings which take place at school, students present and discusses their
designs with their clients. The classroom is organized just like meeting rooms so they feel
they have their own professional spaces. It adds to the general feeling of a real business
presentation. Thereby students realize the importance of quality presentation materials,
proper behaviour, extensive design and concepts control and the so needed rhetoric
appropriate to presentation and ideas exchange with clients.
The attitudes of students toward the entrepreneurs is observed and later discussed by
the professor. The students are also stimulated to self evaluate their behaviour, body
positioning, rhetoric, selection of arguments and observe the responses and remarks made
by the entrepreneurs.
Project structure: interdisciplinarity, strategy and
methods
The Graphic Design Undergraduate at ESPM-SP values interdisciplinarity and seeks to
accomplish it in as many possible courses spread through all the semesters. We
understand that it helps the student make relationships between bodies of knowledge
produced in diverse conceptual, theoretical and practical courses. The Brazilian theorist of
education Lea Anastasiou defines interdisciplinarity as: ‘[...] the interaction of two or more
courses, from ideas, actions, tasks, to the interaction of conceptual fields, laws and
principles, and where the emergence of a new course is even a possibility’ (Anastasiou,
2004, p. 52. Our translation).
In this case, Project II – Corporate Identity works side-by-side with the course Graphic
Fundamentals. While in Project II students learn and practice conceptual, theoretical and
practical contents related to corporate identities, in Graphic Fundamentals they learn
about printing technologies, the use vector illustration and desktop publishing software
which helps them refine the logo (created in Project II) and develop the Corporate Identity
Manual. They also have conceptual reinforcements. The precise alignment of these
contents and schedules enables students to understand that knowledge is only formally
divided into different courses. They realize that it is their task merging them into a
consistent and cohesive whole during their academic training.
235
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
The corporate identity design process is done in teams with no more than four
students and values strategic thinking. Students are free to choose their working peers. It
is important to note that there can be no change of team members along the semester
and these teams will attend their clients just like a design company would do. Regarding
teamwork strategy, Anastasiou says that:
[...] careful organization and preparation is fundamental to the work, as is the
thoroughly thought planning shared with the student who, as a subject of his own
learning process, act diligently. Therefore the objectives, rules, forms of action, roles,
responsibilities, in short, the process and desired outcomes must be explicit and agreed
upon (Anastasiou, 2004, p. 75. Our translation).
We take into consideration the need for careful preparation and organization,
mentioned by Anastasiou, as a basic condition to ensure proper progress of the project,
precise allocation of interdisciplinary contents and thus enhance expected outcomes.
When dealing with teams, it is of utmost relevance, among other factors, creating
equality in the treatment of clients, meaning that one single and strict standard must be
followed by all teams. It includes, for instance, the same number of meetings with clients
and how the work shall be delivered. It has forced us to improve the organization every
new semester and accompany each one of the teams individually to ensure equality.
We have strategically divided the course in two moments. The first one takes place in
the first half of the semester (first two months), when students are introduced to the
history of brand identities, its terminology, concepts and methods. The classes include
theory and exercises. Students develop individually a corporate identity for a fictitious
company as preparation for the job ahead. Besides the logo, they create business card,
letterhead, envelopes and folder. These materials are analysed and discussed with the
whole group in class.
At the second moment (two last months), students already divided in teams create
individually at first, a complete corporate identity for their client's company. These
proposals are discussed with them and one of those identities is chosen for refinement
and development by the team. It will result in the final project to be delivered and possibly
used by the client.
The methodology we developed for this partnership comprises four meetings (detailed
below) between students and entrepreneurs throughout the semester. Three of them take
place at ESPM-SP. Regarding the briefing meeting, the client and students are free to set it
wherever they choose to.
First meeting – Beginning of work
The first meeting happens two weeks before the actual beginning of the work. The
clients are invited to a lecture given by the professor about corporate identity. It aims to
present them the concepts for the creation and evaluation of identity projects, the
terminology of the field, the method which will be used throughout the work, the strategic
role of design and the client/designer ethic relationship that shall be observed. The
presentation also intends to emphasize that the corporate identity process, as Wheeler
states, is a proven method to achieve business results. It is approached what the clients
can expect of this project done by students in their second semester of academic training
that at no time competes with professional designers. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy (see
236
Educating by Design
below) that almost 80% of them consider that the outcomes met or are beyond their
expectations.
At the end of this gathering every entrepreneur is invited to explain, in general terms,
their business to the class. Then, each team of students receives randomly a company to
work for and teams and entrepreneurs are given some time to know each other, to
exchange their contact information and possibly to arrange the briefing meeting.
Briefing meeting and visual research
Within two weeks from the first meeting, the teams must schedule a briefing meeting
where the students and the client should attend to in person. This meeting is prepared in
advance. The students take with them a set of questions from a script studied previously
and think about what information they believe will be needed for the project.
To approach the field of business of their clients, they research corporate identities of
similar companies. They prepare quantitative and qualitative analysis of the identities
collected. The briefing meeting and this research are a team activity. They will configure a
base of information to take their design decisions.
Project Part I – Individual proposals
From the information previously collected, each team member develops a logo, a set of
stationery to the client (business card, letterhead, envelopes and a folder) and a corporate
identity manual. This step lasts four weeks and is supervised by the professor through
individual consultations.
The weekly appointment with the professor involves the discussion, among others, of
the key concepts underlying the work, conceptual alternatives, logo definition, the
development of the set of stationery, and the corporate identity manual. Parallel to these
activities, the students refine the logo, prepare mock-ups of the stationery and the manual
which is done under supervision of the professor of Graphic Fundamentals.
At the end of this process, students present these individual outcomes for their clients
in the classroom and have their corporate identities evaluated by the professor. It is
noteworthy that the classroom layout is completely changed to simulate individual
conference tables for each team and their clients as previously mentioned. It promotes a
different perception of the space and puts students in a different mood, that is, at that
moment they are not students nor behave like students, they are professionals presenting
their work to clients. This allows the team meetings take place simultaneously and with
minimal interference, increasing and stimulating interaction between team members and
the entrepreneur. It promotes forms of assessment by the teacher and self-assessment of
those attitudinal contents mentioned above.
Along this process, the professor emphasizes the importance of benchmarks and
foments reflections from real world design solutions. Some variables are outlined early in
the project but many others will only be discovered in the design process. As states Schön:
The work of the practicum is accomplished through some combination of the student’s
learning by doing, her interactions with coaches and fellow students, and a more
diffuse process of ‘background learning.’
Students practice in a double sense. In simulated, partial, or protected form, they
engage in the practice they wish to learn. [...] They do these things under the guidance
237
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
of a senior practitioner [...]. From time to time, these individuals may teach in the
conventional sense, communicating information, advocating theories, describing
examples of practice. Mainly, however, they function as coaches whose main activities
are demonstrating, advising, questioning, and criticizing.
Most practicums involve groups of students who are often as important to one another
as the coach. Sometimes they play the coach’s role. And it is through the medium of
the group that a student can immerse himself in the world of the practicum – the allencompassing worlds of a design studio, [...] learning new habits of thought and action.
Learning by exposure and immersion, background learning, often proceeds without
conscious awareness, although a student may become aware of it later on, as he moves
into a different setting. (Schön, 1987. Kindle edition).
After the discussion about the individual projects and its analysis by the entrepreneurs,
they are required to choose which design solution is the most appropriate for their
business. They understand the importance of this decision and that it is the ending point of
this phase. According to Wheeler, the organization of the process is ‘defined by distinct
phases with logical beginning and ending points, which allow decision making at the
appropriate intervals’ (Wheeler, 2003. p. 54).
Project Part II – Refining the solution
Once chosen, the design will undergo development by the whole team. On the next
four weeks, teams will have new appointments with the professor to help them improve
the design. The whole team will refine the chosen project based on comments and
remarks made by the entrepreneurs and on discussions with the professor. We consider
the guidance, at this moment, critical for the quality of outcomes. It is the professor's task
to encourage the students to adopt an effective teamwork approach from that moment
on.
The team also refines and completes the corporate identity manual. A meeting for final
presentation of the identities to the clients is prepared including mock-ups and a printed
manual. On this third and last meeting in the classroom, the layout is once more changed
in the same way as before, to provide conference tables to the teams. The entrepreneurs
return to ESPM-SP to check out the project outcomes for their company's' corporate
identity. The teams show their clients the refined logo, the stationery and the corporate
identity manual, which are the agreed delivery between ESPM-SP and CIETEC. From this
moment, there is no room for new refinements since the semester is at the end.
Final gathering for delivering the Corporate Identity Manual
The final gathering is a ceremony in the school's auditorium when the Corporate
Identity Manual shall be handed to the entrepreneurs. In addition to the printed version of
the Manual and the logos for immediate use, they also receive a digital one. On this
partnership it is agreed that the entrepreneurs are responsible for the printing costs of this
hardcover manual.
Students, professors, the Graphic Design Undergraduate Dean, the General
Undergraduate Dean and the Academic Dean of ESPM-SP, and the CEO and the
Partnership Coordinator at CIETEC are invited to this ceremony. Each team is summoned to
hand over officially the Corporate Identity Manual to his client. The corporate identities
238
Educating by Design
created are shown on the screen (see figure 1). Thereby, the outcomes are shared and
appreciated by all participants.
Figure 1
Example of screens (two screens for each identity) shown on the Ceremony for each
corporate identity. Source: author's image.
At the end of this gathering, one student and one entrepreneur are invited to give an
oral testimony on behalf of their peers about the process. These information are important
subsidies for reflection and for improving the partnership.
Project and partnership evaluation
From the second half of 2008, CIETEC makes semi-annual qualitative evaluation with
the entrepreneurs who participate in the partnership. From 2010 onwards in addition to
qualitative information (open questions), it included closed questions to be answered
using the following criteria:
I expected something else (EsE);
it was below my expectations (BmE);
it met my expectations (MmE); and
it exceeded my expectations (EmE).
In 2009 it was not done, and we still don't have the evaluations for the second
semester of 2012 and the years 2013 and 2014.
The questions are about the progress of the project, the coordination of the work at
CIETEC, the final outcomes and the partnership in general.
The quantitative researches were done with 57 entrepreneurs/companies divided as
follows:
2010-1 – 9 entrepreneurs/companies
2010-2 – 9 entrepreneurs/companies
2011-1 – 15 entrepreneurs/companies
2011-2 – 11 entrepreneurs/companies
2012-1 – 13 entrepreneurs/companies
239
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
Quantitative research
Below we show summary tables of the above mentioned data:
TABLE 1 - PROJECT PROGRESS25
EsE
BmE
MmE
EmE
2010-1
0%
0%
44.0%
56.0%
2010-2
0%
11.0%
44.5%
44.5%
2011-1
0%
21.3%
43.0%
35.7%
2011-2
9.0%
9.0%
64.0%
18.0%
2012-1
0%
25.0%
67.0%
8.0%
84.9% of the entrepreneurs considered that the project progress met or exceeded their
expectations. However, it is noteworthy that it has become harder to exceed their
expectations. We believe it may be related to the fact that the partnership has reached
maturity, and also that each new entrepreneur see the brand identities created in previous
semesters for their colleagues and sets higher their own expectations. It is important to
mention that every semester ESPM-SP and CIETEC organize an exhibition of the identities
created in the previous semester.
TABLE 2 - FINAL OUTCOMES
EsE
BmE
MmE
EmE
2010-1
0%
0%
22.0%
78.0%
2010-2
0%
0%
44.4%
55.6%
2011-1
0%
35.7%
35.7%
28.6%
2011-2
18.2%
9.1%
27.3%
45.5%
2012-1
16.7%
33.3%
33.3%
16.7%
For the final outcomes, we observed that 77.4% of the entrepreneurs considered that
the outcome of the project met or exceeded their expectations. However it is important to
observe the increase in the number of entrepreneurs who expected something else. We
found it worrying and believed they were misinformed about what to expect from the
partnership. So, CIETEC's coordination addressed the problem making an initial
presentation to the entrepreneurs every semester when they detail, among others, what
25
The abbreviations used refer to: EsE: I expected something else; BmE: it was below my
expectations; MmE: it met my expectations; and EmE: it exceeded my expectations.
240
Educating by Design
the entrepreneurs should expect from the partnership and what outcomes they will
receive.
TABLE 3 - ESPM-SP/CIETEC PARTNERSHIP
EsE
BmE
MmE
EmE
2010-1
0%
0%
11.0%
89.0%
2010-2
0%
0%
22.2%
77.8%
2011-1
0%
50.0%
25.0%
25.0%
2011-2
9.1%
9.1%
27.3%
54.6%
2012-1
0%
16.7%
25.0%
58.3%
About the partnership, 83.0% of entrepreneurs considered that it met or exceeded
their expectations.
The research of the second semester of 2008 (which used other criteria as mentioned
above), was answered by five of eleven participant entrepreneurs. Among the information
collected by that assessment, using excellent, good, regular and bad as criteria:
All of them (100% – five entrepreneurs) rated the partnership as excellent;
The outcome of the brand identities was considered excellent by three entrepreneurs
(60%) and good by two entrepreneurs (40%);
The project as a whole was rated excellent by three entrepreneurs (60%) and good by
two entrepreneurs (40%).
We noticed that no entrepreneur considered the results regular or bad, by any of the
above criteria.
TABLE 4 - USE OF THE CORPORATE IDENTITIES
No
Partly
Yes
2010-1
0%
0%
100.0%
2010-2
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
2011-1
13.3%
20.0%
66.7%
2011-2
16.7%
0%
83.3%
2012-1
50.0%
0%
50.0%
81.8 % of the entrepreneurs said they will use fully or partially the corporate identities
created by the students. It is worrying the great increase of those entrepreneurs who don't
intend to use them. We have improved the briefing to enrich the quality of information
that will base the project. Future researches may tell us if it has had any impact on these
numbers.
241
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
We show below (see figures 2 to 4) samples of materials the entrepreneurs are
effectively using. Some of them have used the logo in materials other than the stationery,
such as press kits, candy packagings, CD-ROMs, brochures and folders. What is relevant to
notice is that all of them respect the rules in the Corporate Identity Manual, like minimum
sizes and clear spaces. That shows they understood the importance of following those
rules to keep the coherence and consistency of their businesses' images.
Figure 2
Corporate Identities developed for Cemsa – mass spectrometry center applied, created in
the first semester of 2009 by André Bauer, Lucas Veloso and Pedro Spinola; Cast
Overmedia – video and media management, created in the first semester of 2010 by
André Puga, Eric Delbosque and Thomas Mourão; KPI Farm – land measurements
technology, created in the second semester of 2010 by Flora Tortorelli, Juliana Barletta
and Matheus Zoccal and Enercycle – energy recycling, created in the first semester of
2012 by Alex Fidelholc and Arthur Franco.
242
Educating by Design
Figure 3
Corporate Identity for Chem4u, a chemical company, developed in the second semester of
2010by the students André Tanahara, Lorena Bósio and Marianne Meni.
Figure 4
Corporate Identity for Aztek, a mobile learning company, developed in the second
semester of 2009by the students Fabiana Seto, Flávia Amato and Gustavo Alcover.
243
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
CONCLUSION
The project is supportive of a logic of action. It is not only theory nor only practice, it
anchors itself in its discourse and in its own doing (BOUTINET, 2002, p. 255. Our
translation).
Educating in design involves specific issues and singularities in the pursuit of
knowledge, and in this pedagogical experience we seek to reinforce some issues relating to
education in general and to educating by projects. We have shown theoretical
contributions combined with practical experience which demonstrated its success.
Different pedagogical actions call for approaches and epistemological concepts within
certain frames of reference (our own symbolic systems), where we find a plural sense.
It is important to clear that, in the project and its accomplishment, the solution is just
one among possible alternatives; hence the appropriateness, the scenario and the
purposes are what is pursued and questioned in each and every one of particular projects.
To carry out a project and at the same time its ambitions and expansions, it is the aim
to act that makes one perceive when this project's scope and limitations have been
reached. Thus, to design is also a way to seeing the present-future relationship and insert
perspective in the training of students with an eye in their personal achievements and also
as citizens.
Along these eight years of uninterrupted partnership with CIETEC, 202 companies had
their corporate identities created by students of ESPM-SP. We do believe that this
partnership has been reinforcing the objectives and the theoretical and methodological
proposal of the Graphic Design Undergraduate valued by the College's pedagogical project.
Thereby, when we work, as we do, with a practical and reflective teaching, we glimpse
something that can bring diverse contents and experiences to the students. These are not
confined only to this immediate project, they spread throughout their academic and
professional lives. Teaching by projects is, in our point of view, what anchors this
proposition of a graphic design undergraduate more properly.
This unique experience (we know of no other of this kind in Brazil) is a dynamic process
that undergoes constant and permanent revision and update. We feel there is always
room for improvement and we are attentive to it.
We may not forget the importance of this connection with entrepreneurs to raise their
awareness (and also the student´s) about the strategic dimension of design. The briefing
meeting has been reported as one of the most important moments of the whole project
since it brings to light reflections and thoughts about the businesses that were not
previously discussed. In this sense, clients and designers (students in this case) think
together about strategic possibilities for their companies images and communication with
its clients.
This partnership and the refined methodology developed for this process have proved
effective by research in helping to close the gap between academic training and
professional life. We must also point the relevant role of the professor along the whole
project. Besides providing contents – not just conceptual or technical, but also attitudinal
or behavioral – he must show a firm hand in following the process very close. He must also
be available to the students who see him as a guide through this sometimes anguishing
process of growth and maturation. Students have reported this experience as a turning
point in their lifes. We feel that their commitment to this project arises in them a desire to
244
Educating by Design
do more during their undergraduate and to improve their knowledge to become the best
possible future graphic designers.
References
Anastasiou, L. & Alves, L. (2004). Processos de ensinagem na universidade: pressupostos
para as estratégias de trabalho em aula. Joinville, Brazil: UNIVILLE.
Boutinet, J. (2002). Anthropologie du projet. Paris, France: PUF.
Lupinacci, Ana Lucia G.R. (2012). Design, projeto, linguagem, educação: das reflexões às
híbridas ações. PhD Thesis. São Paulo, Brazil: ECA-USP.
Machado, N. (2004). Educação, projetos e valores. São Paulo, Brazil: Escrituras.
Machado, N. (2009). Educação – competência e qualidade. São Paulo, Brazil: Escrituras
Polanyi, M. (1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, UK: Peter Smith.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: toward a new design for teaching
and learning in the professions. San Francisco, United States: Jossey-Bass. Kindle
edition.
Wheeler, A. (2003). Designing Brand Identity: an essential guide for the whole branding
team. Hoboken, United States: Wiley.
245
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum: A Framework
For Shaping a Participatory, Human-Centered Design
Course
Pamela NAPIER* and Terri WADA
Indiana University, Herron School of Art and Design
*pcnapier@iupui.edu
Abstract: Within design education and practice today, new ways are
continuously being developed to utilize Design Thinking in response to social,
environmental, economic, and cultural factors. In the Visual Communication
Design program at Indiana University, Herron School of Art and Design, Design
Thinking is an integral component to both curriculum development and course
content. In considering the inherent complexity of human-centered design—
which focuses on diverse stakeholder collaboration and participation within the
design process—simply understanding a design process and methods for
collecting data is not enough. Students must go through a process of building a
value system for conducting participatory design research. They must also
understand the nature of the changing role of designers, from more traditional
‘making’ roles, to design facilitators who must possess a particular mindset,
model certain characteristics, employ distinct skill sets and use a specific
approach. This presentation and paper will focus on an in-depth case study that
describes the authors' methodology for integrating Design Thinking into the
course curriculum of an undergraduate senior-level studio course, titled ‘Design
for Innovation: Introduction to Design Methods,’ where students work in a
variety of real contexts with diverse stakeholders throughout the design process.
Keywords: Design facilitation, Participatory methods
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Introduction
Our profession is changing dramatically and in doing so, redefining what today’s visual
communication designer is and does. Various factors may be seen as bringing about this
change including: evolving designer roles, a focus on participatory approaches, and a shift
to a problem-seeking—as opposed to problem-solving—mentality. Within this evolving
discipline, emphasis on human-centered design practices and programs have emerged in
response to an identified need for including user perspectives. Currently, there appears to
be quite a bit of existing research and texts available in the areas of methods and
processes for participatory design research. However, due to the inherent complexity of
human-centered design—which focuses on diverse stakeholder engagement, collaboration
and participation within a design process—simply understanding a design process and
deploying design research methods is not enough.
From a professional standpoint, the designer of today must be able to develop design
activities that empower stakeholders to express, make, evaluate and collaborate.
Additionally, the designer of today must be able to understand the increased value that
stakeholders bring to the design process and must be able to facilitate others through the
design process.
Curriculum
Within the Visual Communication Design Undergraduate program at Indiana University
Herron School of Art and Design, specifically in the junior and senior year, we utilize a
human-centered approach to social innovation projects. We not only place emphasis on
understanding and utilizing Design Thinking throughout a collaborative design process, and
developing and deploying appropriate design research methods, but we also emphasize
design facilitation as a distinctive capacity necessary for driving and leading participatory
design or co-design approaches that are seemingly fundamental in human-centered
design.
The student experience in the senior year is focused around three core studio courses:
Visual Communication Design 5: Introduction to Design Methods; Visual Communication
Design 6: Capstone Portfolio; and selecting one of two tracks: Design Interaction: Object
and Place I and II, or Designing People-centered Services I and II.
While students have had some experience in conducting research to inform visual
communication design outcomes, their first introduction to the myriad of design research
methods that exist (and how to select and deploy them throughout the design process),
happens in the first semester of their senior year.
Visual Communication Design 5: Introduction to Design Methods is the penultimate
studio (the main curricular experience) in the fall semester, and is an important step in all
visual communication design students’ educational experience. They continue building
their skills for developing collaborative, student-driven research projects, however in this
course, they are beginning to dive deeper into the theory behind participatory design
research, and utilizing more primary research methods versus mainly secondary research.
Primary research can be defined as ‘original research that is conducted by an organization
for its own use,’ versus secondary research, which refers to ‘reviewing a collection of data
or findings that have previously been published by an outside party, for an alternative
function’ (Visocky O’Grady, 2006).
247
NAPIER & WADA
The purpose of this course is to prepare senior visual communication design students
to successfully utilize design as a catalyst for change and innovation in our society and
culture. Within the course, students learn how to apply and integrate theory and skills for
selecting, developing and deploying design research methods throughout a creative
problem-solving design process. Students work in real contexts with stakeholders to
develop appropriate, meaningful and innovative solutions to complex ‘unframed’
challenges. Meaning that students conduct research in situations where problems have yet
to be defined, and they must work with people to identify and frame the challenges that
they will be trying to address. This may result in developing solutions that are outside of
the traditional expected visual communication outcomes. Special emphasis is placed on
service-learning as a pedagogical approach, and students are asked to continuously reflect
on their identity as a civic-minded designer.
Students in this course are tasked with first, self-selecting into groups of 3-5 people,
based on preliminary understanding of each student’s individual strengths, weaknesses
and future interests. ‘A study by Denton, published in 1997, examined some factors
involved in the planning and practice of multidisciplinary team-based design project work
at undergraduate level. The study reports that since industries increasingly require more
multidisciplinary project work than monodisciplinary team work, the demand for design
college graduates with experience in the former is increasing’ (Kwon & Jang, 2013).
Once they have their group formed, they are then tasked with selecting a context in the
local community (which could be a place, a service or organization, or a particular
experience) and identifying and framing a social issue/concern or problem space within
that context. Examples of issues could range from innovation in healthcare, to
governmental participation, to enhancing transportation. Students develop an action plan
for design research and utilize participatory design research methods to understand the
needs of the community and enable community members to generate ideas and evaluate
the proposed solutions. The methods that the students develop and deploy allow
community members to become co-designers throughout the process, in order to develop
the most appropriate and meaningful solutions.
A key learning outcome of this course is the ability to empathize with the people who
will be affected by or use the designed solution, be it a product, a service or some kind of
interaction. Civic-engagement is a critical component for this learning outcome, as it allows
students to work directly with stakeholders to deeply understand their issues and needs,
thus building empathy for them throughout the design process.
Course Structure and Activities
This 6-credit course meets in the studio for 2.5 hours, three times per week, for 16
weeks. The semester is segmented according to a high-level design process, which gets
broken down into three phases: Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation. Emphasis is placed on
the selection, development and deployment of appropriate design research methods
within each phase.
The overall semester plan is broken down into 8 main areas: Developing a Mission
Statement; Introduction to Design Thinking; Team Formation, Context Selection and
Developing a Research Plan; Visualizing Information; Analysis Phase; Synthesis Phase;
Evaluation Phase; and Reflection.
248
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
The first 2 weeks of the semester focus on developing a personal mission statement; an
introduction to design thinking and participatory design research; team formation, context
selection and building a research plan; and techniques and activities to practice visualizing
information. The students then spend 4 weeks in the analysis phase, 4 weeks in the
synthesis phase, and 2 weeks in the evaluation phase. Throughout the three phases, each
week the students select at least one new method to execute. The last week focuses on
critical reflection and presentation of final deliverables.
The breakdown of weekly activities during the three phases stays within a consistent
structure. One day is reserved for ‘field research days,’ where the students are expected to
be in the field conducting research, working with stakeholders and participants and
deploying methods. On another day, the student groups meet with the instructors to
report on the method/s that they conducted, and their plans for selecting new method/s
for the following week. And the last day is reserved for reporting back to the entire class,
creating highly visual presentations describing the method/s, tools and process used,
including visualizations that portray the collected data, and findings and insights from
those particular methods.
The required books for the course included Vijay Kumar’s ‘101 Design Methods: A
Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your Organization,’ and Bruce Hanington
and Bella Martin’s ‘Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex
Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions.’ These texts are used
as a starting point for identifying and selecting methods, and students are encouraged to
seek out other sources as well. These resources have been selected as the methods
presented enabled students to consider how research could be incorporated throughout a
design process, both with diverse stakeholders or designers only.
‘While research skills are more typically expected of graduate students, studies in
general education and design can introduce undergraduate students to research methods
and prepare them to read and use findings in studio projects. Student work at all levels,
therefore, should be informed by the study of:
What people want and need
What the context demands
How things get planned, produced and distributed
The effects of design action
Tools and methods for exploring these issues’ (Grefe, 2012, para. 9, section 5
‘Research).
The following sections describe the eight main areas of the semester activities,
highlighting both process and content.
Developing a Mission Statement
Upon entering their final year of college, most senior visual communication design
students in the program are met with the mixed emotions of anxiety and excitement at the
prospect of entering the ‘real world’ in just 8 months.
In order to enable the students to be reflective, as well as projective, on the first day of
class, students are given the assignment to develop a ‘personal mission statement.’ This is
intended to have students take inventory of where they are currently in their educational
249
NAPIER & WADA
experience, and where they plan to go professionally. Taken from an article published by
the Levo League, a ‘growing community of professional women seeking advice, inspiration,
and the tools needed to succeed,’ a series of questions and prompts are given to the
students to help craft their mission statement. First, they go through a process of taking an
inventory of their character strengths and virtues, examining their dominant personality
traits. Next, they clarify and define where there personal and professional priorities lie.
Then, they gather all of this information and reflect on four questions: Why are you here in
the first place? What does the world need most that you are uniquely able to provide?
What are you willing to sacrifice? What matters more than money? They are also given the
author’s example to think about how to structure their mission statement. The article,
written by the Levo League, titled ‘3 Steps to Creating a Personal Mission Statement’ is
structured into four categories: Who I am/What I value; Impact or Legacy I want to leave;
Professional Values; Personal Values (3 Steps, 2012). The students are given about a week
to complete their mission statement, and are told that they will be revisiting it at the end
of the semester.
Starting the semester with quite a heavy, introspective writing assignment is then
immediately followed by a quick, engaging activity that gives them a surface-level
understanding of the principles, process and tools used for design thinking.
Crash Course in Design Thinking
The recent emergence of open-source, human-centered design thinking tools and
resources have helped to proliferate design thinking as an approach to create meaningful
change in many new and broader contexts, such as business, healthcare and community
development. Within design education specifically, resources like the ‘Design Thinking for
Educators’ toolkit published by IDEO, and the ‘Virtual Crash Course in Design Thinking,’
shared by Stanford’s d.school, enable educators to consider how to integrate new
processes, tools and methods for design thinking into their curriculum.
Within the VC5 course, the d.school’s ‘Virtual Crash Course’ (Welcome to the Virtual,
2015) was used to provide an introduction to design thinking. The instructors facilitated
the 90-minute activity, allowing students to experience a fast-paced exploration of a
design process, using some basic principles of design thinking.
On the second day of class, students are asked to pair up and are given a set of
worksheets with several prompts. They are facilitated through a series of activities, from
interviewing each other, to sketching and prototyping ideas, to developing solutions in
order to ‘redesign the gift-giving experience’ for their partner. Each phase of the process is
timed, ranging anywhere from 1- to 10-minute activities. During the prototyping phase,
students are given an array of materials to physically build their solutions, such as pipe
cleaners, popsicle sticks, tape and tissue paper, markers, etc. At the end of the exercise,
students engage in a reflective group discussion, commenting on their experience and
their understanding of the principles of design thinking.
This 90-minute exercise allows students to experience the generative, iterative nature
of design thinking, before diving into a much longer process that will span a timeframe of
10 weeks.
250
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Team Formation, Context Selection and Research Plan
Once the students have developed their personal mission statement, and have
participated in a ‘crash course’ in design thinking, they are given a few readings,
specifically Tim Brown’s 2008 article in Harvard Business Review titled ‘Design Thinking.’
After a group discussion over the reading students are given time to self-select their teams
for their project work for the rest of the semester. Given that the students have been in
the same cohort for two years, we allowed them to develop their own 3-5 person teams,
with the caveat that they should think about their own strengths and weaknesses, their
preferred ways of working, and their relationships with one another. Once the teams were
formed, they were required to come up with a team name with the intention of building
some initial team cohesion and comradery.
Once the teams were formed, the students’ first task was to select a context within the
local community (which could be a place, a service or organization, or a particular
experience). The students were given an initial list of criteria to consider for selecting their
context. This included criteria such as accessibility; Was the context easy to access? Could
they visit the context on multiple occasions? Would there be people they could easily
engage with? Was it free to visit, or did it cost money? Was it open during class studio
hours? Another given criteria was locality; Was it close enough to be able to visit and
engage with people in person on multiple occasions?
With their given criteria, the students then worked within their teams to determine
further criteria that was important to them. Some examples included: Cost: How much
would each student be able to invest in transportation, materials, time spent outside of
class, etc.; Transportation: Were each of the team members able to visit the location/s?
Did it need to be on-campus if there were team members who didn’t have vehicles?;
Connections: Did any of the team members have any personal or professional connections
they could capitalize on?; and Interest: Did each of the team members have a vested
interest in the context?
Each of the teams spent time outside of class individually thinking about and searching
for possible contexts. When they came back together, they had to narrow down to three
possible contexts that they would present to the instructors to receive guidance and
feedback on selecting one to move forward with. Of the nine student teams, the final
selected contexts ranged from focusing on shuttle transportation on campus, to the
service experience at a local coffee shop, to the independent local musicians’ experience in
producing and promoting their music.
Once the teams narrowed their context selection, they were then tasked with
developing an initial research plan. They were given an example research plan that was
adapted from the Instructional Assessment Resources site from the University of Texas at
Austin, which focused on eight main categories: Project Title, List of Investigators, Project
Goals, Background and Significance, Methods of Research and Design, Participants and
Interaction, Potential risks, and Potential Benefits (Instructional, 2011).
Each of the teams developed their research plan and presented it to the instructors,
receiving detailed feedback for how to move forward and begin their initial research.
Visualizing Information
As the students began to conduct their initial secondary research, they were given a
short assignment to find a complex data set and visualize it in two very different ways.
251
NAPIER & WADA
Through short readings and lectures, the students were reminded about the importance of
the ability to visualize complex information in order to add meaning to collected data,
represent and communicate relationships and patterns, and bring clarity to concepts.
The students spent roughly 3-4 days creating their visuals, at the end of which a full
class critique was held. During the critique students provided comments and gave
constructive criticism and feedback to each other, focusing on the layout, composition,
visual vocabulary, type treatments, etc. of each of their peer’s visuals.
This short activity was meant to get the students to start practicing how to visualize
complex information for the purposes of clarity and communication; a refresher of sorts to
practice their skills of information design.
Design Process for Research
As previously mentioned, to help students frame their research this course utilized a
general design process consisting of 3 phases: analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Although
there are many differing processes for approaching design both within visual
communication as well as other design disciplines, the analysis, synthesis, evaluation
model can be recognized as one of the highest-level design processes (Dorst, 2009).
As presented in the course, the Analysis phase is concerned with conducting research
to understand the context of the project for the purpose of developing insights and
framing root problems or challenges. Building upon understanding developed in the
previous phase, Synthesis then focuses on generating solution ideas to address these root
problems or challenges. Lastly, the Evaluation phase centers around further developing
ideas gathered from the Synthesis phase in order to test, refine and iterate upon
prototyped solutions.
In moving through the three phases, each week every team was required to plan,
conduct and present on at least one research method respective to whichever phase of
design process they were working in. To aid in carrying out their weekly research, teams
met independently with the course instructors once per week to briefly discuss findings
from previous methods, propose the next method and get feedback on tools developed for
carrying out the next method. Each team also presented the same information, in a more
formal manner, to the rest of the class in order to gather additional feedback as well as
engage students in reflective practice. The teams then utilized their remaining weekly
course time conducting research in the field.
Analysis Phase
Beginning their participatory research in analysis, students were first introduced to the
purpose and outcomes of the Analysis phase through a facilitated discussion. Here it was
established that the main goal of this phase was to gather data focused on developing an
understanding about the research context. For example: who are the stakeholders; what
does the physical environment look like; what is the culture; what actions, behaviors and
values exist; what are the current experiences of people within the context; and so on.
As the teams moved through the Analysis phase, most began by conducting
ethnographic observations and one-on-one interviews. These methods enabled students
to gather a rich amount of qualitative data that they would then need to make sense of, or
(for lack of better terms at the time), analyze and synthesize. Use of these terms within a
larger process constructed upon the same, proved problematic as students at times
252
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
became quite confused about why they were synthesizing information within the Analysis
phase. Prior to carrying out their methods with participants, each team was required to
meet with the instructors to discuss their plans for engaging people in context and to
obtain suggestions or feedback on any tools they would be using.
Figure 1
Student developed observation tool
Drawing from their professional experience as design researchers, the course
instructors were able to offer insights from a high-level, considering the method choice as
a whole in relation to the research question being explored. Under closer examination, the
instructors also provided guidance in terms of both existing tools that could be used—such
as digital cameras, notepads, or audio recorders—along with created tools, worksheets,
interview questions, and observation frameworks, for example.
As the teams gathered data via their research method, emphasis was placed on the
development of visuals to both assist students in making sense of their data, along with
enabling others to engage with their research process and findings. Several of these visuals
took form as an infographic or rough experience map. Based on a newly developed
understanding about the research context, the teams were then guided to develop a new
research question upon which to shape the next method around. This activity of framing a
weekly research question encouraged the students to reflect on the work they had done
so far, in order to identify missing perspectives or factors thus, areas for further research.
Through repeating this process of contextual exploration over four weeks, the students
were able to narrow in on a root problem, which then became a challenge statement for
moving into the Synthesis phase. A challenge statement is a problem that is restated in the
form of a question (Basadur, 1994). At Herron School of Art and Design, we have adopted
the practice of restating problems as ‘how might we’ statements. Following are a couple of
examples of teams’ challenge statements: ‘How might we create a more
engaging first floor that is more inspiring, inviting and promotes communication within
253
NAPIER & WADA
Platform?’ and ‘How might we create a more social dining environment to eliminate the
‘open-seat, closed-table’ concept?’
Synthesis Phase
Once each team developed their challenge statement, they moved into the Synthesis
Phase. Within the course and project context, this phase focuses on solution development
through idea generation and prototyping. Students were encouraged to hold participatory
sessions enabling participants to generate and develop ideas through focused, facilitated
activities.
Generally, the teams worked through synthesis, by first thinking divergently and
gathering many ideas. From those ideas, themes or patterns were identified and used to
enable more focused ideation in subsequent methods. An example of a method pairing
used by one team was: ‘brainwalking’ and ‘affinity clustering,’ followed by focused
brainstorming on post-its.
Figure 2
Student developed model of brainwalking session
254
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Figure 3
Focused post-it brainstorm
Within this divergent step of idea generation, most ideas either offer only part of a
solution or are much too vague to move forward with. At this point, ideas then need to be
further fleshed out and concretized through modeling or prototyping. A few methods
utilized by teams were: card sorting as a modular modeling activity, solution
storyboarding, and co-design sessions.
Figure 4
Student developed modular concept modeling cards in action
255
NAPIER & WADA
Figure 5
Student developed solution storyboard tools in action
As outcomes for the Synthesis phase, teams were expected to create rough solution
prototypes to serve as models that could be taken into the next phase of Evaluation.
Evaluation Phase
Evaluation, being the shortest phase, was only allotted two weeks. This rapid
structuring was intentional in creating the course; considering the main emphasis on
refinement of an existing model through participant feedback, less time would be needed
to shape methods and tools to do so.
Working through this phase, teams generally utilized their solution prototype, resulting
from the Synthesis phase, as a prompting point for gathering feedback from participants
from multiple perspectives. These engagements took place primarily through either oneon-one or group interactions. A few example methods used by the teams included:
feedback interviews, evaluative questionnaires, and ergonomic studies.
256
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Figure 6
Solution prototype used in feedback interview
As an expected outcome from the Evaluation phase, teams were required to develop a
refined prototype that incorporated participant feedback. Due to the diversity across the
resulting solutions from each team, the course could not require a specific outcome, such
as a website, an app, and so forth. Instead, teams were instructed to produce a final
deliverable that successfully modeled or represented their solution concept to the highestlevel of fidelity that the students’ skills would allow. In this case, a few outcomes that
teams developed included a conceptual model for a non-profit music organization, interior
concepts for remodeling an on-campus dinning area, and spatial layouts along with
concepts for an environmental communication piece.
Reflection
Critical reflection is a core component of studio courses within the Visual
Communication Design program at Herron School of Art and Design. Emphasis is placed on
two specific forms of reflection: ‘reflection-in-action,’ and ‘reflection-on-action.’
Donald Shön, an influential thinker in the twentieth century who worked on developing
the theory and practice of reflective professional learning, defined reflection-in-action as a
practice where the designer is continually reflecting throughout the process on the current
understanding of the problem space and the validity and appropriateness of the ideas and
solutions being developed (Dorst & Lawson, 2009). Bryan Lawson and Kees Dorst, who
developed a new model of design expertise, describe reflection-on-action as being able to
step back from a particular design activity to assess the process or ‘flow’ of the activity or
activities as a whole (Dorst & Lawson, 2009).
While each weekly presentation allowed the students to share their moments of
reflection throughout their research, they were also required to participate in a whole
class discussion, as well as complete a written reflection, at the end of the semester.
257
NAPIER & WADA
On the last day of class, students turned in both digital and print versions of their final
case studies that resulted in various formats, from books, to websites, to digital magazines.
The case study was to highlight their context, research, process, methods, findings and
final prototyped solutions. They spent the first third of the class time looking at each
other’s work and talking amongst one another. Once everyone had a chance to view all of
the work, the instructors facilitated a group reflection discussion. Some of the prompting
questions included: How has this course experience changed/impacted your understanding
of participatory design? What were some of the most valuable experiences, both positive
and negative? How do you envision the content and experiences of this course
impacting/influencing what you will do in your Capstone course the following semester,
and even after you graduate?
In addition to the group reflection discussion, students turned in a final written
reflection. They were given the DEAL Model for Critical Reflection, developed by Dr. Patti
Clayton of North Carolina State University (Clayton, n.d.) which asks them to break down
their experiences and reflection into three areas: ‘Describe, Examine, and Articulate
Learning.’ They were asked to reflect on either one experience in particular, or their overall
experience in the course, connecting it back to the personal mission statement they
developed in the beginning of the semester, taking into consideration their personal and
professional goals and values. As one student stated:
‘VC5 has adjusted my scope on my professional values in that with any work
environment, it’s about meeting your supervisors requests as well as setting realistic
personal goals and treating others in the work field with respect. This course assisted me
with developing real research methods, involving real participants and working with real
stakeholders, which has been very different from previous VCD courses. This course helped
me to get out of myself and to take risks, to have faith, and to take the time to experiment,
ideate, test prototypes, and present concepts to stakeholders, not knowing how they
would respond.’
While critical reflection is a core component to students’ learning experience in the
classroom, it is also essential for design educators to continuously evaluate and reflect on
the overall experiences and outcomes of the courses they teach. As part of this practice,
the instructors of this course came together at the end of the semester, and went through
a process of comparing observations and analyzing what went well and what didn't
throughout the course.
Reflection of Course Process & Outcomes
Upon reflecting on the course, the instructors identified three main challenge areas
that have been re-examined and addressed on multiple levels. The new approaches and
frameworks developed will be implemented in the Fall Semester of 2015.
Challenge area 1: Trouble understanding and building a value
system for Human-centered Design approaches
Despite the inherent emphasis on human-centeredness throughout both the
undergraduate and graduate programs at the school where the authors teach, there seems
to be no existing platform through which the values for and benefits of human-centered
258
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
approaches in design are intentionally introduced and promoted to undergraduate
students. As a result of this oversight, students appear to grasp the importance of
conducting human-centered research within the Analysis phase of a project. However,
within the solution-focused Synthesis phase, a few students adopted a ‘design expert’
mentality, where the students’ claim that their education and experience in visual
communication design means that they ‘know what is good’ for the client and users. Upon
adopting this mindset, these students refused to see the value of engaging ‘non-designers’
in generating ideas for solutions, as they determined their exclusive role in developing
ideas.
Although several concepts about collaboration, design-centered research, and design
strategy are touched upon in courses prior to this course, students need to be adequately
primed with a value-system for including people—non-designer people—as stakeholders
and active participants throughout the design process. A loosely developed value-system
that the authors have adopted and established in their human-centered service design
practice, Collabo Creative LLC, sets up three core beliefs:
1. People are experts of their own experiences.
2. All people have the ability to design.
3. Design should be done with people rather than for people.
Derived from concepts expressed by a wide range of designers from Elizabeth Sanders
(founder of Maketools and author of Convivial Toolbox), to John Thackara (director of The
Doors of Perception and author of In the Bubble), to Jane Fulton Suri (IDEO), and John
Heskett (author of Toothpicks and Logos); these three core beliefs provide the underlying
foundation which is necessary for priming students to drive human-centered approaches
in design.
Challenge area 2: How to select, develop and deploy
appropriate design research methods.
While the required books and list of sources that were given to the students provided
examples of methods, processes and tools to use, there has been a consistent issue with
finding established educational materials that are appropriate to use in teaching design
research, whether it’s in graduate or undergraduate curriculum. There exists specific
materials for both practice and application, but little that explore how to build a more
holistic understanding of design research methods, and within the scale and scope that
they need to be used. Several books and open source tools also tend to tie specific
methods to a particular design process, which becomes problematic, given that methods
can serve multiple purposes in multiple phases of a design process.
This has become a research area of particular interest to the authors, and in response
to this challenge area (which has proven to be a challenge at both undergraduate and
graduate levels), they have begun to develop a framework for design research activities,
namely, the selecting, developing and deploying of design research methods.
259
NAPIER & WADA
Figure 7
Framework for shaping design research activities developed by Collabo Creative
The activities that happen throughout the design process can be viewed through the
lens of two different forms of thinking: Divergent thinking and Convergent thinking. Dr.
Min Basadur, Professor Emeritus of Innovation in the Michael G. DeGroote School of
Business at McMaster University and recognized world leader in the field of applied
creativity, describes the skills that are associated with these two forms of thinking:
divergent thinking can be demonstrated by ‘continually seeking new opportunities for
change and improvement; viewing ambiguous situations as desirable; seeking potential
relationships beyond the known facts’ (Simplex, 57). Divergence is about quantity of ideas,
deferring judgment and widening the scope of possibilities. Convergent thinking then, is
demonstrated by ‘taking reasonable risks to proceed on an option instead of waiting for
the perfect answer; and viewing differences of opinion as helpful rather than a hindrance’
(Simplex, 57). Convergence is about the quality of ideas, applying judgment and narrowing
the scope of ideas.
Within divergent thinking there are two categories for developing design research
methods and activities: Exploratory, which has to do with exploring and understanding
‘what exists,’ and resides at the furthest point of divergent thinking; and Generative, which
focuses on exploring ‘what could be.’ Within convergent thinking, there are also two
categories: Sensemaking, which is about making sense of and ‘shaping understanding,’ and
Evaluative, which is focused on ‘shaping decisions,’ and is at the furthest point of
convergence.
The authors have broken down each category, and started to highlight specific design
research methods that may be most appropriate given the type of thinking that is needed
in a given activity:
Exploratory: Ethnographic Observation, Interviews, Participatory Sessions, Cultural
Probes
Generative: Brainstorming, Group Sketching, Rapid Prototyping
260
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Sensemaking: Affinity Diagramming, Flow Analysis, Insights Sorting, Context Mapping
Evaluative: Surveys, Criteria Matrixes, Paper Prototyping, Concept Modeling
If students are given this new framework to help identify, select and deploy design
research methods, they could begin to think about methods in terms of the kind of
thinking they want to enable, versus trying to figure out what is appropriate based on what
phase of the design process they are in.
The authors are currently exploring the development of specific tools that could
accompany this framework, enabling students to think through the anatomy of a method
(which is made up of purpose and application), appropriate contexts for deployment of
methods, and necessary tools needed to execute the method.
However, it is not enough to simply introduce a new framework and process for
deploying design research methods; students must also be able to facilitate design
research activities.
Challenge area 3: Design Facilitation as an emerging skillset
Due to the changing roles of designers today, from more traditional ‘making’ roles, to
being able to facilitate diverse groups of stakeholders throughout the design process,
students must be able to build a new skill set around the practice of design facilitation.
While students in the VC5 class were given a process, process tools, method sources
and a planning framework for the development of participatory sessions, it was not
enough to enable them to develop the skills necessary for facilitating others. Entering their
senior year in the visual communication design program, students have had minimal
experience in facilitating groups of people throughout the design process, and their
previous experiences with design research have focused mainly on secondary research and
engaging others through interviews and surveys, which could be done both in-person and
virtually.
The authors found that the students not only needed more experiences to practice
design facilitation, but also a stronger foundation to build an understanding around the
mindset, skills and characteristics needed to effectively empower people to share, express,
make and evaluate throughout the design process. Through reflection on the course, and
practice within their service design firm, the authors have developed a model that focuses
on two core areas of design facilitation. The first includes the concept of ‘Shaping the
Designer,’ which focuses on Mindset, Skills and Characteristics. The second is about
‘Approach,’ providing the necessary tools for utilizing a human-centered approach. This
includes Process and Process Tools, Human-centered Design Research Methods, and a
Planning Framework.
At the highest level, shaping a designer to carry out effective design facilitation begins
with a mindset that is threefold, based on having a value for empathy, objectivity, and
process-orientation. Skills are directly related to the nature of the design activities being
carried out, and with each kind of activity design facilitators must be able to utilize
different skills or combinations of skills, for example flexibility, visual and verbal
communication, and reflection. And, there are certain characteristics that lend themselves
nicely to the types of skills needed for different activities, such as humility and openmindedness.
261
NAPIER & WADA
In order to carry out a human-centered approach for participatory, collaborative
design, there are essential tools that are needed. The authors have found that within this
approach, there are three essential facets to consider: process and process tools, humancentered design research methods, and a planning framework to aid with planning the
facilitation of participatory design sessions. Founded upon the authors’ professional
experience, both in practice and education, this framework includes six sections that we
believe to be equally essential to carrying out effective approaches to design thinking:
Objectives, Time, Environment, People, Methods and Supplies.
Figure 8
Planning Framework developed by Collabo Creative
In addition to providing the necessary tools for carrying out a human-centered
approach, and further shaping the mindset, skills and characteristics needed for effective
design facilitation, students also need multiple experiences practicing and using these new
skills and tools. They need structured experiences within the safety of the studio to
practice, fail, iterate, and try again.
Conclusion
As previously discussed, resulting from the ever-changing landscape of our societies,
the role that a designer now plays and will play in the future has shifted from focusing
mainly on end of the line, production and implementation, to also include more
collaborative, strategic ‘fuzzy’ front-end facilitation. Given the unique skills and traits that a
visual designer cultivates and hones, they are well positioned to not only design outcomes
262
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
from expertise, but also enable and leverage collaborative creativity from those not
formally versed in design. Thus with this expanding role, the designer of today must now
be able to shape and carryout human-centered research that empowers stakeholders to
express, make, evaluate and collaborate. Additionally, to drive or lead a human-centered
approach, the designer must also understand and ‘buy-in’ to the increased value that
stakeholders bring to the impact of designed outcomes.
Considering the supplemental skills necessary to fulfill both the researcher and
facilitator roles, in addition to the traditional visual designer role, emerging designers
today must be adequately prepared to work in this burgeoning field. Therefore, we have
presented in this paper a working model for developing and offering practical humancentered design experiences to undergraduate, senior visual communication design
students.
References
3 Steps to Creating a Personal Mission Statement. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.levoleague.com/articles/career-advice/personal-mission-statement-threeeasy-steps-defining-creating
Basadur, Dr. Min. ‘Simplex: A Flight to Creativity.’ Canada: The Creative Education
Foundation, Inc. 1994.
Clayton, Dr. Patti. (n.d.). DEAL: A 3-Step Model for Reflection. Retrieved from
http://servicelearning.duke.edu/uploads/media_items/deal-reflectionquestions.original.pdf
Dorst, K. and Lawson, B. (2009). Design Expertise. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Ltd.
Grefe, R. (2016, August 12). Evolving Expectations for Design Education. Retrieved from
http://www.aiga.org/evolving-expectations-for-design-education/
Instructional Assessment Resources. (2011). Retrieved from
https://www.utexas.edu/academic/ctl/assessment/iar/research/plan/examples/explan.pdf
Kumar, Vijay. ‘101 Design Methods: A Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your
Organzation.’ Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2013.
Kwon, D.E., & Jang S.H. (2013). An effect of multidisciplinary design education: creative
problem solving in collaborative design process. In E. Bohemia, I. Digranes, P. Lloyd, E.
Lutnaes, L.M. Nielsen, & J.B. Reitan (Eds.), Design Learning for Tomorrow: Design
Education from Kindergarten to PhD. Paper presented at DRS Cumulus: 2nd International
Conference for Design Education Researchers, 14-17 May 2013, Oslo Norway (183-198).
ABM-media as c/o Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences.
Martin, Bella and Hanington, Bruce. ‘Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research
Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions.’ Beverly,
MA: Rockport Publishers. 2012.
Visocky O’Grady, Jen and Ken. ‘A Designer’s Research Manual: Succeed in Design by
Knowing Your Clients and What They Really Need.’ Gloucester, MA: Rockport
Publishers, Inc. 2006.
Welcome to the Virtual Crash Course in Design Thinking. (2015). Retrieved from
http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/
263
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics
in Design Education
Naz A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
Middle East Technical University, Department of Industrial Design
nborekci@metu.edu.tr
Abstract: A study was conducted on the preliminary and final submissions of five
industrial design education projects carried out in teams, based on the argument
that teams develop characteristics during the design process, and these
characteristics determine the project development levels. The study examined
the features of the 38 project submissions that define project development
levels, which were identified as: qualities of the design solution, representational
qualities, and qualities indicating attainment of educational objectives. These
features helped determining the project development levels as problematic, low
effort, acceptable, satisfactory, detailed and advanced. An analysis of team
compositions revealed the factors affecting team characteristics as: composition
of the team and background of members; voluntariness in team formation and
involvement in group activities; strategic division of labour; management of
team dynamics; team positioning; and, motivation and team ambitions. These
factors were found to be contributing to the success of collaboration among
team members, and affect the level in which a project is developed before
submission. Overall, these findings suggest that various team characteristics can
be described in terms of skills, mental attitude, process conduct and design
outcome.
Keywords: Teamwork in design, team characteristics, design education projects,
project development levels.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Introduction
The studio courses constitute a major part of the curriculum of our four-year
undergraduate program at the METU Department of Industrial Design. The academic year
is composed of two semesters, each with a duration of 14 course weeks. The industrial
design studio courses are 12 hours per week. In the third and fourth year studio courses,
generally around two projects are conducted in a semester (Evyapan, Korkut & Hasdoğan,
2006; Korkut & Evyapan, 2005). When a project is assigned in the course, the students are
presented with a brief that includes a process planning, a project calendar, and
requirements for the stages of the process. Students are directed with individual and panel
critiques from instructors, and also carry out various studio activities to support their
design processes (Evyapan, Korkut & Hasdoğan, 2005; Hasdoğan, Evyapan & Korkut, 2006).
Throughout years, the studio course has evolved such as to incorporate more group work
and design projects carried out in teams. Each academic year, it is aimed to carry out at
least one team project.
Conducting design education projects in student teams requires an effective
management of the process for teams to be able to successfully complete their projects.
Teamwork differs from individual work in design, from various aspects; teams have to
communicate their current thinking, and besides dealing with the design task, teams
organize and execute group activities as part of their work (Stempfle & Badke-Schaub,
2002). Planning activities in advance and keeping within the time schedule are critical in
managing the design process for teams, as well as being able to identify opportunities and
drift from the agreed plan when necessary for the project’s interest (Cross & Cross, 1995).
Team size seems to be a factor that affects team performance and around three to five
members are shown to be ideal in the literature. Cash, Elias, Dekoninck and Culley (2012)
explain that larger teams may produce more ideas but take longer to arrive at decisions;
besides, participation may decrease in larger teams, and actions may require leadership.
Smaller teams on the other hand, may show conflicts in deciding on an idea, due to the
tension that may arise between members, which all the same seems to positively affect
the creative problem solving ability of the team.
A major influence on team performance seems to be the team members’ abilities in
communication and cooperation. Cross and Cross (1995) point to the difficulties that
teams have in arriving at a shared understanding of the design problem and in team
working towards proposing and developing design concepts in response. It is important for
team members to discover, accept and explore their strengths and weaknesses, both
individually, and as a team. This will make it possible to establish a team approach to the
project, with a common understanding of the design problem and an agreement on the
solution area in which design solutions will be explored. Besides, as Cross and Cross (1995)
point out, team members will thus be able to adopt roles within their team, as well as
resolve and avoid conflicts during the process.
Wiltschnig and Christensen (2013) explain that in design teamwork, team members
mostly collaboratively conduct the problem-solution co-evolution (developing an
understanding of the problem and generating solutions for it simultaneously), and this
takes place distributed over time. Therefore, collaborative problem-solution co-evolution
episodes require support in terms of process management and decision-making. Dong,
Kleinsmann and Deken (2013) investigate the mental models that teams adopt with their
265
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
collective cognitive structures and design processes, and assess the match between the
team mental model and the team members’ mental models, as this match is a critical
factor for a team to act in a goal-directed behavior. The course instructors appreciate the
difficulties of conducting teamwork and therefore search for ways to overcome these, and
make use of the team dynamics in a productive way.
Aim of the Study, Methodology and Background
This study was formulated around a concern about how teams can be supported in
succeeding with their projects. The author has observed during the conduct of various
team projects that, the project outcomes are highly influenced from the team
characteristics. Team characteristics define how teams approach a design problem,
conduct the design process and conclude the project, in the mean while organizing the
team dynamics in a way specific to the team, also affecting team performance. Team
characteristics do not only depend on the individual characteristics and design abilities of
the team members, but also develop during the course of the process, as teams carry out
collaborative activities, jointly make critical decisions, and show an effort for the
preparation of their submissions.
Based on this concern, the author was motivated towards understanding the factors
that affect team characteristics and in turn, how team characteristics affect team
performance. For this purpose, a study was formulated based on the examination of the
outcomes of five design education team projects. The author believed that a revision of
previously carried out team projects in terms of process and development levels could
help in determining the performance shown for the submissions, and this in turn could
make it easier to understand the dynamics involved. The aim of this paper is to discuss the
features that constitute the project development levels in undergraduate industrial design
students’ teamwork submissions as a display of team performance, in the meanwhile
exploring the factors that affect team characteristics.
The study analyzed the preliminary and final submissions of a total of 38 team projects
in terms of content and quality. The review also utilized the author’s personal notes on
design progress follow-up, observation on team dynamics, and assessment of team
performance, kept on the teams in course diaries for each academic year. The study
initially reviewed the design briefs of the five team projects from diverse sectors, the
submission requirements for the preliminary and final evaluation phases, and the grading
criteria for the projects. The project briefs were based on real needs identified by partners
from the national industry, and one NGO, and were elaborated by the course instructors
with priority given to educational objectives. Table 1 gives project information and the
number of teams for each.
The process determined for the projects in the briefs followed a similar construct,
allowing the students time for literature and user or on-site research, identification of
design opportunities, idea generation, and selection of initial ideas, followed by a
submission for the preliminary jury. The submission requirements for the preliminary juries
included CAD visualizations of one or two design solutions thought-out in detail, showing
each design solution within its context and its usage described in a scenario. The format
varied, including colour print-out presentation posters or PowerPoint presentations, also
expecting 3D models showing critical features. Following feedback from the preliminary
266
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
jury, teams were expected to develop their design proposals, and prepare their final
presentations. The final submission required presentation boards describing one design
solution in detail within its usage context with CAD visualizations, user-product interaction
scenario, research and process history, technical drawings, justification of anthropometric
dimensions, and detailed 3D models.
Table 1
Project Information
Code
Year
B
2006-2007
Fall
VE
2007-2008
Fall
K
2010-2011
Fall
CN
2013-2014
Fall
ID
2014-2015
Fall
No. of
Teams
Project Title
Food storing and cooking product systems.
Duration: 13 weeks (4 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Digital products for portability and mobility.
Duration: 10 weeks (3 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Open-plan en-suite bathroom products.
Duration: 9 weeks (3 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Sustainability scenarios on neighbourhood identity.
Duration: 6 weeks (2 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Alternative usages of pick-up trucks.
Duration: 10 weeks (4 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
7
9
7
7
8
Evaluation of the projects were carried out by the course instructors, other invited
instructors from the Department and firm representatives, for both the preliminary and
final juries, while the teams presented their projects. The submissions were evaluated in
terms of design, justification, detailing and presentation qualities. Three of the projects
were graded over 4,00, whereas two were graded over 100. Grading for the third and
fourth year studio courses is divided into eight categories ranging from outstanding to fail.
Table 2 shows the distribution of the preliminary and final evaluations for each project into
these grading categories.
Grading categories for the projects
Very good
Good
Adequate
Poor
Very poor
Fail
Preliminary
Jury
Number of
projects per Grading
grading
categories
category
Over
100
Over
4,00
Excellent
Outstanding
Table 2
90-100
85-89
80-84
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
50-59
3,604,00
3,253,59
2,753,24
2,252,74
1,752,24
1,251,74
0,751,24
0,000,74
8
3
15
7
4
0
1
0
267
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
13
7
7
4
0
0
0
Final
Jury
7
Features of the Project Development Levels
The grading categories were considered to be demonstrative of the project
development levels. In order to identify the features that earned these projects their
grades, the 2D submissions and the visuals of the 3D models for the five projects were
sorted into their grading category for a thematic content analysis. The identified features
were grouped under the themes of ‘qualities of the design solution’, ‘representational
qualities, and ‘qualities indicating attainment of educational objectives’.
Qualities of the Design Solution
Qualities of the design solution are about how well the solution responds to the design
problem as defined, and the extent to which it is developed. These qualities include the
following. The product/service must provide a fit between the form or structure and the
purpose and function. The design solution must provide alternative usage possibilities, or
be flexible in terms of changing contexts of usage. The design solution must demonstrate
the interaction possibilities for the users. The product/service must be developed with the
overall experience and expected outcomes of various stages of usage in mind. The design
solution must provide a developed interface that is well integrated to the product. The
solution must also offer a high level of design detailing, demonstrating how a detail will
affect the overall product/service system. The interior and exterior of the design solution
must be consistent, with realistic sections. The design solution must be suitable to the
materials and production methods that are suggested. Overall, an important quality of the
design solution is its being characteristic, having features that identify it, and differentiate
it from the others.
Representational Qualities
Representational qualities are about the ways in which the design solution is presented
and how well this is achieved. Representations include 2D presentation posters and 3D
models, and in some cases animations showing product and interface usage.
Format: As the projects have to be presented in a limited space, the 2D presentations
have to explain for themselves, be to-the-point, and avoid repetitive usage of information
given with visuals and texts. The composition of the presentations have to be well thoughtout, also considering the balance and hierarchy between visuals and texts. The
presentation boards must form a visual harmony as they are used together. The visuals
used are mostly renderings, followed by mixed media (digital and hand-made) visuals and
a lesser amount of hand-made visuals. For digital visuals important aspects are, the
realistic selection of perspective angles; appropriate and balanced framing that does not
cut off critical features; balanced usage of zoom-ins and zoom-outs showing details;
correct usage of lighting and avoiding excessive shadows; and, accurate technical drawings
and measurements using line drawings besides renderings in order to reduce the weight of
visuals. It is seen that text supports the design solution with explanations that could not be
268
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
made sole through usage of visuals, but is also used as a graphical element. The
appropriate amount of text used, selection of font type and size, and usage of language
without spelling or grammatical errors are critical, as incorrect usage of these may weaken
the persuasiveness of the project.
Content: The presentation boards are expected to display the usage of
products/services within context. The background theme must reflect the lifestyle that the
product/service is addressing. A realistic background, preferably on photographic visuals,
better contextualizes the design solution rather than a modelled environment. Likewise,
using modelled human figures weakens the image, whereas photographic human figures
may contribute to the project. On the other hand, using human photographs on all the
informative visuals may load the presentation and cover over critical features. A successful
strategy that teams have used is usage of background-product/service-people in a
hierarchy depending on the feature that needs to stand out. For example, using a
transparent background and a transparent human figure brings forth the product in focus.
Models: Models are an important part of the submissions in demonstrating the design
decisions. The finishing and detailing qualities of the models are an indicative factor of the
project development levels. Apart from the submission requirements, the additional
models that the teams prepared distinguished them from the others. The additional
preparations included, scaled or 1:1, colored realistic exterior model; details showing
moving or removable parts; models with moving or removable parts showing how the
product is set-up or converted; models showing the interior structure of the product; and
additional models of the components of the products or systems.
Team identity: Overall, a main feature indicative of the project development level, as
well as effective team dynamics, was the reflection of a ‘team identity’ on the
presentations. Some presentation boards had graphical features that united the boards in
a way unique to the team. Although prepared by different team members, the finalized
models appeared to be made from a single hand, with the same surface finishing qualities
and detailing level. Oral presentations to the jury also differed in terms of strategies.
Teams that prepared in advance either selected one or two spokespersons to carry out the
oral presentations, or distributed the presentation equally to all team members. There also
were teams that attended the jury without any oral preparation, either from confidence or
from the lack of an opportunity to discuss how to proceed in the jury presentation.
Teams were generally referred to by numbers or letters of the alphabet. In one project,
teams chose to use names to represent themselves. Finally, it was observed in some teams
that the team members dressed in a similar fashion using the same color palette or
clothing type for their final jury presentations.
Qualities Indicating Attainment of Educational Objectives
Qualities indicating the attainment of educational objectives are related to how well
the teams conduct the earlier stages of the process such as research, idea generation,
critiques and evaluations, and make use of the outcomes for building up on the design
solution. As an educational objective, we expect the students to develop the design
thinking abilities that allow the correct contextualization of a design solution, with a match
between the problem area and the solution area. Therefore a main concern is the correct
identification of a design opportunity within the solution area, and the students must be
able to achieve this altogether, using the suggested procedures and methods applied in
269
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
studio, and according to schedule. Another important concern is to prevent situations in
which students are confused in their exploration, fail to identify a design opportunity, fail
to explore design ideas, or fail to discover the potentials of the ideas they have explored to
a certain extent. This may lead to switching to other ideas way into the design process,
requiring that the exploration process is repeated, making teams loose time. This reflects
on the final project submissions as underexplored product-context relationships,
underdeveloped design solutions, lack of a reflection of the earlier stages of the process,
and only drafted 2D and 3D presentations.
Project Development Levels
A revision of the projects within grading categories in terms of these qualities, allowed
the determination of the project development levels.
Problematic Projects (Grading Categories: Poor, Very Poor)
A major problem observed in the project at the problematic level, was the lack of an
appropriate problem identification in response to the brief. Besides, the team delayed
their discussions on the problem area, and this affected the remaining process. The
identified design opportunity was based on a limited point of view. The resulting project
was not detailed, and the final presentations failed in reflecting the features of the design
solution.
Low Effort Projects (Grading Category: Adequate)
The projects at the low effort level were those that completed all submission
requirements, in most cases on time, in a few cases with delay. The problematic that puts
these projects in this category is weak technical detailing. Critical issues related to the
usage scenario and context have not been resolved, and in some projects, minimum effort
is given to 2D and 3D presentations. In some cases, lack of team effort is sensed.
Acceptable Projects (Grading Category: Good)
The projects at the acceptable level have covered all submission requirements. The
major concern is in the way in which the problem is defined and the mismatch between
the problem and the solution. The components of the project seem to have been solved in
separate hands, and not developed in equal level, leaving weak spots in the overall design
solution. The projects have either failed in developing the design idea in full consideration,
or have overdone the design in order to compensate for the weaknesses of the concept.
Satisfactory Projects (Grading Category: Very Good)
The projects at the satisfactory level bring an original problem definition that in some
cases differ significantly from the rest of the teams, and offer a design solution that
responds to the problem. All the same, the projects present difficulties in justifying some
contextual aspects, such as explaining how the design solution fits the suggested usage
area. It is seen that some teams that are graded higher in the preliminary jury, have
renounced from the details that brought a unique quality to the project but presented risk
to its successful completion, rather than attempting to solve them. Some teams have
270
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
considered their effort for the preliminary jury to be sufficient, and neglected the detailing
of the design, leaving the project unrefined.
Detailed Projects (Grading Category: Excellent)
The projects at the detailed level present highly satisfying design solutions focusing on
a main design idea, with well-prepared presentations reflecting the features. There is an
in-depth exploration of the context, and justification of usage scenario. Some features of
the project may be underexplored, such as an unprioritized mechanical detail or material
selection. Some projects may not involve a risk-taking design idea but end up as extremely
well-detailed and finalized, setting strong alternatives for the current market. The projects
in this category are the result of good team effort and collaboration.
Advanced Projects (Grading Category: Outstanding)
The projects at the advanced level provide a well-established design concept that
involves a variety of design ideas integrated into an overall design solution. The design
ideas are highly detailed, all at an equal level. There is extensive consideration of the usage
possibilities, particularly in terms of product components and integration of the design
solution with the surrounding system. The ideas are considered from the points of view of
many users, enriching the possibilities provided with the design solutions. Some projects
include additional features supporting the concept (e.g. product/service brochures); as
well as additional supportive design solutions (e.g. reusable packaging). Projects in this
category are the results of extremely hard and effective teamwork, and involvement of
user research.
Team Formation and Team Categories
The 38 teams examined for this study were formed on a voluntary basis (Table 3). All
the same, in two occasions, students who were not able to take part in a team during the
set-up, were distributed into teams by drawing lots.
Table 3
Project
B
Information on team formation
Number of
teams
7 (+ 1)
teams
VE
K
9 teams
7 teams
CN
7 teams
ID
8 (+ 1)
Person per team
Team formation
All teams of four.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
One left-out student drew a lot to join a team.
Following preliminary submission, this student
completed the process individually.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
All teams of four.
Three groups of
three.
Four groups of four.
Four groups of six.
Three groups of
seven.
Four groups of four.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
Three left-out exchange students picked up by
teams.
Four left-out students came together to form a
team.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
271
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
teams
Four groups of five.
Four left-out students drew a lot to join teams.
Following preliminary submission, one student
completed the process individually.
For an analysis, the teams were initially categorized according to the design skills of the
team members, based on individual project performances and social skills as a prospective
team member. In this categorization, besides students’ grades from earlier studio projects,
observations on their in-studio behavior (such as time management, responsibility and
collaboration with others) and notes from earlier critique sessions on individual
performances (such as work effort, design abilities and communication), were also taken
into consideration. This analysis revealed two types of teams: teams were either
composed of members with equal levels of skills, or composed of members with differing
levels of skills. For both types the subcategories were, teams composed entirely or mostly
of members with high, medium or low level skills (Table 4).
Table 4
Team categories according to individual performance of team members
Grading for
Preliminary
Submission
Grading for
Final
Submission
Grading for
Preliminary
Submission
B_T1
B_T2
B_T4
High skills with weak
protegé
High
ID_T5
High
K_T2
B_T3
CN_T3
CN_T5
ID_T3
K_T3
VE_T8
K_T1
K_T7
VE_T3
VE_T7
Excellent
Very Good
Medium
VE_T6
CN_T6
Low
VE_T4
CN_T1
ID_T8
B_T5
ID_T1
ID_T2
Medium skills with weak
protegé + weak lot
ID_T4
B_T6
B_T7
Low skills group of
strategic convenience
CN_T7
ID_T6
VE_T5
Low
Teams with Members of Mixed Skills
Medium
K_T6
Teams with Members of Equal Skills
K_T5
CN_T2
Medium skills with weak
protegé
K_T4
Outstanding
ID_T7
VE_T2
Medium skills with strong
protegé
Medium skills with strong
driver
Medium skills with
medium protegé
Medium skills with
medium lot
Medium skills with weak
lot
VE_T1
CN_T4
VE_T9
Good
272
Adequate
Poor
Very Poor
Grading for
Final
Submission
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
The grades that the teams received for their projects’ preliminary and final evaluations
were matched into this categorization (Table 4). It was seen that there is a relation
between the team project grades and the levels of skills of team members. For example,
eight out of nine teams including members of high level skills received the highest grades.
On the other hand, only four out of eleven teams including members of low level skills
received the lowest grades for their submissions. Likewise, out of 18 teams including
members of medium level skills, four received the highest grades, and three received the
lowest grades. The range of the grades within each team category indicated that this
relation was not necessarily direct.
Besides, it was seen that teams did not always perform at the same level for their
preliminary and final submissions. Only eleven out of 38 teams received the same grades
for both submissions, whether high or low. This indicated that there were various factors
affecting team performance during the process, and depending on the course, the
performance could be affected positively, where the teams would raise their grades for
their final submissions, or negatively, where the teams would drop their grades.
These suggested that the team characteristics, rather than the individual characteristics
of team members, were more significant in determining the dynamics within teams. The
following section discusses the factors that play role in the development of team
characteristics.
Factors Affecting Team Characteristics
Composition of the Team and Background of Members
The composition of the team members and their individual background is a factor in
the development of team characteristics. The team members’ character traits, gender,
experience, and background constitute the individual characteristics; their design skills and
design-related interests determine the nature and level of their contribution to the
project, and their social skills contribute to the effectiveness in carrying out the design
process. Overall, although expectation of success, social factors such as long-time
friendships and gender preferences played role in team formation, strategic factors such as
varying the skills within the group (is good at computer modelling, is good at solving
mechanical details, is meticulous at model making) and logistic opportunities (has a car,
has a flat available to accommodate all during the project, mother is available for user
trials) were also considered in team formation.
Voluntariness in Team Formation and Involvement in Group
Activities
It was observed that students preferred coming together with peers from a closer
social circuit in order not to lose valuable project time while getting to know each other.
Voluntariness in team formation contributed to the team motivation, provided swiftness in
team actions, eased the process in arriving at decisions, and facilitated the distribution of
work. Teams that were not formed on a voluntary basis had difficulties in starting the
process. Team members delayed early group discussions on the problem area and
273
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
therefore delayed idea generation. The generated ideas lacked a common effort and
remained irrelevant, as the teams did not have a project goal. There was lack of
communication between team members, and those who did not show up regularly for
meetings remained uninformed of the process and of the decisions that the team had
made so far.
On the other hand, voluntariness in team formation did not always guarantee that the
team performed in good terms until the end of the process. One team had difficulties in
arriving at an agreement on the main concept that the project would pursue, also affecting
the team members’ social relations in the future. Another team had arguments on the
unequal workload for the final submission. Problems in other cases were observed as well,
although in principle teams chose to overcome difficulties as early as possible. Teams that
felt conflict followed two strategies. One was to divide the tasks among team members,
carry out individual work remote from the others, and meet up to gather the work for the
submissions. Another was to follow the decisions of a trusted team member who finally
had to assume the role of ‘leader’.
Strategic Division of Labor
Some teams had difficulties in understanding that collaboration in teamwork does not
mean that all members do the same thing at the same time, in the same amount and for
the same duration; or that if their individual design ideas were not selected to be pursued
for the team project, this did not mean that they were not able to contribute to the
process. Some of these cases resulted in team members alienating themselves from their
teams.
Once the teams got to know their members’ strengths and weaknesses, and their ways
of thinking, they were able to strategically divide labor among themselves. This was
generally possible following the initial stages of the process such as research and problem
identification. In some cases, the collaboration was swift, and at a certain stage of
progress, the team members were able to vary the team effort; such as, while one team
member carried out technical research, one would visit a user, another one would prepare
mock-ups, and the other one would work on a graphical identity for the presentation
posters. In some cases, a team member who could not be effective in developing the
design ideas, was given additional work on model making, or computer modelling. It was
seen that division of labor extended to providing something to eat for the team, and
shopping for model making materials, which were seen as a natural part of teamwork.
Management of Team Dynamics
Teams mostly chose to manage the project as a process in which all members had an
equal saying. Some teams determined for themselves a ‘team driver’ whom they found to
be stronger in designerly skills. This member also acted as the team spokesperson in some
cases, but in a few cases, preferred to remain in the background, leaving the opportunity
to present the ideas to the others. In some cases, team members switched roles
depending on the actions required. While working equally for some stages of the project,
when it came to making critical decisions, team members could assume more
preponderant roles, and keep the leadership role for a duration, until a next critical
decision had to be made by another team member. Having to take responsibility and step
up for certain actions was an important effort towards acting as a team.
274
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Team Positioning
Following the early evaluation stages, such as research presentations and initial ideas
evaluation, it was seen that teams positioned themselves in reference to one another.
Teams assessed the others in terms of performance and set goals for themselves for the
following stages. The teams that were found to be successful in such evaluation stages,
raised the bar for the others. For example, if a team was preparing for a submission with
extra work that was not required in the brief (e.g. an animation for the interface), or if a
team was using a particular technique for the final presentations (e.g. usage of a new
computer program) most of the other teams would also make the same preparations. Or
else, if a team was found to be more effective in a particular aspect (such as a strong
design idea, or strong graphical qualities in the 2D presentations), other teams would
determine for themselves, a specific aspect (such as better mechanical detailing, or extra
effort on model making), that could differentiate them from the others.
Motivation and Team Ambitions
A major motivation for the teams was to be able to stand out among others in the final
jury, in terms of design idea and project representation. The more a team was ambitious,
the more frequently it demanded design critiques from the instructors and the earlier it
was able to take critical decisions within the process. Particularly considering that these
projects were carried out in collaboration with firms, the more firms were involved in the
process (such as coming to critique sessions, attending the evaluation juries, indicating at
the beginning of the process that the teams would be rewarded), the more determined
the teams were in fulfilling the project goals. Other factors were the possibility of being
chosen for an office internship, or for collaboration in the student’s graduation project.
The students gave importance to the projects also for the opportunity of using their grades
to raise their GPA, and for the positive impact of having the project in their portfolio. A
rewarding expectation was the possibility of the projects resulting with designs subject to
intellectual property rights.
Conclusion: Team Characteristics
As a result of this study, it is possible to discuss team characteristics in terms of skills,
mental attitude, process conduct, and design outcome.
In terms of skills, the 38 teams could be described as highly confident, moderately
confident or with low confidence. The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams
were related to the team members’ levels of designerly skills, and could change as the
process progressed. Activities conducted in the studio for which team members had to
come together (e.g. critiques from instructors, method applications), helped members to
know each other better, and gain confidence in themselves’ and their peers’ skills.
Likewise, joint preparation for submissions also affected relations between team members
and their performance.
In terms of mental attitude, the teams could be described as determined, or confused.
The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams were related to their success in
determining project goals and ability in carrying out group activities towards this end.
Determined teams were those who set their project goals early within the design process
and could work systematically towards their realization. Determination is a factor that
275
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
positively affects team performance, as it contributes to the regularity of effort and
progress. On the other hand, insisting on a design idea may result negatively, particularly if
there is a mismatch between the problem and the solution; therefore teams have to
identify these mismatches at an early stage to allow time to change their design strategies.
Confused teams were those who generally had difficulties in identifying an appropriate
design idea within a solution area, either as a result of too diversified an exploration, and
late identification of the idea to pursue; or due to difficulties in deciding on how to
progress with their processes following decisions made for various stages.
In terms of process conduct, the teams could be described as leader-driven,
coordinated, or fragmented. The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams were
related to the social skills of the team members and their expectations from the process in
terms of outcomes. Leader-driven teams worked around a team driver who showed
responsibility in critical decisions and division of labor. Coordinated teams aimed to show
equal amount of effort and contribution, and in general did not need to be guided by a
driver, regulating their own actions instead. Fragmented teams were those with members
who had difficulties in coming together and preferred to work individually in between
submissions.
In terms of design outcome, the teams could be described as risk-takers and safeplayers. The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams were related to their
interest in the project, the effort they committed to design development and the strategic
decision making ability of the team. Risk-taking teams were those that aimed at bringing
innovative solutions to the problem. Safe-playing teams provided solutions that could be
considered as alternatives to what is already available in the market. Success for both
groups depended on the level of design development and detailing that the teams were
able to achieve.
The study described in this paper helped in determining team characteristics that
develop as a result of the dynamics occurring in the process of an educational design
project. These characteristics evolve during the course, affecting team performance and
therefore reflecting on the project development levels. The next step following this study
would be to assess how team characteristics relate with project development levels. This
would help in suggesting strategies for studio course instructors and students to effectively
manage the design process of team projects, identify teams having difficulties with project
development, support teams in overcoming difficulties and ensure project development.
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank the instructors and the
students of the ID401 Industrial Design V courses of the 2006-07, 2007-08,
2010-11 and 2014-15 academic years, and of the ID301 Industrial Design III
course of the 2013-14 academic year for their contribution to the courses and
involvement in the projects mentioned in this paper.
References
Cash, P., Elias, E., Dekoninck, E., & Culley, S. (2012). Methodological insights from a
rigorous small scale design experiment. Design Studies, 33, 208-235.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.008
276
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Cross, N., & Cross, A.C. (1995). Observations of teamwork and social processes in design.
Design Studies, 16, 143-170. doi:10.1016/0142-694X(94)00007-Z
Dong, A., Kleinsmann, S., & Deken, F. (2013). Investigating design cognition in the
construction and enactment of team mental models. Design Studies, 34, 1-33.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2012.05.003
Evyapan, N., Korkut, F., & Hasdoğan, G. (2005). Glass Packaging for Food and Beverage
Products: Design Process and Innovation Strategies in an Educational Project. In M. Gül
& E.S. Umdu (Eds.), Proceedings of IV. International Packaging Congress and Exhibition,
(Vol. 2, pp. 637-646). İzmir, Turkey: TMMOB Kimya Mühendisleri Odası.
Evyapan, N.A.G.Z., Korkut, F., & Hasdoğan, G. (2006). Implications of Collaboration with
Industry for Educational Strategies in Industrial Design: A Case of Graduation Project
Course. In Allan Davies (Ed.), Proceedings of CLTAD 3rd Int. Conference: Enhancing
Curricula (pp. 137-159). The Center for Learning and Teaching in Art & Design, UK.
Hasdoğan, G., Evyapan, N.A.G.Z., & Korkut, F. (2006). Understanding User Experience for
Scenario Building: A Case in Public Transport Design. In Philip D. Bust (Ed.), Proceedings
of Contemporary Ergonomics (pp. 189-193). The Ergonomics Society, Taylor & Francis,
UK.
Korkut, F., & Evyapan, N. A. G. Z. (2005). Dynamics of Collaboration with Industry in
Industrial Design Education: The Case of a Graduation Project Course. In P. Rodgers, L.
Brodhurst & D. Hepburn (Eds.) Crossing Design Boundaries: Proceedings of the 3rd
Engineering & Product Design Education International Conference (pp.477-481). Taylor
& Francis, UK.
Stempfle, J. & Badke-Schaub, P. (2002). Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team
communication. Design Studies, 23, 473-496. doi:10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00004-2
Wiltschnig, S., Christensen, B.T., & Ball, L.J. (2013). Collaborative problem-solution coevolution in creative design. Design Studies, 34, 515-542.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2013. 01.002
277
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-Making in Design
Thinking
Delane INGALLS VANADA
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Delane.vanada@uncc.edu
Abstract: In this global economy, there is a critical need for training students to
be more well-rounded, strong in collaborative skills and able to think critically,
creatively, and practically. In order to develop tomorrow’s change makers and
problem solvers, design thinking processes can capitalize on a balance of skills
and mindsets including inductive and deductive reasoning along with abductive
sensemaking. The paper will highlight the author’s published mixed model
(QUAN + QUAL) research study in middle school art and design classrooms as
well as action research projects at the college level which brings to light the
major drivers of dynamic thinking and learning in art and design toward
fostering tenacious, creatively confident, connection-makers who also possess
the practical skill sets for meaningful success in learning and life. From a
systems-thinking approach, this research strives to understand the
multidimensionality of environment, teacher pedagogy and beliefs, curriculum,
and students’ perceptions of their abilities— critical components of motivation
and behavior, effort, and persistence and grit in the face of setbacks. How
students perceive their competence—their theories in action—correlates with
their creative confidence. Design- and project-based learning provide learnercentered pedagogical examples for empowering students.
Keywords: Design thinking, design- and problem-based learning, dynamic
learning
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Introduction
There is a lot of discussion in 21st century education about the need for nurturing
resilient students who are independent and self-directed thinkers, able to take risks,
collaborate, and possess a balance of critical, creative, and practical skills (Duckworth,
2006; Ingalls Vanada, 2013; Zhao, 2009). Yet, opportunities for developing these
competencies—essential to today’s students’ inevitable multiple careers, but more
importantly for overall success in life—are mostly overlooked for the sake of teacher and
school accountability in Standards-rich, American culture.
At every level, students are primarily exposed to linear and logical ideas about learning
intended to produce one right answer, stifling innovative mindsets. Traditional schools in
which prescribed content, compliance, and excessive foci on external standards and
standardized assessments as measures of academic success have generally been found
ineffective or suppressive of creativity (Ken Robinson,2006; Zhao, 2012). School is thought
of as a place to practice creativity, but it is becoming less and less true. If we do not want a
culture based on imitation, the view of the purpose of education is where change has to
take place.
Further, our students fear failure and are more comfortable with being told what to
think to pass the test, rather than how to think and to trust their own abilities to make
connections and solve complex—or heaven forbid, ambiguous—problems. Sir Ken
Robinson (2006) stated in his popular ‘How Schools Kill Creativity’ TED Talk, that modern
education is training students out of mindsets necessary to innovation:
What we do know is, if you're not prepared to be wrong, you'll never come up with
anything original—if you're not prepared to be wrong. And by the time they get to be
adults, most kids have lost that capacity. They have become frightened of being wrong.
And we run our companies like this. We stigmatize mistakes. And we're now running
national education systems where mistakes are the worst thing you can make. And the
result is that we are educating people out of their creative capacities (para. 6).
But students aren’t the only ones who must be prepared to be wrong. Educators must
also take risks, says Kwek (2011), to ‘depart from the ideas and pedagogies of yesterday
and become bold advocates to develop the sorts of learning dispositions needed’ in our
21st century problem solvers (p. 3). This requires a focal shift in teaching quantities of
knowledge to developing a balance of students’ qualities of thinking —creative, critical and
practical. Teachers need to envision and design cultures of thinking that move away from
convergent-thinking end products and think of themselves as designers of student’s
thinking and dispositions through more integrated approaches (Kwek, 2011).
A Systems View of Developing Dynamic Learning
To grow students’ creative confidence, critical thinking, and making sense of and
connecting information from multidisciplinary sources, along with their resilience as
learners, it is time to rethink the old systems and fundamentally ‘reboot’ the education
process (World Economic Forum, 2011, p. 6):
Educational institutions at all levels (primary, secondary and higher education) need to
adopt 21st century methods and tools to develop the appropriate learning environment
for encouraging creativity, innovation and the ability to think ‘out of the box’ to solve
279
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
problems. Embedding entrepreneurship and innovation, cross-disciplinary approaches and
interactive teaching methods all require new models, frameworks and paradigms.
Notable education researchers, Dewey, Piaget, and Vygotsky, with more recent
educational psychologists such as Gardner (2007) and Sternberg (2008) have long
challenged narrow views of intelligence and proposed that students should be selfdirected and active learners. Knowledge, as defined by deep understanding, is not
acquired by passively absorbing information; it is constructed through direct experience
and making connections to prior learning and in multidisciplinary ways (Bransford, Brown
& Cocking, 2000). This article proposes that different and more learner-centered
approaches are needed in our classrooms—including design- and project-based learning
provide—as constructivist exemplars for empowering and training more self-directed,
intrinsically motivated, and balanced students. A few essential questions are in order:
How can art and design instruction and classroom culture best develop students’ skills
and dispositions for creativity/innovation, critical thinking, and practical intelligence?
How can educators best prepare students for the world in which we live — one in
which self-direction, creative confidence, and connection-making are imperative?
From a systems-thinking approach, which looks beneath the surface for the
interconnected factors and how all aspects of a system are interconnected, this article
brings to light underlying drivers of dynamic thinking and learning in art and design toward
fostering resilient, creatively confident, connection-makers who also possess the practical
skill sets for success in learning and life. The author also reports on a mixed model
research study conducted in middle school art and design classrooms as well as an action
research project at the college level that provide new models that can be used in visual
arts classrooms for ‘designing thinking’ (Ingalls Vanada, 2011).
A Systems View of Developing Dynamic Learning
The process of developing dynamic learners—defined as those who self-activate their
creative, analytical, and practical skills and dispositions with depth and complexity—can be
thought of as a complex system much like Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari's ‘rhizome’
(1987). Rhizome is a term used to describe the relations and connectivity of things, as of
certain roots that spread underground but remain related and dependent upon one
another such as a grove of aspen trees. A systems-thinking approach to developing
dynamic learners considers both the external and internal aspects of the learning process,
similar to the visible and invisible (yet evident and active) action of the rhizomatic roots of
aspens. Each tree is visible, yet the interaction of the complex root system of the entire
grove is largely invisible, sometimes evidenced when new trees start to grow where you do
not want them to grow. Every part of this system is connected to another, and each affects
each other.
Fostering students’ dynamic, balanced, and powerful learning requires a view of
intelligence as a multifaceted process involving a complex interplay of skills and
dispositions (Claxton, 2007). In this system, the development of students’ learning power is
a process that involves related catalysts or drivers. Some of these major drivers of dynamic
learning are the learning culture and philosophy, teacher pedagogy and beliefs, curriculum,
and students’ thinking skills, dispositions and self-beliefs. These factors are all critical
components of students’ capacity to learn as well as their motivation and behavior, effort,
280
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
persistence and grit in the face of setbacks. How students perceive their competence—
their ‘theories in action’ (Argyris & Schön, 1996) affects their creative confidence.
In our quest to make sense of the factors impacting dynamic learning, learner-centered
philosophy serves as a starting point for making meaning of the complex avenues of
accessing students’ individual capacities as learners.
Learner-centered Philosophy
Ritchhart (2002) claims that in order to have an impact on students’ creative, analytic,
and practical thinking skills and dispositions, teachers must be purposeful about the
learning and thinking culture they create. Covering course content doesn’t assure that
students ‘learn’or develop deep understanding. Learning too, is an organic, rhizomatic
process—one that relies highly upon integration/connection making, student autonomy
(choice), and personal, creative expression (Cullen, Harris & Hill, 2012). The classroom
environment, particularly one more learner-centered, plays an important role in students’
self-efficacy, confidence, desire to learn, and motivation, factors which are known to
further predict and affect levels of learning and achievement (Bransford, Brown & Cocking,
2000).
A learner-centered classroom is defined as inherently constructivist in theory, building
on philosophies mentioned which contend that students should be actively involved in the
learning process rather than passively taking in information imparted to them from
teachers and textbooks. Learner-centered philosophy promotes students’ deeper
understanding and integrative meaning making through first-hand experience or active
learning and is supported by a vast research base indicating its effectiveness (Bransford et
al., 2000; Cullen et al., 2012; Weimer, 2002). In a balanced view, learner-centered goals
build upon the pillars of connection-making, inquiry, and student self-direction (Ingalls
Vanada, 2011). These ideas coincide with Sternberg’s ideals (2008) that students’
successful intelligence can be seen as a balance of creative, critical, and practical thinking
skills. See Figure 1.
Figure 1. Learner-centered Goals
Paradigm Shift
Learner-centered curriculum focuses less on the end product (typically the first step in
most teachers’ planning), and more on the thinking and learning process. In this
281
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
constructivist paradigm, responsibility for learning is shifted to the students, and teachers
become co-learners and guides. In an LC approach, shared power and increased choices for
students are priorities. Sharing power happens by providing choices in the procedures of
the classroom, giving students the responsibility for goal setting, and designing curriculum
in ways that give students in how they learn, its relevance, as well as how they will
demonstrate what they know and understand. In so doing, teachers are placing the
responsibility for learning in the hands of students—where it belongs—and in alignment
with the LC mantra, ‘The one who does the work, does the learning.’
LC students practice dealing with a level of ambiguity along a trial of inquiry, not often
found in traditional classrooms (Dewey, 1938; Weimer, 2002). Students’ dispositions for
self-direction, self-efficacy, creativity, and increased motivation are reportedly more
positive in more learner-centered classrooms (Cullen et al., 2012), yet it is typical for LC
teachers to experience some pushback from students who are more used to tightly
mandated traditional student-teacher roles, instead of a level of ambiguity involved in
creative problem solving and having to exercise independent thinking (Weimer; 2002).
In an action research study I conducted in a large, 200-student university liberal studies
course, I experienced students’ discomfort at times, but the integration of more learnercentered principles (operationalized through inquiry, connection-making, and selfdirection) led to their enhanced perceptions about their balanced thinking skills (creative,
critical and practical) as well as their mindsets about themselves as learners (Ingalls
Vanada, 2013).
Rather than a strict content and discipline-focused approach, LC curriculum is often
organized around problems or complex, big ideas: philosophical issues or theories of social
concern that require multidisciplinary, authentic, real-life solutions (Constantino, 2002;
Cullen et al., 2012). In these problem-based, big-idea classrooms, students make
connections from disparate sources and across disciplines to develop artworks or ideas
that draw upon what Howard Gardner (2007, p. 45) calls, ‘a synthesizing mind.’ This is a
‘learning with understanding’ approach (Bransford et al., 2000, p. 8), wherein investigation
and observation lead to finding a problem, asking a question, and searching for knowledge
to answer it. Focusing questions are used to encourage independent thinking, curious
inquiry, and life-long learning.
Lastly, a learner-centered paradigm encourages students to become independent
thinkers, problem-finders, and problem-solvers through direct experience and while
actively learning with others, questioning and using critical thinking, examining, and
rethinking. Critical to this paper, these ideals are also inherent in design thinking, as
utilized in educational settings to promote deep and relevant learning. Design thinking is a
learner-centered and constructivist design, with many similarities to learner centered
theory: learning by doing, creativity, motivation to explore, openness to new ideas,
dispositional benefits, and emphasis on process. To this we will now turn.
Design Thinking Frameworks
Design thinking is an iterative, collaborative framework and process that facilitates
problem identification and problem solving. Opportunities (‘I could do this!’) or difficulties
(‘This needs to change or I could be better!’) in a current situation, together with a
decision that some action could solve the problem, is the start of a design process
(Razzouk, 2012). Design thinking phases include: (a) developing understanding and
282
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
empathy through observation and need finding, (b) problem solving, (c) generating
multiple possibilities, (d) prototyping, then (e) testing solutions. Typical phases of the
design thinking process, as identified by the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design or ‘d.school’
are in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Design thinking process (d. school as cited in Carroll et al., 2010)
The design thinking process, as a system of overlapping stages rather than a sequence,
can be divided into three phases: inspiration, ideation, and implementation (Brown, 2008).
The Inspiration phase includes understanding a problem by gathering data and inquiry;
students ideally direct this search.
Ideation is the process of possibility thinking and brainstorming to generate as many
ideas toward solutions, then develop and test those ideas by prototyping.
Implementation is the final phase that relies on feedback and reflection to modify then
develop a solution/idea or creation that aligns with the first phase.
Design thinking is aligned with active and experiential learning; it has long focused on
processes familiar to students in engineering and architecture: the posing of a problem
which is open-ended with some constraints, which nudges them to practice dealing with
ambiguity (Kellogg, 2006). As an approach to learning in the classroom, DT processes
utilizes active inquiry to build empathy and identify problems, promotes a bias toward
action (followed by reflection), activates collaborative effort, encourages ideation, and
fosters active problem solving and reflection (Carroll, Goldman, Britos, Koh, Royalty &
Hornstein, 2010; Kwek, 2011; Razzouk et al., 2012). Seeking for ways to meet human needs
fosters empathy.
For students, design thinking develops both their inductive and deductive reasoning
skills along with abductive thinking—possibility thinking linked to intuition (Kolko, 2010).
Students bridge the gap between subjective and objective reasoning by using intuitive
abilities to combine ideas and common sense into a new whole, says Kellogg (2006). This is
sensemaking! For teachers, design thinking requires a decentralization of power in the
classroom and a pedagogical shift toward learning that is: 1) human-centered; 2) action
oriented; and 3) process-oriented (Carroll et al., 2010). Incorporating design thinking into
the classroom means that teachers must value active problem solving; learning through
constructivism; dealing with ambiguity; and focusing on solutions (Cross 2007).
The use of design thinking models in the art education classroom have been found as a
key to unlocking 21st century skills and a balance of students’ thinking skills and
dispositions (creative, critical, and practical) because design thinking brings awareness to
283
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
the supportive role of critical thinking to creativity and creativity to critical thinking, with
greater development between both processes (Carroll et al., 2010; Cross, 2007; Ingalls
Vanada, 2011).
Both design- and problem-based learning rely on open-ended questioning and inquirybased methods to solve multidisciplinary design challenges or units of academic study
structured around real world problems (Carroll et. al, 2010). In the regular classroom and
visual art classrooms, design thinking clearly supports the three main pillars of learnercentered theory: inquiry, connection-making, and student self-direction.
Research in Art Education
Traditional art education classrooms, more focused on end products with less emphasis
on student-led inquiry, connection making and meaning making are missing opportunities
to develop the capacities of tomorrow’s change makers and problem solvers. More
learner-centered models that put students in charge of their learning, foster student-led
inquiry, and integrated learning are needed. There is a continued need for research
regarding how problem- and design-based models in the art education classroom might
advance students’ balanced thinking skills and dispositions (Ingalls Vanada, 2011).
In a mixed model comparative study (QUAL + QUAN) I conducted in large suburban
middle schools, regarding the effects of learner-centered classrooms (utilizing inquiry,
connection-making, and self-direction) on art students’ balanced thinking in the visual arts,
I found conceptually close ties between learner-centered philosophy, constructivist
pedagogies, and design thinking processes.
The purpose of the study was to explore the kinds of teacher pedagogies and classroom
cultures that can foster students’ balanced thinking and dispositions (creative, critical and
practical). I also wanted to understand any correlation between students’ perceptions
about themselves as learners, and their learning cultures, including teacher pedagogies. Its
purpose was defined by two questions: (1) Is there a difference in students’ quality of
thinking skills in classrooms that are designed to foster inquiry, connection-making, and
self-directed learning and those that are less so?; and (2) How do students perceive their
intelligence and understanding of a subject in these classrooms?
While the overall results of this research project are beyond the scope of this paper,
this work illuminated statistically significant (.935 at the .05 level) and qualitatively positive
effects of learner-centered pedagogy on students’ balanced thinking and dispositions
(creative, critical, and practical) (Ingalls Vanada 2011). There was also a significantly
positive relationship between more learner-centered environments and students’ more
positive perceptions about themselves as learners (their self-beliefs) in these classrooms
(.933 at the .05 level). What this indicates is that students in classrooms designed to be
more learner-centered/constructivist, performed better at a variety of assessments that
measured their balanced thinking skills and dispositions (creative, critical, and practical);
they also felt more confident and in charge of their learning in those classrooms. How
students perceive their competence—their ‘theories in action’ (Argyris & Schön, 1996)
correlates with their creative confidence.
The qualitative data gathered and coded led to an emerging theory of ‘Quality Thinking
Systems’ (Figure 5), which highlights the interconnectedness of students’ success as
learners, the learning culture, curriculum, and student and teacher beliefs.
284
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Figure 5. Quality Thinking Systems Theory
From a systems-thinking view, three outcomes highlighted how more learnercentered/constructivist classrooms promoted: (1) exploratory, (2) balanced, and (3) deep
learning. Students were more in charge of their own learning. The theory indicates how
exploratory thinking and learning might be displayed (connectivist, inquiry-driven,
constructivist, and self-directed); how balanced thinking and learning might be displayed
(analytical, creative, and practical, and process equaling product); how deep thinking and
learning might be displayed (conceptually flexible, synthetic, meaningful, and visible).
The overall results of this exploratory study are beyond the scope of this paper and do
not claim causation, but it may point to the learning culture and pedagogy, students’ belief
systems, and a systems view affecting students’ overall learning power.
Overall Quality of Thinking and the T-H-I-N-K Tool
To measure students’ balanced thinking skills and dispositions, a matrix of assessment
tools were created specific to art and design that measured students’ quality thinking—
their creative, critical, and practical thinking skills and dispositions (Ingalls Vanada, 2011).
One of the assessments, the Overall Quality Thinking tool (OQO), was developed to explore
kinds of knowledge to be learned (knowledge dimension), along with the depth and
complexity of thinking (cognitive process dimension), as inspired by Bloom’s revised
taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). The OQO resulted after extensive reviews of
best-practice literature relating to assessments in quality thinking in art and design,
problem-based learning (including design-based learning), cognitive theory (Bransford et
285
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
al., 2000; Burnette & Norman, 1997; Gardner, 2007; Sternberg, 2008). The core ideas are
featured in Figure 3.
Figure 3. T-H-I-N-K tool for Quality Thinking (2011)
The OQO led concurrently in the development of a creative process and design thinking
model, or T-H-I-N-K model (Revised model, 2014; Figure 4). The acronym, ‘THINK’ was used
to label and define each dimension, assigning levels of complexity toward students’ more
complex thinking and observed action at each level, including:
T: engage thinking (to recall, define, and observe)
H: have a plan (set learning goals and organize)
I: investigate (make connections and explore)
N: generate new ideas (create and attach meaning)
K: know or understand (synthesize, elaborate, and reason with evidence)
This model is currently being used and tested in K12 classrooms, undergraduate
teacher training courses in art and design education (Ingalls Vanada, 2014), and during
development for teachers. In an undergraduate ‘Critical and Creative Thinking Course’ for
preservice art educators, students engage with the T-H-I-N-K model in a collaborative
research project that guides them into inquiry and research to identify problems they
observe in their clinical assignments, develops empathy for their ‘user’ (teachers, students,
or administrator), and leads them to hopeful, more innovate lesson planning attached to
the benefits of problem- and design-based learning. The T-H-I-N-K process is used in this
case to also promote a greater ability to deal with ambiguity and orchestrate learning
processes that put student self-direction, thinking skills, and inquiry at the forefront. In this
preservice art education course, design thinking is also used to encourage future art
educators’ abilities to design innovative student-centered learning investigations (lesson
plans) versus the lock-step filling out of lesson plan templates.
286
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Figure 4
Although the results are still emerging, early reports on using design thinking processes
in this art education course indicated that teacher candidates using this model are
challenged to think more about developing students’ thinking skills—and less on the final
product. After interviewing and observing students in action during their clinical
observations, they approach curricular planning from an aspect of the students’ expressed
needs and problems, expanding their ability to motivate students and individualize their
learning. Candidates link these needs to State Standards in the visual arts, collaboratively
brainstorm for innovative solutions, and then synthesize their ideas into solutions that are
prototyped. The T-H-I-N-K process encourages collaboration, something that their training
in studio classes does not equip them for, and to engage in deductive brainstorming, which
surprisingly causes discomfort. Candidates have reported that in studio classes they rarely
push themselves to create multiple solutions to problems, and that design thinking forced
them to think both divergently to come up with never-before-thought of solutions, then to
move back into convergence (Lee et al. 2010).
Candidates also expressed difficulty with dealing with the ambiguity of inquiry-driven
research and planning, being more used to filling in prescripted, traditional lesson plan
templates. At the same time, one student commented on the design thinking process used
in the model:
I really liked this whole process. It was energizing and invigorating to know that I can
have a hand in change! This process definitely helped me to think outside the box in
287
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
everyday problems. It also gave me a chance to work with different personalities in a
corroborative setting. …The skills of thinking, creating, listening and evolving will be used
throughout the rest of my career as well as in my personal life.
Summary
In order to build students’ agency and sense of self as learners and creators, at every
level, teachers must be purposeful about the learning and thinking culture they create. Not
only should more passive pedagogies in art and design education (and education overall)
be replaced with more constructivist, learner-centered models which provide active,
social, and affective facets of learning. From a systems-thinking approach, this research
strives to understand the multidimensionality of environment, teacher pedagogy and
beliefs, curriculum, and students’ perceptions of their abilities— critical components of
motivation and behavior, effort, and persistence and grit in the face of setbacks.
Pedagogical models that incorporate design thinking across disciplines, including art
education, can activate students’ analytical thinking and creative problem-solving skills to
higher levels. Design-based learning experiences can affirm a postmodern point of view
that engages art education students in empathic inquiries into problems of social interest
that support contemporary art integration.
Models for thinking that incorporate design thinking across disciplines, including art
education, can activate students’ analytical thinking and creative problem-solving skills to
higher levels. Design-based learning experiences can affirm a postmodern point of view
that engages art education students in empathic inquiries into problems of social interest.
In this way, the focus is on creative, critical, and practical thinking processes, including
inductive and deductive reasoning, along with abductive and synthetic sensemaking
(Kolko, 2010). As we envision a more connected education, one in which prepares students
for a complex future, balanced and learner-centered arts and design environments provide
needed inspiration.
References
Anderson, L., and Krathwohl, D. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison
Wesley Longman.
Argyris, C., and Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice.
Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley.
Bransford, J., Brown, A. & Cocking, R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review: Paperback Series. Boston:
Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.
Burnette, C., & J. Norman, J. (1997). Design for thinking DK-12. Tucson, Arizona: Crizmac
Art and Cultural Materials.
Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A. & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination,
imagination and the fires within: Design thinking in a middle school classroom.
International Journal of Art and Design Education, 29(1), 37-53. Available from
http://www.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/takingdesign/proposals/Destination_Imagination_the_Fire_Within.pdf
288
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Claxton, G. (2007). Expanding young people’s capacity to learn. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 55(2), 115-134.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verglag AG.
Constantino, T. E. (2002). Problem-based learning: A concrete approach to teaching
aesthetics. Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research in Art Education,
43(3), 219-231.
Cullen, R., Harris, M. & Hill, R. (2012) The learner-centered curriculum: Design and
implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dewey, J. (1938). Education and experience: The 60th anniversary edition. Bloomington, IN:
Kappa Delta Pi. (Original work published 1938)
Duckworth, E. (1996). The having of wonderful ideas and other essays on teaching and
learning. New York, Teachers College Press.
Gardner, H. (2007). Five minds for the future. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Ingalls Vanada, D. (2014). Balance, Depth and Beyond: Tapping in to Design Thinking in Art
Education. The International Journal of Arts Education, 10(1), 1-14. Common Ground
Publications: ISSN: 2326-9944. http://ijae.cgpublisher.com/
Ingalls Vanada, D. (2013). Practically creative: The role of design thinking as an improved
paradigm for 21st century art education. Paper presentation (paper refereed 1st for
acceptance) at the 2nd International DRS/Cumulus ‘Design Learning for Tomorrow: Art
and Design Education from Kindergarten to PhD’ conference, Oslo, Norway.
Ingalls Vanada, D. (2011). Designing thinking: Developing dynamic learners in the arts.
Saarbrücken, Germany: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Kellogg, C. (2006). Learning from studio: Focus on the future. Design Intelligence
Knowledge Reports, January.
Kolko, J. (2010). Abductive thinking and sensemaking: The drivers of design synthesis.
Design Issues, 26(1), Winter 2010
Kwek, S. H. (2011). Innovation in the classroom: Design thinking for 21st century learning.
(Masters thesis).
http://www.stanford.edu/group/redlab/cgibin/publications_resources.php
Razzouk, R. & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of
Educational Research, 82(3), 330-348.
Ritchhart, R. (2002). Intellectual character: What it is, why it matters and how to get it. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Robinson, K. (2006, June). How schools kills creativity [Video File]. Retrieved from Lecture
Notes. http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity/
Sternberg, R. (2008). Increasing academic excellence and enhancing diversity are
compatible goals. Educational Policy, 22(4), 487-514.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes in practice. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching Up or Leading the Way. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
289
Hidden Value - Towards an Understanding of the Full
Value and Impact of Engaging Students in User-Led
Research and Innovation Projects Between
Universities and Companies
Mark BAILEY*, Mersha AFTAB and Neil SMITH
Northumbria University
*mark.bailey@unn.ac.uk
Abstract: ‘Live’ projects have been the staple of degree programmes in design
for as long as design education has existed. They represent the perfect vehicle
through which students can test their evolving knowledge and skills. They
provide an ideal constructivist platform through which problem-centred,
authentic learning can be achieved and deliver immediate value to student
learning. This study explores the value to the other stakeholders in such projects:
the Company and the University. A suite of projects undertaken over a ten-year
period between a leading Design School and one of the largest Fast Moving
Consumer Goods companies in the world has been reviewed. Semi-structured
interviews with Company employees and academics have been used to establish
the impact of each project, and this data has been mapped against the original
objective of each project in order to identify the hidden value of these
collaborations. Through this exploration of a decade of University-Company
collaborations, the authors identify levels of engagement that go beyond the
‘live project’. The paper illustrates the value of such projects for the ‘client’
organisation, and the academic community, as well as reflecting, briefly, on the
student experience.
Keywords: Live-Project, Industry-collaboration, Innovation, Impact
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Background
The site of this research, Northumbria University School of Design (hereafter NUSD),
has an international reputation for the excellence of its teaching of industrial design
practice at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. It is also an acknowledged pioneer of
multidisciplinary practice learning within design, and, between design, business,
technology, and social sciences subjects. A characteristic of NUSD is the essential role that
projects (conducted between external partners, academics, and students) play in the
curriculum.
NUSD plays host to the students with the highest academic points-score in their
University and the brightest design students in their country. The academic team comes
from different facets of design dealing with both theory and practice-based design
research. In addition to the academic team, the School of Design involves ‘Innovators in
Residence’; recent Masters Graduates who support the projects whilst being mentored by
the University as they launch their own businesses.
Projects undertaken between student groups and external organisations are often
referred to as ‘live’ projects. This study makes a distinction between ‘live’, ‘collaborative’
and ‘partnership’ projects. A ‘live’ project as defined by the LiveProjectsNetwork;
comprises the negotiation of a brief, timescale, budget, and product between an
educational organisation, and an external collaborator for their mutual benefit. The project
must be structured to ensure that students gain learning that is relevant to their
educational development (Anderson, J., & Priest, C., 2015).
The live project is, in effect, an outcome-focused transactional project.
Introduction
IMPLEMENTI
NG
291
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
COLLABORAT
ION
BETWEEN
ORGANIZATI
ONS:
AN
EMPIRICAL
292
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
STUDY OF
SUPPLY
CHAIN
PARTNERING
IMPLEMENTI
NG
293
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
COLLABORAT
ION
BETWEEN
ORGANIZATI
ONS:
AN
EMPIRICAL
294
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
STUDY OF
SUPPLY
CHAIN
PARTNERING
This paper explores the ten years of University-industry collaboration between NUSD and Unilever.
The nature of the collaboration started with live, outcome-based projects focusing on learning for
both the Company and the University’s students. This relationship has ultimately transformed into a
partnership where both parties still learn from creating outcomes, but learn more about the
cultures, methods and approaches that prevail within each organisation and the disciplines involved
in them.
Pertuzé, et al. (2010, pp. 83) state that, ‘Most previous studies of industry-University collaboration
[partnership] have framed the analysis of such partnerships in terms of research project outcomes,
defined here as a result that creates an opportunity for a company, such as guidance for the
direction of technology development. From a business standpoint, however, research outcome is of
only incidental importance. What matters is not the outcome but impact – how the new knowledge
derived from a collaboration with a University can contribute to a company’s performance.’
As the collaborations between Unilever and NUSD strengthened over time, the relationship has
transformed into a partnership where both enjoy a number of impactful benefits. The paper
identifies the nature of project relationships and the benefit of these to both parties; the Company
and the University.
Relationship history
A chance meeting, a decade ago, brought together the School of Design and Unilever. A
senior research chemist interested in the relationship between detergent and fabrics had
295
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
engaged in projects with Fashion Design programmes and was also working with a design
agency that employed an alumnus of NUSD. The alumnus introduced the chemist to the
School of Design.
At that time, most of the School of Design in question (and indeed industrial design
education as a whole) was very much focused upon the traditional role of the Designer as
creative problem-solver and crafter of artefact. In this context, a telephone call from a
chemist curious to find out whether industrial design students had anything interesting to
say about ‘the nature and behaviour of fluids’ might have met with a lack of positivity.
However, the creative potential in this enquiry, and the opportunity that it presented to
move students out of their comfort-zones was recognised and a live project was duly
established. This was in 2005.
The student outcomes of this project were truly surprising; the students were guided to
think beyond product design, and to consider what might happen if fluids (in the context of
the Company’s products) were unconstrained by packaging. They were asked whether
scientists could design the behavior of fluids within certain consumer contexts. What
resulted was a series of designed narratives; user-stories from the consumers’ perspective
that highlighted the role that designerly ways of thinking and communicating (Saikaly,
2005; Yee, 2009) can play in informing scientific enquiry upstream in scientific discovery.
The project outcomes took a shortcut from laboratory to supermarket shelf, and caused
the client to consider how they might engage a wider Company audience in this type of
thinking and way of working.
This first project was very much in the transactional model of the live project with a
sole industry contact that had an interesting question of minimal commercial value. In this
case, however, its value can’t be overstated for it paved the way for 23 subsequent
projects (and counting) undertaken over a ten-year period that have enabled the
relationship to grow to that of a partnership.
Research Methodology
As the projects have been conducted over a ten-year period, there have been a
number of different actors involved from both the University and Company. However,
there is a small number of key NUSD staff that have been involved in all of these projects,
and these staff were consulted from the outset. Workshops were conducted in which they
created a timeline for the projects onto which they mapped key information (Figure 1).
This timeline and mapping was conducted at a large scale and on the wall; externalizing
the information, and sharing it in this way prompted the recollection of data, and
supported the synthesis of data at a later stage (Saldana, 2009). It allowed for recollection
over time and for multiple actors to become involved.
Figure 1
Relationship timeline and project mapping
296
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Evidence and Interviews
Interviews were conducted with key Unilever staff who had been involved with
projects over the ten years. They highlighted the value of engaging with students. For
example, the Director, Homecare Discover Team, Unilever stated, ‘It’s a way of breaking
out of the box of kind of a traditional thinking that we do in Unilever’; the R&D Programme
Director, Unilever added, ‘What Northumbria brings to the table is not one-to-one
relationship but one-to-many’, also indicating that Unilever has learnt new ways of looking
at their problems. Unilever’s ‘smart futures leader’ saw clear advantage in collaborating
with Northumbria students and she added, ‘It was clear that we were working with
partners that were [going to] help us really generate something completely different, but at
the same time make sure that it was grounded with our consumers and aligned to the
brand that we work with.’
She further confirmed that engaging with Northumbria led Unilever to understand the
real value of ‘compelling communication’ by stating, ‘we were able to come up with an
output to the project, which was completely different from what we would have got from
an internal team [doing] it. We have been able to gather a set of videos as the output,
aligned to our consumers, for each of the ideas that we came up with. I think the videos
that we have produced were absolutely key in getting stakeholder buy-in for at least one or
possibly two projects that we are now doing, which simply would not have happened if we
would not have done that piece of work.’
Finally, Unilever’s ‘Project Team Leader’ provided evidence towards the collaborative
projects delivering real business value to Unilever by stating, ‘The real value that we have
got out of working with Northumbria is two folds; firstly, we have got a very different way
of thinking about some of our products and some of our problems, and some new
populations, and secondly, we have got a way of understanding how we can turn that into
a business proposition’. Additionally, Laundry Liquids Designer at Unilever, said, ‘The ideas
that we create are sensible ideas with a business context, are creative and enable us as an
organisation to file and protect the IP in the territory, or bring those ideas to market.’
Academic staff, reflecting on the students’ perspective, and interviews with students
themselves highlighted that these sort of partnerships provided the opportunity for the
students to practice their new found design skills in these new contexts with real
professionals. Additionally, staff also confirmed that such partnerships helped in making
their students employable in industry.
Several students’ interviews highlighted value in this collaboration as well. For
example, a MA Student stated that, ‘I definitely felt from this project that I progressed in
terms of being able to work with a live client.’ An undergraduate student on Northumbria’s
Design for Industry course confirmed that regular feedback from industry clients was great
to build his confidence. Further, a MA student, MDI) stated that partnership projects
helped her understanding the needs of the client and through constant feedback she was
able progress in her design capabilities.
Data Analysis
Whilst the very earliest live projects were not subject to any formalized post-project
review, from the third year of the relationship onwards, University staff have
systematically gathered feedback from the Company representatives involved in the
297
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
projects. Such data has informed a number of studies, including doctoral research. The
Company perspective from the interviews was thus represented in the mapping exercise,
and has subsequently been corroborated by semi-structured interviews with the primary
contacts (including reflection on the earliest projects with the lead contact from that
period). Seven criteria were used in order to map the projects (Table 1). In the mapping
exercise the criteria were colour-coded in order to ease evaluation.
Table 1
Mapping Criteria
Criterion
Evidence
What we did
Summary of the brief and objectives
How we did it
Methodologies employed
Who we did it with
Key contacts, their role and position within the Company
Impact to Company
What changed in the Company as a result of the project
Impact to University
What changed for the University as a result of the project
What we learned
New knowledge or approach (es) resulting from the
project
Financial Value
Sponsorship income resulting from the project
The criteria of particular interest in this paper are ‘Impact to Company’ and ‘Impact to
University’. However, it is worth noting that University staff involved in the workshops and
mapping became somewhat confused between ‘Impact to University’ and ‘What we (as an
academic community) Learned’. It is clear that gaining new content knowledge; specific to
the topic under consideration, the sector, Company etc. or disciplinary knowledge;
involving new methods or approaches to practice both create an impact for the University
(and its students). With hindsight, the study may have benefitted from de-coupling
learning from impact when posing the question to the Company in order to gain a more
detailed understanding. However, as the criteria merely acted as prompts to aid reflection
in the mapping and evaluation exercises, this omission is not considered material to the
overall validity of the findings.
Despite focusing on the three criteria indicated above, ‘What we did’ sheds some light
on where the University has impact in the Company. This criteria, then, has also influenced
these findings.
Project Engagement
The typical student engagement in a project took the form of a team-based learning
project, generally of 6-8 weeks in duration. Undergraduate students would be assessed on
the team outcome of the project; how good the design was, whereas Masters students
would be assessed on their reflection on what they had learned from undertaking the
project. In all cases, the Company’s business context framed the problem space for the
students, and each team was invited to work with this to create their own brief for the
project. Outcomes from the projects have included designs for: new business models;
brands; development strategies; product and formulation designs; advertising; and
communication materials.
298
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Key Findings
Four types of projects
Reviewing ‘What we did’ enabled the authors to identify that there have been four
broad categories of project conducted with the Company during the ten-year period;
Framing & Exploring
Projects in this category were essentially about understanding the true underlying
problem in the territory that interested Unilever, then framing this in a way that
(re)defined the explicit nature of the problem, engaged the Company with their
commercial language and context, and directed the academic/student teams in the
project. This laid the foundations for disrupting the territories by challenging basic
assumptions through the lens of different disciplines.
Communicating Science
These projects were concerned with bringing science to life; translating early scientific
discovery into meaningful, tangible, consumer-relevant communications. The audiences
for such communications were internal to the Company (e.g. the outputs were intended to
allow R+D teams to gain advocacy for new science programmes from Marketing colleagues
or to provide collateral for consumer testing etc.), and Business-to-Business (e.g. in
support of engaging external agencies or commercial collaborative partnerships)
Changing Consumer Behavior
In this category, the Company was interested in how a given market or category might
be transformed through consumer behavior-change supported (or driven) by relevant
product, system, service or business-model development.
Market Strategy
Projects in this category sought to identify strategic opportunities to load the
Company’s Innovation Funnel based on project content from the above three areas. This
was to deliver a macro context to project work, which aligned with the Company’s toplevel strategic direction.
Figure 2
Distribution of project category over time
299
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
Figure 2 identifies how the various project categories are distributed over time with a
consistent spread of Framing and Exploring projects evident across the timescale.
Communicating Science has featured consistently from three years in (this corresponds
with the University’s development of its Multidisciplinary Innovation Masters programme),
and latterly Changing Consumer Behavior and Market Strategy have started to feature. The
volume of project activity has also increased substantially in recent years and a number of
projects have involved work in more than one category.
From Live Project to Partnership, via Collaboration
By reviewing a ten-year relationship between NUSD and Unilever, the authors have
been able to identify the changing nature of that relationship. From merely conducting a
small number of ‘framing and exploring’ projects, to engaging in a partnership with a
combination of the four aforementioned project types caused the relationship to progress.
This long term history with working and learning together led to an increased
understanding of the different levels of engagements the key stakeholders could have, and
the benefit these engagements could bring to both. As a consequence of this, the reach of
the University within the Company has extended and the role of the projects is moving
more towards the strategic.
Historically, Unilever and the School of Design have worked together in three specific
ways that can be described as Live Projects, Collaborative Projects and, more recently,
Partnership Projects.
L IVE P ROJECTS
Anderson and Priests (2015) definition of Live Projects reflects the transactional nature
of the relationship. What has been observed within the School of Design is that, whilst
students gain from the experience, ‘mutual benefit’ is limited in reach for companies and
University. The emphasis is, rightly in one respect, on student learning. The use of the
word ‘live’ implies that the project brief is commercially significant, and presently of
concern to the organisation. Our study found that this is rarely the case when the
transaction is as described in their definition. The project outcomes in these cases reflect
only a small amount of the academics’ research knowledge other than as it applies to any
teaching associated with the project. In other words, the client company typically gains
inspirational raw ideas, but little of commercial relevance.
C OLLABORATIVE P ROJECTS
‘Collaborative Projects’, on the other hand, go beyond the simple transaction of
agreeing ‘brief, timescale, budget and product’, and place emphasis on mutual
commitment as well as mutual benefit. They are undertaken as more of a joint venture
with the external party(ies). This ensures a greater partner input to the project (beyond
the budget and brief), and consequently greater academic contact and thereby
opportunities for deeper sharing of knowledge. Inevitably, this increased sharing delivers
greater benefit to all stakeholders; the company employees witness alternative ways of
thinking about their world and different ways of working, and academics are able to
measure the currency of their knowledge in real-world commercial contexts.
300
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
P ARTNERSHIP P ROJECTS
Ultimately, a Partnership Project offers the greatest opportunity to deliver truly mutual
benefit, and goes beyond the benefits of mere collaboration in that the partners become
so aware of each other’s needs, culture and direction of travel that they can become proactive in the relationship. Close alignment of the goals, culture, and ethos of the University
and company leads to increased impact of any project undertaken involving the students.
Pertuzé, et al. (2010) suggest that in such a project scenario the real impact of the
partnership can be brought to life; the relationship could go beyond the finishing of the
project, and lead to implementation of the learning within the company and the University
for real business impact.
Discussion
This study explored the value of ten years of collaboration between NUSD and Unilever
by illustrating the different types of collaborations that led to a strong partnership
between the two. The paper concludes that ‘Partnership Projects’ lead to a stronger longterm relationship between the two partners, and highlights the hidden value these ten
years of working together brought to the Company and the University.
Figure 3
Hierarchy of impact
We have identified three levels of impact for the Company in respect of this
relationship and these can be expressed as a hierarchical model as depicted in Figure 3.
The nature of the aspects that the Company values (set out 1-5 in the next section) can be
mapped onto this hierarchy, where at the bottom of this pyramid, fragile, often naïve,
student generated ideas in need of nurturing can act as inspiration, and at the very top,
game-changing new products and new ways of working are the prize. By moving from a
live project approach, which only delivers at the bottom of the pyramid, to a partnership
model, the scale of impact potential increases without losing the value of those fragile
inspirational ideas. In order to be at the top of the pyramid and the outcomes to become
more impactful, the University stakeholders need to be active in the project longer,
beyond student involvement. They need to deploy their knowledge, in partnership with
301
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
the Company, to translate the student outputs into more Company applicable, refined
solutions. Nevertheless, the research recognises the difference between valuable benefits
and impact that the engagement brings to both stakeholders.
Benefits and Impact to the Company
Value to the Company through Live and Collaborative projects
In identifying valuable benefits and impact, we have considered what Unilever’s
representatives have told us that they valued most about engagement in these projects,
and considered the ‘reach’ that these aspects can have within the organisation.
Rapidity
In relative terms, a project conducted in the hothouse environment of a studentengaged project, delivers ‘tangible’ results very quickly. (Tangible results in this respect are
manifestations of an idea in a format that is readily understood by a specific audience.
These may include mock-ups and prototypes, faux-adverts (in poster and video format),
video stories, animations, poster-presentations and reports). What this means is that new
scientific discovery can be postulated as consumer-ready products whilst still in early
exploration. When such discoveries are placed in meaningful consumer contexts in this
way, their proponents can garner advocacy for the idea, highlighting potential consumer
benefit, and potential return on investment thereby aiding go/no-go decision-making.
2. High Volume, High Quality
Whilst Osborn’s (1953) assertion that ‘quantity breeds quality’ in idea generation has
been challenged (Diehl and Stoebe, 1991), there is still a very good case to make for high
volume idea generation in the context of a student-engaged project with industry. For
Unilever, in the context of these projects seeing their situation played back to them
through the multiple lenses of many students’ understanding increases the potential for
them to derive value from the exercises:
affirmation/validation of their own thinking;
inspiration; entirely new ideas and approaches;
unexpected connections (from sector to sector, culture to culture, life-stage to lifestage);
and valuable ‘stupid’ (naïve) questions.
Proponents of Osborn’s brainstorming method, and derivatives thereof, highlight the
importance of quantity over quality. And supporters of live projects with students will
often cite (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Brown, 2013) the main value as being the ‘creative
naïvety’ that students bring to a problem. This is, indeed, an important source for
challenging company-held perceptions, and pre-conceptions relating to the given context.
Whilst the typical student may lack experience and wisdom born out of age and life
experience, this delivers a particular value to the company. By proposing positively naïve
ideas, intelligently framed, and in a contextually-relevant way, their value and potential
impact increases significantly.
Compelling Communications
Smith, et al. (2010) identified the essential role of story-making and story-telling in
multidisciplinary design projects, especially those engaging scientific communities. They
302
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
explain that story-making acts as mediation between different disciplines seeking to solve
the same problem but employing methods, approaches, behaviors and knowledge specific
to their own background. This story-making approach places the consumer at the center of
the story; understanding the consumer is therefore key.
Unilever have a sophisticated model for representing different consumer types in
different global situations. This guides internal decision-making and new brand strategy,
product development and positioning. However, whilst the tool is sophisticated, and based
on thorough research and rigorous data, it can be somewhat ‘lifeless’. Story-making (and
the character creation required) brings the consumer to life, and immediately places the
ideas in the consumers’ context.
Smith, et al. (2010) explain how, as a project progresses, the story-making must
translate into storytelling. Storytelling and its relationship to the design pitch is a relatively
under-researched area, however there have been recent attempts to understand how
approaching storytelling at this stage of a conceptual design project has an impact on a
company in terms of their ability to see value in the work of a designer (Parkinson et al.,
2012a, 2012b). In particular Parkinson and Bohemia (2012a), highlight the importance of
considering the perceptions of a company when devising the structure of a story, in terms
of what type of communication they perceive to be diverse and different, and what
perspectives and cultural beliefs their users have.
The means of presenting such stories is also important. The mock-ups and prototypes,
faux-adverts video stories, animations, poster-presentations and reports previously
mentioned, can all act to bring aspects of the ideas to life, and are often combined to
create presentations that are transportable; can be replayed and reused within a company
by the project champions, long after the students have moved on to other things.
At the onset of projects, the School of Design has learned that investing time in
interrogating the project brief, mapping the project objectives, assumptions and context
against the School’s own knowledge of the situation, and placing all of this in the context
of the consumer has particular value. We call this ‘brief-back’. This ‘brief-back’ ensures
that both parties fully understand each other’s perspective and have a shared, common
goal for the project prior to student engagement. This also gives the company a compelling
narrative with which to garner internal advocacy for the work and stimulus material with
which to bring colleagues onboard.
Impact to Company through Partnership Projects
True impact of the engagements between Unilever and the School of Design has been
witnessed only through Partnership Projects that have brought both parties to align their
thinking, cultures and ethos. The most valuable impacts to the Company as identified by
them are:
4. Co-creation
In Partnership Projects, a greater degree of ownership of the outcomes ensures that
the project has increased potential to influence internal Company development activity
once the academic community has stepped away. Engaging a broad team of Company
representatives in co-creative activities as the project progresses by establishing a series of
workshops throughout the project allowed the Unilever team to engage directly with the
students in story-making. This inspires their own creativity and lowers inhibitions.
303
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
Company employees state that working with students gives them ‘permission’ to behave
more creatively, especially if the workshops are held in the School of Design premises. By
‘permission’, employees are referring to the creative freedom that working with students
liberates, away from the constraints of their ‘day-job’ and the perceived professionalism
called for when engaging with external commercial creative agencies.
This co-creation helps to establish ownership and a desire to see the ideas through into
the Company Innovation Pipeline. However, it has a more profound impact; employees
have explained that working with NUSD has impacted on their working practices, bringing
about new ways of approaching problems, and engaging in a more consumer-focused and
multidisciplinary practice.
5. Beyond students
Whilst the typical ‘live’ project concludes with the ‘final presentation’ to the ‘client’ and
some feedback from them, research previously conducted in the School of Design (Bailey
et al 2013) identified an important post-completion phase of activity, in effect, ‘feedforward’ – ‘what happens next…’. Building on this research, the School of Design has
established a mechanism through which the academic team can work with recent
graduates engaged in an Innovators in Residence scheme to work with companies to refine
ideas, establish appropriate strategic propositions based upon them and communicate
these appropriately. This level of engagement is important to Unilever because it answers
the question which are often posed in feedback at the conclusion of the typical live
project; ‘that was great - now, what can we do with it?’
Benefit and Impact to the University
The overarching value to the University from this type of engagement with an
organisation is that it provides a platform for truly integrated academic practice; a model
in which external engagement provides both a learning context for students and research
site for academics (for the application (and exchange) of existing knowledge and creation
of new).
Value to the University through Live and Collaborative Projects
Barnes et al. (2002) explain that, in the context of university-company interactions, the
different parties have different motivations;
any University partner aims through its research activities to achieve certain important
academic objectives, e.g. the publication of research results in academic journals; to run
projects for research students leading to postgraduate degree qualifications; to perform
further research in specific areas; and through this research to develop new teaching and
case study material.
These academic objectives are certainly present within the School of Design, however,
there is another motivation at play, which possibly takes a higher priority than all of these
and this is that of providing authentic learning; learning opportunities that allow for theory
to be applied in practice in addressing ‘real-world’ problems.
High Level Learning Within Real World Context Bailey et al. (2014) identified context of
application as essential to establishing authentic learning. With regard to these projects
with this Company, it is clear that the closer the relationship moves towards the
Partnership Project model, the more authentic the learning opportunity becomes.
304
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Impact to University Through Partnership Projects
1. Generation of Currency in Practice Based Knowledge
Within the context of design innovation education, it is essential that contemporary
(and future) influences on the designers’ practice are continually refreshed. Traditional
academic research practices, longitudinal studies and engagement with the academic
community at large, offer one dimension in this respect. However, active engagement with
commercial contexts of application allows academics to understand much more rapidly the
pervading priorities of the time. This ensures a currency of knowledge, which is not always
achieved through theoretical study. In turn, it ensures that what is taught in the classroom
and studio is entirely relevant to contemporary practice, and therefore better equips
students for employment.
2. Opportunities for Future Research and Funding
Such contemporary awareness sets the scene for relevant, practice-based research. In
the same way that real-world context is essential to student learning, so it is for research.
It provides a testing ground for evolving theories and approaches, methods and tools.
Based upon the co-creative approaches outlined above, it also provides an opportunity for
such approaches to be tested with industry collaborators.
Conclusion
The University gives importance to delivery of excellence in learning and teaching, and
programmes of study need to demonstrate high achievement across the range of
University and HE metrics against which they are judged. The move from ‘Live Projects’
through ‘Collaborative Projects’ to conducting ‘Partnership Projects’ has proved beneficial
not just for the primary partners (Unilever and Northumbria University), but also for the
students. The more closely the students work with the Company (co-creating in the
partnership model), the greater their experience of working in a real world context,
learning the skills and competencies which not only make them highly employable, but
also confident agents of innovation and change.
The Future
As highlighted in the paper, partnership through students’ projects in order to propose
solutions to real world problems generates great value for the students, the company and
the University. In addition to the former, such collaborations also generate value for the
disciplines, and the individual stakeholders who are part of the partnership. This poses a
challenge for the University; to ensure a four-way value creation i.e. for the company, the
discipline, academic research and students. This has to be done by balancing the
University-company relationship (business) while creating viable research output (adding
value to the discipline), research opportunities (future collaborations and funding
opportunities), and enhancing student experience; we call this Integrated Academic
Practice.
305
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
References
Anderson, J., & Priest, C. (2015) Live Projects Network. Retrieved 24 January 2015, from
http://liveprojectsnetwork.org/about/
Bailey, M., Smith, N., & Aftab, M. (2013, 14-17 May). Connecting for Impact Multidisciplinary Approaches to Innovation in Small to Medium Sized enterprises (SMEs).
Paper presented at the DRS/Cumulus Conference 2013: The 2nd International
Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo, Norway.
Bailey, M., Aftab, M., & Duncan, T. (2014). New Design is Bigger and Harder - Design
Mastery in a Changing World. Paper presented at the International Conference on
Engineering and Product Design Education, Enschende, The Netherlands.
Barnes, T., Pashby, I., Gibbons, A. (2002) ‘Effective University – Industry Interaction: A
Multi-case Evaluation of Collaborative R&D Projects’. European Management Journal 20
(3), 272-285.
Blumenfeld, Phyllis C. et al. (1991) ‘Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the
Doing, Supporting the Learning.’ Educational Psychologist 26, no. 3-4: 369-98.
Brown, J. Benedict (2013) ‘An output of value’ - Exploring the role of the live project as a
pedagogical, social and cultural bureau de change. Presented at Association of
Architectural Educators Conference, 4-5 April, Nottingham Trent University. 4.
Michael Diehl; Wolfgang Stroebe (1991). ‘Productivity Loss in Idea-Generating Groups:
Tracking Down the Blocking Effect’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61 (3):
392–403
Osborn, A.F. (1963) Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem
solving (Third Revised Edition). New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Parkinson, D. and Bohemia, E. (2012a) Developing the Design Storytelling Impact-Approach
Framework, 2012 International Design Management Research Conference, Boston,
Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Parkinson, D., Bohemia, E., Yee, J. and Smith, N. (2012b) Design Process and Organisational
Strategy: A Storytelling Perspective, Design Research Society Annual International
Conference, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pertuzé, J. A. et al. (2010). Best Practices for Industry-University Collaboration. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 51(4), 82-91.
Saldana, Johnny (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: SAGE
Publication Ltd.
Saikaly,F. (2005) Approaches todesign research:Towards the designerly way. Sixth
international conference of the European Academy of Design (EAD06). University of the
Arts, Bremen, Germany
Smith, Neil & Mark Bailey & Steve Singleton & Phil Sams. 2010. Storytelling stimulates
science. International Conference On Engineering And Product Design Education 2 & 3
September 2010, Norwegian University Of Science And Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Smith, N., Bailey, M., Singleton, S. and Sams, P. (2010) – 12th International Engineering &
Product Design Education conference, E&PDE 2010, Trondheim, Norway. ISBN 978-1904670-19-3.
Yee, J. S. R. Capturing tacit knowledge: Documenting and understanding recent
methodological innovation used in design doctorates in order to inform postgraduate
306
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
training provision. Experiential Knowledge Conference, 19th June 2009 London. London
Metropolitan University
307
What Problem Are We Solving? Encouraging Idea
Generation and Effective Team Communication
Colin M. GRAY*a, Seda YILMAZa, Shanna R. DALYb, Colleen M. SEIFERTb and
Richard GONZALEZb
a Iowa
State University; b University of Michigan
*cmgray@iastate.edu
Abstract: Idea generation has frequently been explored in design education as
an exercise of students’ ‘innate’ creativity, and few tools or techniques are
offered to scaffold ideation ability. As students develop their design skills, we
expect them to demonstrate increasing ideation flexibility—a cognitive and
social ability to see a problem from multiple perspectives, and to create more
varied concepts within the problem space. In this study, we introduced three
tools— functional decomposition, Design Heuristics, and affinity diagramming—
to aid students’ ideation in a three-hour workshop. Participants included 20
students in a junior industrial design studio arranged in five pre-existing teams.
These participants first decomposed the functions within an existing set of
concepts they had generated, then selected a specific function and generated
additional concepts using the Design Heuristics ideation method. Finally, teams
organized these concepts using affinity diagramming to find patterns and
additional concepts. Our findings suggest that this process encouraged students
to try multiple ways of examining the existing problem space, resulting in a
broadened set of final concepts. More striking, the instructional activities served
to foreground differences in team members’ understanding of the problem they
were addressing, fostering alignment of their problem statement and aiding in
its further development.
Keywords: problem framing; functional decomposition; Design Heuristics;
affinity diagramming; team communication
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
What Problem Are We Solving?
Introduction
The framing of a design problem is a key component of design thinking (Dorst, 2015;
Paton & Dorst, 2011). Previous research has addressed the exploration of problem spaces
(Cross, 2007; Goel & Pirolli, 1989; Schön, 1990), both through the application of productive
constraints (Biskjaer & Halskov, 2014; Stokes, 2009) and the dialectic between problem
and solution states (Dorst & Cross, 2001), in which problem framing can make a wicked or
ill-structured problem tractable for individual designers and design teams. However, less is
known about how designers and design teams develop consensus around problem
framings in order to develop potential solutions, particularly early in their design
education. While the reflective skills of articulating design decisions and building
consensus around those decisions are hallmarks of expert design behavior (Lawson &
Dorst, 2009; Nelson & Stolterman, 2012), the pedagogical scaffolds that are needed to
effectively teach these skills have not been adequately identified.
Numerous scholars have suggested that sketching offers a unique insight into the
creative process (e.g., Goldschmidt, 1997; Goel, 1995; Self & Pei, 2014) by externalizing
design cognition in a visual form, forcing the individual designer to document potential
design solutions. However, sketching as a method or tool does not necessarily constrain
the student’s articulation of the problem space they are working within, and when
sketches are externalized and isolated from the individual designer, can often be too
ambiguous to build consensus without other forms of communication. When multiple
stakeholders are engaged in the design process (as is most often the case), the alignment
of problem space and potential solutions—as depicted through sketching and other
communication tools used in early concept generation—becomes even more complex,
requiring complex patterns of communication in order to reach an understanding among
team members (e.g., Cross & Cross, 1996; Nelson & Stolterman, 2012).
The issues of team communication, dialogue, and negotiation are critical in forming an
understanding of how design is practiced; however past design research has focused
primarily on the relationship of the individual designer to the created artifact. However,
Cross and Cross (1996) offer an early example of how team alignment and the roles of
designers within the team can affect the ability to build consensus and work efficiently.
McPeek and Morthland (2010) focused on the development of communicative patterns
that facilitated alignment and understanding within student teams, including a common
dialogue and language. In addition to these more general studies of team alignment, and
the elements of interaction that facilitate this alignment, some scholars have focused more
closely on problem framing and its role in facilitating and sustaining alignment. Stumpf and
McDonnell (2002) operationalized Schön’s concept of reflection-on-action between team
members as a way to make the frame negotiation process explicit, with team recognition
of major shifts in framing as a productive step towards producing aligned concepts. Hey,
Joyce, and Beckman (2007) expanded on the idea of frame negotiation as a cycle of frame
setting, where students’ individual frames are systematically made explicit, which then
raises potential conflicts between individual frames, ultimately leading to the construction
of a shared frame.
Reflection-on-action is valuable to externalize and explain the situated design
judgments of an individual designer (e.g., Holt, 1997; Schön, 1985) on both the design
decision and problem framing levels. But team-based design requires not only
309
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
externalization, but also negotiation. Nelson and Stolterman (2012) refer to the object of
negotiation as the desiderata—or ‘that-which-is-desired’—which reinforces the need to
understand design intentions in a specific, situated design process. The negotiation of the
desiderata, which encompasses the problem framing along with the dimensions of ethics,
aesthetics, and reason, is at the core of developing a team design solution. Yet there is
little research addressing the mechanics of this alignment process, particularly in relation
to ideation and the continued development of a collective understanding of problem
framing. So, while we know that designers constantly engage in a dialectic between
problem and solution (Dorst & Cross, 2001; Maher & Tang, 2003), it is less clear how this
dialectic forges alignment between team members.
Three Design Methods
For this study, we selected three existing, complementary design methods to scaffold
the generation of ideas and help students gain an understanding of the problem space.
The first method, called functional decomposition (e.g., Booth et al., 2014), encourages the
generation of productive constraints. The second method, called Design Heuristics (Daly et
al., 2012b; Yilmaz et al., 2014), provides strategies or shortcuts for designers to generate
multiple, varied concepts. The third method, affinity diagramming (e.g., Hanington &
Martin, 2012; Kawakita, 1975), encourages the sorting and grouping of data to understand
potential relationships. The relevant cores of each method, we propose, can be
synergistically combined to support designers as they actively and explicitly set design
constraints, and then use that constrained problem framing to create innovative concepts.
Functional Decomposition
Functional decomposition is a method commonly used in engineering (e.g., Booth et
al., 2014). It describes a product or system by means of its functions, often oriented in a
hierarchical way. Thus, when a product is defined in terms of functions, each function can
be thought of as modular or replaceable to some degree (van Eyk, 2011), and this
decomposition provides insight into how a system works. In order to adequately describe a
product or system in terms of its functions, an engineer must have the cognitive skill that
Umeda and Tomiyama (1997) refer to as functional reasoning—an ability to understand
subfunctions of a product, and to relate them to each other in a logical, hierarchical
manner.
A common approach to functional decomposition in the classroom is to begin with an
existing product or system and decompose the primary and secondary functions in order
to identify the hierarchy of functions present within an extant design (Toh, Miller, &
Kremer, 2012). This approach often includes not only conceptual decomposition, as in
software engineering (Jackson & Jackson, 1996), but also a physical product dissection in
order to encourage students to understand how component functions relate to each other
(e.g., Booth, Bhasin, Reid, & Ramani, 2014; Lamancusa & Gardner, 1996). In this study, we
focus on conceptual functional decomposition, using the resultant understanding of
functions as generative constraints to further develop early concepts (Gray, Yilmaz, Daly,
Seifert, & Gonzalez, forthcoming).
310
What Problem Are We Solving?
Design Heuristics
A variety of idea generation techniques and approaches have been introduced in the
engineering and design literature (e.g., SCAMPER, TRIZ, morphological analysis). Design
Heuristics is an evidence-based method for encouraging the production of varied concepts
during idea generation (Daly et al., 2012b; Yilmaz et al., 2014). Design heuristics were
derived from award-winning products (Yilmaz & Seifert, 2010) and the design activities of
expert designers (Daly et al, 2012b; Yilmaz et al., 2010; Yilmaz & Seifert, 2011). The 77
identified heuristics comprise a catalogue of ‘cognitive shortcuts’ that can be used in
generative ways to transform or modify design concepts. This method has been
extensively validated in studies of ideation in engineering and design classrooms (Christian
et al., 2012; Daly et al., 2012a; Kotys-Schwartz et al., 2014; Kramer et al., 2014; Yilmaz et
al., 2012). The Design Heuristics are presented on a deck of 77 cards, with each card
including a heuristic, a written description, an abstract depiction of the heuristic, and two
examples of the heuristic as it is used in consumer products (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Sample Design Heuristics card (front and back).
Affinity Diagramming
A final method introduced to the students in the study is the use of affinity
diagramming (Hanington & Martin, 2012) to create clusterings of potential concepts that
support the selection of a final product design direction. This method originated as a way
to understand relationships between complex sets of qualitative field data (Kawakita,
1975), and has been widely used in business settings and participatory design to encourage
the collaborative grouping of information, with participants distilling this information into
themes or clusters that may drive further development or iteration.
Purpose
In this study, we addressed the gap in research on the team negotiation of problem
framing through a situated design project in an industrial design context. We focused on
individual and team understandings of problem framing, and how these understandings
affected idea generation and selection. While the majority of research on idea generation
strategies have focused only on individual or team behaviors, in this study, we address the
movement from team to individual processes and back to team through the process stages
of problem framing, idea generation, and recomposition of concepts using the following
research questions:
311
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
What individual and team problem framings did students rely on when performing
their functional decomposition?
How did the students’ selected focal function and resulting concepts relate to their
individual and team problem framing?
How did the scaffold of three design methods influence the nature of divergence in
concept generation and sorting relative to initial and revised problem framing,?
Method
Participants
Twenty students (6 female and 14 male) in a single junior-level undergraduate
industrial design course at a large Midwestern U.S. university participated in the study.
These students were organized into five teams of four students at the beginning of the
semester, and all teams engaged in an industry-sponsored semester-long project on the
development of innovative kitchen products related to rising food costs, the future of
food, or the unique needs of millennials.
Classroom Intervention and Problem Statement Evolution
The study took place as a workshop held during a three-hour class session (Figure 2),
during the fourth week of the semester. The workshop included a set of activities to
facilitate the generation of divergent concepts through three methods: individual
functional decomposition of existing concepts, individual concept generation using Design
Heuristics, and affinity diagramming in teams. In preparation for these activities, each
team was asked to produce ten detailed concepts related to a previously defined problem,
and these team-generated concepts informed the individual functional decomposition
noted in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Overview of the classroom intervention, including individual and team activities.
Data Collection
Beyond the specific intervention, classroom activities supporting individual and team
problem framing throughout the semester were used as a secondary data source. In this
study, we drew upon three separate groups of problem statements created by each team
312
What Problem Are We Solving?
during the classroom intervention: 1) an initial set of problem statements completed
individually by each team member in the first week of the semester, resulting in a total of
18 potential problem statements from three starting statements, forming iterative
‘ladders’ of related statements; 2) a team problem statement supported by the initial
research created in the third week of the semester; and 3) the final team problem
statement included in the end-of-semester process book.
The concept data from the classroom intervention include: 1) team-generated concepts
immediately prior to the intervention; 2) individual concepts generated across three
sequential 15-minute stages (ideation, iteration, recomposition); 3) team clustering of
individual concepts, which includes the composition of concepts and cluster names; and 4)
the final concepts generated by each team at the conclusion of the intervention. These
primary data sources are contextualized within the problem statements generated before
and after the intervention, including the relationship of generated ideas to the final design
at the conclusion of the semester.
Analysis
Data were analyzed using several strategies focusing on the longitudinal development
of a problem statement within each team, and the relationship of that problem statement
to the concepts each team member created and then clustered with other team members’
concepts. We first identified emergent themes from the team-generated concepts prior to
the intervention, relating these concepts to the previously defined problem statement. In
isolation, we then analyzed the labeled clusters of concepts identified by each team,
including the composition of concepts from individual team members. These clusters were
then related to the initial problem statements generated by individual team members in
the first week of the semester, and the correspondence of final concepts generated by the
team to the problem statement the team had generated collaboratively. Finally, these
clusters and problem statements were compared to the completed design at the end of
the semester. All comparisons were initially made by the lead researcher, and then were
confirmed and altered where necessary by a second researcher familiar with the classroom
intervention until agreement was reached.
Results
In the classroom intervention, five teams of students generated a total of 237 concepts
across the three design stages (i.e., ideation, iteration, and recomposition), with an
average of 11.8 concepts (SD=4.06) each. All 20 students generated concepts in the
ideation phase (n=133), 17 students generated concepts in the iteration phase (n=82), and
only 8 students generated concepts in the recomposition phase (n=22). The number of
sketches varied somewhat by team, with the lowest averaging 9.5 sketches (SD=5.2) per
team member in Team 1 (T1) and the highest average of 14.5 sketches (SD=4.2) in T2.
All teams generated concepts in the final stage following the clustering activity, with an
average of 4.0 concepts (SD=2.3) each. The affinity diagramming activity resulted in an
average of 5.6 clusters (SD=2.4; min=3; max=9), with each cluster including an average of
6.8 concepts (SD=4.6; min=3; max=26). Out of the 237 total concepts students generated,
189 were organized into labeled clusters; 3 concepts were not organized into a cluster; the
remaining 45 concepts did not appear to be represented in team activity (M=2.4; SD=2.26).
313
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
A summary of the team problem statement, individual functions selected by team
members to direct their ideation, team clusters, and final concepts are included in Table 1.
Table 1
Summary of Individual and Team Concept Framings.
Tea
Initial Team
Problem Statement
Individual
Functions After
Functional
Decomposition
1
System-based solution to
improve upon portion
control, food preservation, &
waste
Compartmentalization
Ease of Access
Space saving
[N/A]
Accessibility (n=4)
Adjustable Dividers
(n=5)
Exterior
Adjustability/Space
Saving (n=8)
Interior Adjustability
(n=12)
How can we create a
system that
discourages millennials
from throwing away
food at home?
2
...this system will work
towards saving space,
minimizing waste,
maintaining taste &
nutrients, & decrease
amount of time.
Compactable
Hold
Adjustable
Fold Down
FFB (n=4)
FFP (n=6)
FPT (n=3)
Inset stackable (n=3)
Lid (n=4)
Misc. (n=7)
Sliding lids (n=5)
Stackable (n=8)
Strainers (n=2)
How could we create a
system that encourages
millennials to connect
with one another while
preparing a meal?
3
The proposed dehydration
solution will be combined
with a microwave and/or
convection oven to provide
faster access to dehydrated
produce, accommodating a
busy lifestyle.
Collapsible
Dries food
Air circulation
[N/A]
On-the-go (n=26)
Preparation (n=10)
Preservation (n=7)
Facilitate an emotional
connection with a food
preservation system
that encourages
healthy and
personalized snacking
experience.
4
Generate products that
increase convenience,
support and encourage the
principles of a healthy
lifestyle, and tie in a
community facet within the
preparation and
consumption of meals.
Be held
Covering of base
Intuitive use
Unique experience
Attachments (n=11)
Coverings (n=9)
Handles (n=9)
Serving (n=6)
Storage (n=3)
How could we compose
an engaging interaction
specifically adapted to
the eating habits of the
dynamic millennial
lifestyle?
5
Develop a system, which will
re-invent the perception of
'on the go eating' that
conforms to the lifestyles &
eating habits of healthconscious millennials.
Give user experience
Emotional
Cleaning
Versatility
Customizable
Container (n=3)
Lid (n=6)
Other (n=4)
Flexible
Cleaning Mechanisms
(n=5)
Storage Mechanisms
(n=7)
Experience
Consumption (n=6)
Storage (n=6)
Promote an experience
that accommodates
eating habits which
reflect the diverse
lifestyles of the out and
about millennial.
m
Team
Concept Clusters
After Affinity
Diagramming
Team End-ofSemester
Problem
Statement
Based on the initial summary and descriptive statistics of all five teams, we selected
two contrasting cases from this intervention, representing diversity in the number of
314
What Problem Are We Solving?
generated concepts and the apparent degree of alignment among team members around
a central problem framing.
Team One: Divergence Through Multiple Interpretations of the
Problem Space
Team One (T1) included one male and three female students. In previous problem
framing activities, they had generated a wide range of potential problem framings, first in
laddering exercises performed individually (18 framings per team member), and then later
in a collaborative one-page summary document drawing on several themes based on the
individual laddering exercises. These concepts were primarily combining elements rather
than selecting or synthesizing. The resulting problem statement was broad, with the team
focusing on a ‘system-based solution to improve upon portion control, food preservation,
& waste.’
I NITIAL C ONCEPTS
Prior to the classroom intervention, T1 created 10 concepts in a collaborative manner,
working within the problem framing that had previously been set. The team’s concepts
primarily addressed issues involving extending or enhancing existing functions within an
existing refrigerator or freezer system (e.g., shelves, drawers). As shown in Figure 3, the
concept drawings were developed as relatively detailed marker comps, including callouts
and arrows to indicate movement. Eight of the 10 concepts dealt directly with organizing
or making food in the refrigerator/freezer more accessible, with the remaining two
concepts targeting space-saving elsewhere in the kitchen. Although all of the concepts
addressed the overall problem framing, they lacked any sign of integration, and instead
were viewed as separate entities.
Figure 3
A sample of T1 initial concepts, generated prior to the classroom intervention.
I NDIVIDUAL D ECOMPOSITION AND I DEATION
During the functional decomposition stage, each team member produced a function
tree based on their understanding of the concepts and problem space that had previously
been defined. It appears that Participant 1 (P1) recognized opportunities outside of the
refrigerator (Figure 4, top) because her function tree focused on the temporal context of
use, with elements of the problem statement embedded in each function. In contrast, P3
focused on an area less defined by the problem statement: namely, storage (Figure 4,
bottom).
315
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Figure 4
Comparison of P1 (top) and P3 (bottom) function trees.
P1
P3
Figure 5
Sample concepts generated by P1 and P3 which exemplify use of Design Heuristics to
modify existing team concepts. P1’s concepts include one that simply expands and
contracts (left) and another where containers attach using suction cups. P3’s concept
identifies a ‘slide out platform to set fridge items on to allow easier access to back items.’
When ideating using their individual understanding of the problem framing, team
members took different approaches to divergence within the problem space based on
their selected function. P1 focused on compartments that functioned in and out of the
refrigerator by exploring mechanisms shared between containers to save space and
provide a degree of adjustability. P3 focused on reducing common issues a user might
encounter when storing food in a refrigerator. Both participants used Design Heuristics
extensively in all of the phases where they generated concepts, frequently beginning with
316
What Problem Are We Solving?
a concept relatively similar to one of the ten team concepts, and then refining or
reworking that concept using a Design Heuristics card as a modifier (Figure 5). For instance,
several of the team concepts included items being ‘attached’ in some way to each other or
to the wall of the refrigerator or freezer space. P1 used these concepts as a starting point,
identifying a storage form that could expand or contract to fit the contents (using heuristic
#32: ‘expand or collapse’), and connecting containers together with suction cups (using
heuristic #13: ‘apply existing mechanism in a new way’). In total, the four team members
produced 38 concepts, 28 of which indicated use of one or more Design Heuristics. In
keeping with the functions each team member selected, the concepts were widely varied
within the originally defined problem space. P1 focused on the function of
‘compartmentalization,’ and generated concepts relating to compartments, dividers, and
other forms of expansion/contraction or attachment to other container elements. P2 did
not provide a function tree, but her concepts related primarily to compression, crushing,
and bending container forms to fit tight spaces. P3 focused on the function ‘ease-ofaccess,’ creating mechanisms that slid out or attached to fridge in some way, with
unrelated container concepts that had soft edges or soft/hard ribs to promote flexibility.
Finally, P4 focused on the function ‘space saving,’ and produced concepts that worked in
and out of the refrigerator, including stackable components, flexible covers, and hanging
jars.
T EAM A FFINITY D IAGRAMMING
During the affinity diagramming phase, the team members worked together to sort
their concepts into groups or clusters. Unlike the previous individual phases, the process of
sorting the concepts generated by all of the team members encouraged externalization of
the rationale for the concepts, and discussion of how they related to the concepts of other
team members. T1 struggled to identify commonalities between their concepts, generating
several possible groups before finalizing four categories (Table 2).
Some of the indecision in relation to the cluster names is visible in the final affinity
diagram (Figure 6). The cluster titled ‘transfer’ has no concepts assigned to it, whereas the
‘adjustable’ cluster is linked to the external and internal adjustability clusters. These two
clusters represented the most alignment among team members, with all participants
creating concepts in one or both clusters. However, the other clusters were comprised of
concepts created by only one or two team members. Interestingly, when considering
phase of production (i.e., ideation, iteration, recomposition), only the interior and external
adjustability clusters included concepts from the final recomposition phase.
Table 2
Summary of T1 clusters.
Cluster Name
(# using Design Heuristics)
1
P
2
3
4
TO
TAL
Space saving/ Exterior adjustability
(n=6)
3
1
2
2
8
Interior adjustability (n=10)
7
2
1
12
Adjustable dividers (n=4)
5
317
P
P
P
5
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Figure 6
Accessibility (n=4)
1
Unassigned (n=4)
1
3
4
1
4
3
9
T1 affinity diagram.
F INAL C ONCEPTS
Following the clustering of individual team members’ concepts, students were directed
to ‘recompose’ concepts from the clusters to form new concepts they could move forward
with as a team. T1 created two different concepts (Figure 7): a band to hold silverware in
the refrigerator (left) and a microwaveable container that could keep a compartment of
food cold while heating the other compartment’s contents.
Figure 7
T1 final concepts, generated by all team members.
Interestingly, neither of these concepts appears to have a direct origin in the individual
team members’ concepts. Instead, they provided a new set of framings within the overall
problem space. Arguably, these concepts do not fit within the three broad categories
identified in the original problem statement (i.e., portion control, food preservation,
waste); however, they make sense as a progression of the storage concepts explored by P3
and the containers designed for multiple stages of use by P1. While the team did not
appear to come to consensus on their problem statement in this intervention, the variety
of concepts generated by the team members encouraged an in-depth conversation about
318
What Problem Are We Solving?
desirable problem framings. The final project presented by this team at the conclusion of
the semester was present, in initial form, in the intervention, with significant resemblance
to the refrigerator slider concept produced by P3. This concept (Figure 5, bottom), while
later valued, was not included in any of the clusters produced by the team, indicating a
lack of fit within the clusters or a lack of alignment around this concept at this stage of the
team’s work.
Team Five: Divergence Through Intentional Segmentation of
the Problem Space
Team Five (T5) included three male students and one female student. As with T1, they
had generated a wide range of potential problem framings through laddering exercises and
a collaboratively created summary document. Unlike T1, however, the resulting problem
framing was more narrow and purposeful, with a relatively exclusive focus on ‘on-the-go’
eating. This statement unified the team’s ideation efforts in terms of context (e.g., eating
while on the move) and target outcomes (e.g., healthy eating).
I NITIAL C ONCEPTS
Unlike T1, T5 took a very different approach to the initial concept generation phase. As
demonstrated by T5’s initial ten sketches (Figure 8) generated prior to the classroom
intervention, the concepts dealt with the storage of food while focused on a particular
facet unique to the subject (e.g., the experience from eating out of a container). A wide
range of graphic styles and approaches were used, representing multiple team members’
contributions. This variety is in contrast to the homogenous visual style from T1, likely
indicating a single author for all sketches. This early approach to engaging variety across all
team members appears to have enabled the team to cover large portions of the target
problem framing.
Figure 8
A sample of T5 initial concepts, generated prior to the classroom intervention.
I NDIVIDUAL D ECOMPOSITION AND I DEATION
During the decomposition stage, T5’s alignment as a group became more visible.
Because of the clear and unified problem statement, with all team members engaged in
addressing the topic of ‘on-the-go’ eating, the function trees were considerably more
consistent across team members (Figure 9). In particular, all trees branched from a unified
‘on-the-go’ problem, a stark contrast to the variation seen in T1. From this point, however,
T5 took on a ‘divide and conquer’ approach by systematically addressing a range of
319
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
behaviors implicit in eating while on the move, with each team member selecting a
complementary perspective. In doing so, the team used the function trees to select
functions and explore the problem space in a divergent manner, addressing the need for
cleaning, versatility, portability, and experience. Overall, the team’s evident early
alignment positioned them to blend resulting concepts, with multiple perspectives working
towards the same ultimate goal.
Figure 9
Comparison of T5 function trees, showing alignment of core concepts across all team
members (P17-P20 clockwise from top left).
While T5 members were aligned around their problem framing, their individual
perspectives and selected functions allowed them to take different approaches to diverge
on the concepts they had already created. P18 was focused on the emotional experience
of product use, while P19 addressed common issues that might appear when cleaning
containers. Both of these participants used Design Heuristics extensively in all of the stages
in which they generated concepts, often modifying concepts generated in the first idea
generation stage in later stages (Figure 10). For instance, the combination of containers
with multiple compartments or elements were a common theme in the initial concepts.
P18 started in this general space, first creating a bowl that could be flipped to serve, with
the lid functioning as a plate. In a later iteration phase, P18 refined this concept further
using heuristic #50 (‘provide sensory feedback’) to add the functionality of a scale to the
plate. Similarly, P19 used Design Heuristics to transform initial hunches about potential
cleaning issues into new concepts. P19 started by identifying a product that could easily
bend to fit into a dishwasher rack, with a flexible middle portion. Later in the idea
generation session, this participant modified this ‘bendable’ concept to include a more
accessible lock that could be clicked (heuristic #50: ‘provide sensory feedback’) by moving
a clasp (heuristic #2: ‘motion’). All participants in T5 exhibited similar transformations of
concepts, with several visible threads of concept iteration using Design Heuristics.
320
What Problem Are We Solving?
P18
P19
Figure 10 Sample concepts generated by P18 and P19 which exemplify use of Design Heuristics in
generating concepts. One of P18’s concept sequences includes a ‘flip and serve’ bowl (top
left), which is then modified with heuristic #50 (‘provide sensory feedback’) to include a
display of the weight of the food (top right). P19’s concepts also show a similar iterative
development, with a bendable container that bends to fit more easily into the dishwasher
(bottom left). This concept was extended using heuristic #2 (‘motion’) and #50 (‘provide
sensory feedback’) to include a quick release clasp and snap for washing (bottom right).
In total, the four team members produced 46 concepts, 38 of which indicated use of
one or more Design Heuristics. The concepts were widely varied within the originally
defined problem space, but all strongly related to the selected function. P17 focused on
the function ‘user experience,’ experimenting with unique container forms, attachments,
and ways of stacking or collapsing elements, focusing on portability and user friendliness.
P18 focused on emotional qualities by attempting to impart an emotion in the course of
using the product, relying on transformations of objects through rolling or orientation
shifts to provide a memorable user experience. P19 addressed cleaning as his function,
experimenting with different materials and mechanisms to ease the process of cleaning.
And finally, P20 focused on the versatility, exploring a variety of inserts or additions to
increase configurations or capabilities without altering the core container.
T EAM A FFINITY D IAGRAMMING
T5 then worked together to sort their concepts into clusters. Because the team
members were already aligned in their overall problem framing, they began by reiterating
an explicit problem statement, writing it next to their eventual affinity diagram (Figure 11).
This statement appeared to guide the clusters they would develop:
‘Design a solution that provides users w/ a system that is customizable, gives
affordances for flexibility & storage, and provides users w/ an experience.’
Unlike any other team, T5 created nested clusters, with three top-level clusters of
‘flexible,’ ‘customizable,’ and ‘experience’ (Table 3).
Table 3
Summary of T5 clusters.
321
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Cluster Name
(# using Design Heuristics)
P
17
P
18
P
19
P
20
TO
TAL
Flexible
Storage mechanisms (n=5)
1
3
Cleaning mechanisms (n=5)
2
1
5
7
5
Customizable
Container (n=2)
1
Lid (n=6)
2
Other (n=4)
2
1
3
2
2
6
2
1
4
Experience
Consumption (n=5)
6
6
Storage (n=5)
3
1
1
1
6
Unassigned (n=6)
4
1
1
3
9
Within each of these clusters, sub-clusters were created to further distinguish among
concepts. It is notable that all of the top-level clusters included concepts from all team
members, with most of the gaps in sub-clusters among team members resulting from the
explicit functions each member uniquely pursued. Only the ‘customizable’ cluster included
concepts from the recomposition phase of the idea generation exercise.
Figure 11 T5 affinity diagram.
322
What Problem Are We Solving?
F INAL C ONCEPTS
After clustering the team members’ concepts, T5 used the newly defined problem
statement to ‘recompose’ concepts from the clusters. Unlike any other team, T5 team
members generated concepts in the recomposition stage individually (Figure 12). They
drew upon their conversations as a team, but retained their individual understanding of
the ‘next steps’ for developing their problem space. This strategy not only resulted in a
greater variety of concepts than in other groups, but also a larger quantity of total
concepts, with an additional nine concepts in this phase alone.
P17
P18
P19
P20
Figure 12 T5 final concepts, organized by participant.
Final concepts varied widely in T5, with many drawing on multiple concepts from the
team (Figure 12). In general, it appeared that the team members found it easier to
recompose these concepts because the elements were significantly more interchangeable
than those of T1. This is likely due to the complementary set of functions the team
members chose, and their joint understanding of how these perspectives fit together, as
demonstrated in their refined problem statement. The team’s final product design at the
end of the semester blended a number of the concept approaches explored in this
classroom intervention, resulting in a hybrid, compartmentalized water bottle and snack
container (similar to the second concept by P20 above).
323
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Discussion
These two cases illustrate different ways in which functional decomposition, Design
Heuristics, and affinity diagramming can encourage team alignment and divergent concept
generation. T1 created an exceptionally broad and multi-faceted problem space, and a lack
of explicit alignment among the team members in relation to that problem space. This
appeared to lead to the development of several isolated clusters of concepts, and
provoked a broader discussion about where the team wanted to focus moving forward.
These isolated clusters were based on different interpretations of the team’s problem
statement which, when broken down to the functional level, resulted in clusters of
concepts that were not complementary. Due to this lack of conceptual alignment and
divergence at the problem level (rather than concept level, as in T5), the affinity
diagramming activity encouraged externalization of team members’ assumptions about
what the problem space should include, and which interpretation they were willing to
proceed with in the next stages of concept development. In contrast, T5 agreed on a more
narrowly stated problem framing, and team members were generally aligned around what
kinds of concepts would address their chosen space. As a result, rather than team
members creating isolated clusters of concepts, T5 participants selected functions
representing complementary aspects of the overall problem framing (e.g., user experience,
emotion, cleaning, versatility). They diverged in their perspective on the design problem—
choosing elements to foreground and background—but not so completely that their
approaches were in conflict.
These differences in team alignment surrounding the understanding of a shared
problem space—and by extension, a singular desiderata—underscores the importance of
scaffolding activities that encourage team communication. As we will discuss in more
detail below, only through aligned problem frames does convergent or divergent activity
become clear to the team at large; and, without this realization, the dialectic movement
between problem and solution (Dorst & Cross, 2001) can lead to frustration and tension
among team members rather than productive engagement.
Alignment of Problem Frames
In the early problem exploration process, the majority of individual and team problem
statements were quite broad, representing or defining spaces that did not narrow the
complexity of the overarching client problems. This breadth, particularly in the team
problem statements, seemed to stem from the variety of individual framings that existed
among the team members. Then, when creating the group statement, multiple framings
were combined rather than selected or synthesized. The resulting problem space was too
large due to this union of multiple frames, and further complicated through the
engagement of multiple stakeholders (i.e., team members). The result was a series of
misunderstandings among team members about what constraints within that space were
appropriate or desirable (e.g., ‘frame conflict;’ Hey, Joyce, & Beckman, 2007). While the
concepts that teams brought to class the day of the intervention represented a first step
towards consolidating the problem space, these concepts were not sufficient to align the
team’s differing frames. Instead, articulation of the constraints and features of the
problem space—or bringing the tacit understandings of the team members into explicit
324
What Problem Are We Solving?
communicative acts— was required (McPeek & Morthland, 2010; Stumpf & McDonnell,
2002).
Relationships of Divergent and Convergent Behaviors
Success in idea generation and development relies on both divergent and convergent
thinking (Cropley, 2006; Dym et al., 2006; Yilmaz & Daly, 2014); however, students
generally need more support to generate divergent concepts, particularly in academic
environments that may not value play or speculation. In this study, divergent idea
generation was supported through individual use of Design Heuristics, and was critical in
creating a space for teams to effectively converge on ideas later in the design process.
While students in these groups went about diverging ideas in different ways—the first
team in a more chaotic, ad hoc way, and the second team in a more systematic way—the
result was the same: a move towards convergence based on their team’s breadth of
divergence, individually and collectively. The group clusters reified this divergence, leading
to a conversation that helped to identify individual understandings of the problem space,
and which convergent paths might be most beneficial.
Figure 13 Dialectic of Divergence and Convergence (DDC) Model, illustrating the shaping of the
problem space boundaries through individual and group activities.
Idea Generation to Stimulate a Dialectic Movement Between
Divergence and Convergence
Numerous methods exist that have the potential to scaffold divergent or convergent
thinking (e.g., Hanington & Martin, 2012), but this study suggests a need to focus on the
dialectic between these two modes of exploration. In particular, the relationships between
divergent/convergent behavior through situated methods use and the impact of the
broader problem framing are poorly understood, even when using empirically validated
tools such as Design Heuristics. In this study, we have shown how the setting of decisive
325
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
and generative constraints, supported by functional decomposition, Design Heuristics, and
affinity diagramming in an instructional intervention, can encourage both types of thinking
and exploring, and movement between these modes of design.
This study suggests that the multiple scaffolded ‘shifts’ in problem framing and
structured ideation are productive to the development of design expertise, especially in
relation to practicing a expert-like dialectic movement between problem and solution. As
seen in Figure 13, the students were guided through multiple framings of the design
problem, drawing on both team and individual understandings of the problem space over
time, resulting in a dialectic of divergence and convergence (DDC). The framing that
students developed through individual work and team concepts prior to the classroom
intervention was used to structure individual idea generation, followed by team evaluation
and clustering of the resultant concepts. While additional exploration is needed to validate
which DDC approaches may be most valuable in specific instructional settings or for classes
of design problems, it appears that multiple shifts between team and individual work, and
between individual and team framings, resulted in increased team alignment and
productive idea generation in this study. Of course, our analysis drew from a relatively
small sample in a single context, and may not be directly generalizable to a larger design
education population. In addition, specific aspects of the present study, such as the order
of method presentation, and which methods were carried out individually and in teams,
should be studied in future research. Future studies may include permutations of the order
of methods and individual or group work to validate particularly generative sequences
using the DDC model.
Conclusion
We have demonstrated one set of methods that encourages the dialectic movement
between problem framing and solution generation. The DDC model we have presented has
some similarities with techniques in individual and team research that take advantage of
differential strengths in individual and group processes, such as the Delphi method (see
Pahl, Beitz, Felhusen, & Grote, 2007 for a review relevant to design). The process of
working through the DDC appeared to be productive, both for teams that already enjoyed
team alignment, and for teams that needed to challenge and verbalize their latent
assumptions regarding the target problem space. Individuals were first encouraged to
narrow from their initial framing to a specific function through the generation of a
functional decomposition tree, selecting a function that would serve as a decisive
constraint. Following this convergent behavior, participants were then able to generate
ideas within a narrowed, yet purposefully divergent space using Design Heuristics. Finally,
the team affinity diagramming activity encouraged individuals within the team to relate
their concepts to those produced by other team members, a primarily convergent activity.
This final step required a rapid dialectic movement between individual concepts and the
broader goals of the team project, including problem statements, problem framings, and
observed synergies between individual concepts. The results of this study have a number
of implications for design educators, including: (1) additional ways to conceive of team
alignment early in the design process, which impacts motivation and, eventually, the
success of the design team; (2) the need for a series of robust design methods or other
empirically-validated tools for guiding the design process between divergence and
326
What Problem Are We Solving?
convergence stages; and (3) the value of responding to the ‘right’ question as a team by
proposing solutions directly addressing the target problem in idea generation, which is
contextualized through a shared awareness of the problem framing being utilized.
Acknowledgements: This research is funded by the National Science
Foundation, Division of Undergraduate Education, Transforming
Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and
Mathematics (TUES Type II) Grants # 1323251 and #1322552. We appreciate
the assistance of Justin Monaco throughout the data analysis process.
References
Biskjaer, M. M., & Halskov, K. (2014). Decisive constraints as a creative resource in
interaction design. Digital Creativity, 25(1), 27-61. doi:10.1080/14626268.2013.855239
Booth, J. W., Bhasin, A. K., Reid, T., & Ramani, K. (2014). Evaluating the bottom-up method
for functional decomposition in product dissection tasks. In Proceedings of the ASME
2014 Conference.
Christian, J. L., Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Seifert, C., & Gonzalez, R. (2012). Design heuristics
support two modes of idea generation: Initiating ideas and transitioning among
concepts. In American Society for Engineering Education. American Society for
Engineering Education.
Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391404.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.
Cross, N., & Cross, A. C. (1996). Observations of teamwork and social processes in design.
In N. Cross, H. Christiaans, & K. Dorst (Eds). Analysing design activity (pp. 291-317).
Chichester, NY: Wiley.
Daly, S., Christian, J., Yilmaz, S., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012a). Assessing design
heuristics in idea generation within an introductory engineering design course.
International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), 463-473.
Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012b). Design
heuristics in engineering concept generation. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4),
601-629.
Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by design. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problemsolution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425-437.
Dym, C.L., Agogino, A.M., Eris, O., Frey, D.D., & Leifer, L.J. (2006). Engineering design
thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 34(1), 65-83.
Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Goel, V., & Pirolli, P. (1989). Motivating the notion of generic design within information
processing theory: the design problem space. AI Magazine, 10(1), 18-36.
Gray, C. M., Yilmaz, S., Daly, S., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (forthcoming). Supporting
idea generation through functional decomposition: An alternative framing for Design
Heuristics. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Engineering Design
(ICED). Milan, IT: The Design Society.
327
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Hanington, B., & Martin, B. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research
complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Beverly,
MA: Rockport Publishers.
Hey, J. H., Joyce, C. K., & Beckman, S. L. (2007). Framing innovation: Negotiating shared
frames during early design phases. Journal of Design Research, 6(1), 79-99.
Holt, J. E. (1997). The designer's judgement. Design Studies, 18(1), 113-123.
Jackson, D., & Jackson, M. (1996). Problem decomposition for reuse. Software Engineering
Journal, 11(1), 19-30.
Kawakita, J. (1975). The KJ method—a scientific approach to problem solving.
Kotys-Schwartz, D., Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Knight, D., & Polmear, M. (2014). Evaluating the
implementation of design heuristic cards in an industry sponsored capstone design
course. In Annual Conference of American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE),
Indianapolis, IN.
Kramer, J., Daly, S., Yilmaz, S., & Seifert, C. (2014). A case-study analysis of design heuristics
in an upper-level design course. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of American
Society of Engineering Education (AC 2014-8452), Washington, DC: American Society for
Engineering Education.
Lamancusa, J., & Gardner, J. F. (1996). Product dissection in academia: Teaching
engineering the way we learned it. In International Conference on Engineering
Education.
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press.
McPeek, K. T., & Morthland, L. (2010). Collaborative design pedagogy: An examination of
the four levels of collaboration. In Design & complexity: Design research society
international conference, Montreal, Canada. Retrieved from:
http://www.designresearchsociety.org/docs-procs/DRS2010/PDF/085.pdf
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an
unpredictable world (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., & Grote, K. -H. (2007). Engineering design: A systematic
approach (3rd ed.). London, UK: Springer Verlag.
Paton, B., & Dorst, K. (2011). Briefing and reframing: A situated practice. Design Studies,
32(6), 573-587.
Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1984). Planning problems are wicked problems. In N. Cross (Ed.),
Developments in design methodology (pp. 135-144). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Schön, D. A. (1985). The design studio: An exploration of its traditions and potentials.
London: RIBA Publications Limited.
Schön, D. A. (1990). The design process. In V. A. Howard (Ed.), Varieties of thinking: Essays
from Harvard’s philosophy of education research center (pp. 111-141). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Self, J., & Pei, E. (2014). Reflecting on design sketching: Implications for problem-framing
and solution-focused conceptual ideation. Archives of Design Research, 27(3), 65-87.
Stokes, P. D. (2009). Using constraints to create novelty: A case study. Psychology of
Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 174-180.
Stumpf, S. C., & McDonnell, J. T. (2002). Talking about team framing: Using argumentation
to analyse and support experiential learning in early design episodes. Design Studies,
23(1), 5-23.
328
What Problem Are We Solving?
Toh, C., Miller, S., & Kremer, G. O. (2012). Mitigating design fixation effects in engineering
design through product dissection activities. In Design Computing and Cognition.
Umeda, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1997). Functional reasoning in design. IEEE Expert, 12(2), 4248.
van Eck, D. (2011). Functional decomposition: On rationality and incommensurability in
engineering. (Unpublished dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft, NL.
Yilmaz, S., & Daly, S. R. (2014). Influences of feedback interventions on student ideation
practices. In 10th International Design Thinking Research Symposium (DTRS). West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
Yilmaz, S., Daly, S. R., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2011). A comparison of cognitive
heuristics use between engineers and industrial designers. Design computing and
cognition (pp. 3-22). Springer.
Yilmaz, S., Daly, S. R., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012). How do Design
Heuristics affect outcomes?. In M. M. Andreasen, H. Birkhofer, S. J. Culley, U.
Lindemann, and D. Marjanovic (Eds.), Proceedings of 12th International Design
Conference (DESIGN) (pp. 1195-1204). Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Yilmaz, S., & Seifert, C. M. (2011). Creativity through design heuristics: A case study of
expert product design. Design Studies, 32(4), 384-415.
329
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Katja THORING*a,b, Carmen LUIPPOLDb,c , Roland M. MUELLERd and Petra BADKESCHAUBa
a Delft
University of Technology; b Anhalt University of Applied Sciences: c Bauhaus University,
Weimar; d Berlin School of Economics and Law
*katja@thoring.com
Abstract: This paper is part of a research project that investigates the role of the
physical space, such as architecture, room layout, and furniture, on creative
work processes in design educational contexts. The particular focus of this paper
is to identify differences in the spatial requirements of designers in academia
(students and educators) and design practitioners who are working in corporate
contexts. Based on a research approach with cultural probes and a follow-up
focus group workshop with participants from academia and design practice,
characteristics of creative work environments have been defined, and different
requirements of both user groups were identified.
Keywords: Creative Space; Learning Environment; Co-Working Space; Design
Education and Practice
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
1 Introduction
Nowadays, the concept of co-working spaces that offer shared work environments for
heterogeneous groups of people, especially in the so-called creative industries, are
becoming more and more popular (Davies & Tollervey, 2013; Sundsted, Bacigalupo, &
Jones, 2009). However, these concepts of shared work spaces pose some challenges,
especially when people with different cultural, disciplinary, or professional backgrounds
share a space. A peculiar form of such co-working spaces are university-affiliated research
centers or incubators, in which educators, students, and professionals come together to
either work together or independently on (design) projects. The question how such a coworking space should be designed in terms of room layout, infrastructure, furniture, and
the architecture itself, is the focus of this paper. Of particular interest are the different
requirements of design professionals and educators that might cause challenges or even
conflicts between those two target groups.
The present study builds on previous work (Thoring, Luippold, & Mueller, 2012a,
2012b), in which we analyzed different environments in two different design educational
institutions. In these studies we were particularly interested in the perspective of design
students—how they would perceive their environment; what types of spaces they
considered necessary, what they found was missing, and how they would envision a
perfect creative workspace. Based on a research approach with cultural probes, 18
selected students from two different institutions provided their impressions and ideas
about the creative workspaces at their home universities: one being a traditional design
school, consisting of classrooms, separated workshop spaces, lecture halls, etc.; the other
one being an institution for design thinking education, focusing on team work through
dedicated team spaces, lots of whiteboards and writeable walls, as well as toys and games
on hand. The provided data from the cultural probes from both institutions were used to
develop a typology of creative spaces—indicating different types of spaces that were used
for creative work, as well as different functions such a space might facilitate. Although the
concrete characteristics and instantiations (furniture, room layout, architecture, materials,
etc.) of the spaces in both institutions were quite different, it became evident that the
types of work spaces for creative work processes, as well as the functions such a space
might fulfill, were similar in both institutions. This led to the development of a ‘Typology of
Creative Space Types and Functions’, based on the identified activities (also misuses)
within the provided spaces and the identified related requirements. The developed
typology suggests that a creative space system consists of a combination of five different
space types: the Solitary Space for personal withdrawal, the Team Space that allows
interactions with others, the Presentation Space in which people passively consume input
(such as lectures), actively give input themselves (such as presentations), or display their
work (e.g. in show cases), the Tinker Space that allows people to experiment and to build
stuff, and Transition Spaces that connect the other space types and provide opportunities
for resting, walking, or meeting people. The data from the studies also showed that these
space types can serve different functions:
A space can be a Source of Stimulation by providing sound, views, noise, or by
displaying work examples; it can serve as a Knowledge Repository by storing or displaying
information; it can have a Social Dimension that triggers interactions between people, it
331
KATJA THORING et al.
can be a Culture Indicator and express the way one should behave in it; or it can define a
Process Manifestation by guiding or enforcing the workflow (Thoring et al., 2012a, 2012b).
Since these two prior studies only addressed the perspective of design students, but
not the teachers’ perspective, nor did they provide any view from design practitioners, we
conducted an additional study, which is the focus of this paper. This third study served also
as an evaluation and verification of the previously developed typology. We invited 9
participants from different institutions and with different creative backgrounds (design
teachers and research assistants, independent design practitioners, founders of creative
start-up companies, and employees of global companies) to a focus group workshop. In
preparation for the workshop they were handed a set of cultural probes with several tasks
to document their respective work environments and to provide ideas and suggestions on
the question how to design a co-working space for various heterogeneous creative people.
In the following we describe the cultural probes method and the setup of the workshop
(Section 2). The results from the study are presented and discussed in Section 3. Section 4
summarizes the theoretical implications of the study and points out the differences
between the two target groups. We conclude by discussing the results and providing an
outlook to future work.
2 Methodology
Cultural Probes is a self-documentation method in which selected participants are
equipped with a predesigned set of questions and tasks that are supposed to be
independently completed over a specific period of time, see e.g. (Gaver, Dunne, & Pacenti,
1999; Mattelmäki, 2006; Thoring, Luippold, & Mueller, 2013). In our case, 9 selected
participants were given a poster-based cultural probes set (see Figure 1). The poster
format (size A0) was chosen to reduce the size and weight of the probes, because the
participants were distributed across various locations and the cultural probes set had to be
sent by postal mail. The lower part of the poster (placed inside an abstracted speech
bubble) was dedicated to the documentation of the status quo—the existing workspaces
the participants were working in. They were supposed to take pictures and place them on
the poster, according to written prompts and questions. Also, they were asked to provide
sketches or photos of things they find inspiring or annoying, as well as their typical work
postures. The upper part of the poster (placed into an abstracted think bubble) was
dedicated to the vision of the participants. Here they were supposed to provide ideas,
thoughts, and statements about their desired co-working space. Also, they could choose
one picture from a set of exemplary workspaces (sent along with the poster) that they
would prefer to have as their future workspace. Additionally, they were supposed to add a
wish list of equipment, furniture, and atmosphere for their envisioned workspace, as well
as a sketch of a floor plan for the envisioned co-working space, which they were supposed
to structure and design according to different creative activities.
332
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Figure 1:
Cultural probes poster (Din A0) that was sent to the participants for self-documentation
Along with the poster we sent some additional material, such as colored pens, a bar of
chocolate (with additional questions on the packaging), a USB flash drive for storing
additional pictures, a set of pictures of exemplary work spaces (showing a diverse range of
work spaces from traditional to futuristic, taken from other field studies or from books), as
well as an envelope with stamp for returning the material (see Figure 2).
Figure 2:
The Cultural Probes set: poster, colored pens, USB flash drive, pictures of exemplary
workspaces, chocolate, return envelope.
333
KATJA THORING et al.
The 9 participants were chosen with the goal to address a wide range of different
backgrounds and employment positions. Figure 3 shows an overview of the participants.
They had a total of 3 weeks for completing and returning the cultural probes set. We then
evaluated the returned data by extracting and summarizing the main insights from each
participant in preparation for the upcoming workshop.
Practice
P1
P2
P3
P4
Start-Up
IT / Software Engineering
Global Company Employee
Innovation Management
Global Company Employee
Team Organization
Self-Employed
Product and Textile Design
Education
E5
E6
E7
E8
E9
Figure 3:
Student
Educational Studies
Research Assistant
Business & Psychology
Research Assistant
HCI / Engineering
Research Assistant
Product and System Design
Research Assistant
Work Organization
Overview of Study Participants (code numbering: P= Practice; E=Education)
Afterwards all nine participants were invited to a focus group workshop to discuss the
insights from the cultural probes, and to evaluate their provided data in comparison with
the previously defined typology of creative spaces.
During the 1-day workshop, the participants were teamed up in pairs of two and each
team was asked to analyze their own two posters and explain the results to each other.
Each team was supported by one researcher who took notes or visual sketches from the
most promising statements and insights. Then each team presented their finding to the
entire group. Finally, they were asked to cluster the notes and sketches according to
different space types and spatial functions. Although they had been given a brief
presentation about our previously developed typology at the beginning of the workshop,
they were asked to define their own labels for space types or to create new ones, in case
that the provided structure would not suffice and they identified additional space types
and functions.
The cultural probes task allowed the participants to freely express their own
experiences and wishes regarding a creative workspace, without being influenced by input
from the other participants, whereas in the follow-up workshop arising ideas and
questions were discussed with the goal to share the different perspectives. The results of
the cultural probes and the workshop are summarized in the next section.
3 Study Results
Results of the Cultural Probes
The returned cultural probes from the nine participants were analyzed an evaluated by
the researchers. Figure 4 shows an exemplary cultural probe poster that was returned by
one participant. The participants provided impressions of their current work spaces, as
well as ideas and wishes about envisioned work spaces. The main insights from the posters
are summarized in the following.
334
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Figure 4:
Exemplary cultural probes poster returned by one of the participants.
Based on the provided cultural probes we were able to identify several spatial themes
or concepts that seemed to be of importance for the participants. Through manual coding
and clustering of the insights, we were able to derive 15 ‘themes’ that seemed to be of
importance for most or some of the participants. These identified themes (ordered
according to the number of mentions) include: 1) working zones, 2) physical activities, 3)
lighting, 4) style and atmosphere, 5) flexibility, 6) open space, 7) (coffee) breaks, 8)
electronic infrastructure, 9) knowledge storage, 10) access to materials, 11) outdoor
connection, 12) general storage, 13) privacy, 14) layering, and 15) facilitation (see Tables 1
through 15). While the first theme (working zones) was mentioned by 8 of the 9
participants, the last theme (facilitation) was mentioned by only one participant.
In the following we summarize the main insights from the cultural probes regarding the
identified themes, in order to identify correlations or contradictory statements between
the two target groups, practitioners (P) and academics (E).
1) Working zones for different work types: The possibility to choose between different
spaces for different work purposes was mentioned by all of the participants, except P2.
Among the major requirements were the possibility to change between team work and
single work (P3, E6, E7, E9), and to change between formal work and informal relaxation
(P1, P3, E5, E6, E7, E9), which could be distinguished by the comfort of the furniture.
Outdoor access was important for E5 and E7. P3 mentioned also the need for theater-style
lecture rooms for presentations, while P4 suggested a dedicated welcome area for guests.
335
KATJA THORING et al.
The idea to separate those zones through curtains was raised by P4 and E5. Table 1
summarizes the statements by the different participants.
Table 1:
Ref. #
P1
P3
P4
E5
E6
E7
E8
E9
Working zones
Statement related to working zones
Change between different work postures; chairs and sofas; relaxation area
Change between formal and informal meeting, small cells (‘cubicles’) for concentrated
single work; free space for dreaming and crazy ideas; change between single and
teamwork, theatre-style chairs for lectures and presentations, open space for
communication and (informal) collaboration with coffee and tea
Welcome area; curtains as room separators
Choice of different furniture for different postures (range from comfy hammocks to hard
stools); change between single and team work; make use of outside space (fresh air
breaks), outdoor equipment and furniture; curtains as separators and for light control
Space for personal withdrawal, phone calls; change between single work and social
interaction
allow change between single and teamwork; quiet space for personal withdrawal
(individual thinking); outdoor access
Allow working in small groups; elevated stage for presentations, storage space
underneath
Mixture of different spaces for different work types (active work and individual relaxation
and withdrawal areas
2) Physical activities: The need for creative activities that require both standing and
sitting postures was mentioned by P3, E5, E6, and E8 while the need for bodily activities for
inspiration purposes was mentioned by P1, P4, E5, and E7. E7 explicitly suggested sports
and game activities, while P4 pointed out the value of changing perspectives by moving
around. As a way to enforce such activities during creative work, E7 suggested medium
comfortable furniture, as well as E5 who suggested furniture that ranges from comfy
hammocks to hard stools. P5 had the unusual idea to project presentations towards the
ceiling to enforce a change of perspective. Table 2 summarizes the statements by the
different participants.
Table 2:
Ref. #
P1
P3
P4
E5
E6
E7
E8
Physical activities
Statement related to physical activities
Bodily activities support creative work, change between different work postures;
comfortable chairs and sofas
Change between standing and sitting postures
Allow and enforce bodily activities, movement, and change of perspective
Allow and enforce change of postures (standing, sitting, on the floor); movement as
source for inspiration; furniture that enforce movement (range from comfy hammocks to
hard stools)
Allow different work postures (ideation on sofa, concentrated computer work at desk)
Games and Sports are inspiring; furniture medium comfortable to enforce movement
Change of work postures (standing, sitting)
336
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
3) Light: Lots of light was an important requirement for P3, P4, E5, E6, and E7, from
whom P4 explicitly preferred natural daylight. P1 suggested customizable light colors and
temperature, while E8 had already a particular brand of lightning system in mind which
simulates natural daylight. E5 suggested curtains to regulate light intensity. Table 3
summarizes the statements by the different participants.
Table 3: Light
Ref. #
P1
P3
P4
E6
E5
E7
E8
Statement related to light
Customizable light color
Lots of light
Natural daylight
Light and friendly atmosphere, enhances clarity
Sufficient light and air; curtains as separators and for light control
Lots of light
Specific lighting (daylight-simulating Rentex Membran-Lighting systems)
4) Style and atmosphere: A natural environment with natural materials was desired by
P3, P4, E5, E8, and E9. Materials other than ‘wood’ and ‘concrete’ were not mentioned by
any of the participants. E5 explicitly expressed the wish for a warm and cozy atmosphere.
P4 and E9 particularly welcomed plants within the creative workspace. E8 highlighted the
importance of high quality materials. The educators E5, E6, E8, and E9 mentioned
attributes like playfulness, unexpectedness, imperfection, improvisation, or colorful
liveliness as a source of inspiration. E6 suggested a balanced atmosphere between colorful
and calm, while E5 preferred a cozy living-room atmosphere.
The practitioners expressed their wish for a more modern and representative
atmosphere (P3) with structure and order and a representative welcome area (P4). From
the practitioners, only P4 mentioned a surprising and unusual environment as a source of
inspiration. Background music was desired by P4 and E5. Table 4 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 4:
Ref. #
P3
P4
E5
E6
E8
E9
Style and atmosphere
Statement related to style and atmosphere
Modern interior; nature
Natural materials, organic interior; consider Ergonomics; unusual combinations,
surprising things (for inspiration); music, plants, order and structure, welcome area for
guests
Not cool and stylish but comfortable and cozy (living room atmosphere); music,
communication; wooden floor
Balance between colorful liveliness and calm structure
High quality and natural materials; playful interior
Imperfect, improvised character for inspiration (lead to new ways of thinking; take risks);
natural and raw materials (wood, concrete); green plants
5) Flexibility: The requirement for flexible furniture that allows for different postures
and work purposes was mentioned from educators and practitioners in the same way. For
most of them, flexible or modular furniture was suggested as a solution for theme 1), the
337
KATJA THORING et al.
possibility to divide the space into different zones for different work types, or for theme 2),
the enforcement of physical activities by providing height adjustable furniture or furniture
that allows sitting and standing postures. Table 5 summarizes the statements by the
different participants.
Table 5:
Ref. #
P1
P2
P4
E5
E7
E8
Flexibility
Statement related to flexibility
Flexible furniture, modular systems that allow combinations for different work purposes,
chairs, sofas, bean bags, different configurations, rectangular tables that can be arranged
to larger table areas
Flexible furniture (on wheels)
Modular and flexible furniture for different work purposes; several layers (different
perspectives)
Mobile and flexible work spaces, height-adjustable furniture
Allow different postures, standing and sitting
Mobile furniture units, flexible usage; additional mobile equipment (moveable beamer)
6) Open space: The concept of open space was mentioned by practitioners and
educators alike, but partly in a different manner. The educators E6, E7, and E9 mentioned
the concept of open space in terms of mental space for dreaming and developing ideas.
The practitioner P3, however, distinguished between the need for separated cells for
concentrated work (e.g. ‘cubicles’) and open space for informal exchange in the kitchen.
P4 suggested transparent glass doors to give some feeling of open space while limiting
access through electronic control at the same time, which is quite the contrary of the
concept expressed by the educators. P2, E6, and E9 expressed the need for lots of open
space for displaying ideas and information to exchange with others. Table 6 summarizes
the statements by the different participants.
Table 6:
Ref. #
P4
P2
P3
E6
E7
E9
Open space
Statement related to open space
Glass doors (transparency)
Huge walls and boards to display ideas and thoughts
Free space for dreaming and crazy ideas, open space for (informal) collaboration with
coffee/tea, small cells (‘cubicles’) for concentrated single work
Lots of free/empty space to fill with ideas; not too packed/crowded
Allow daydreaming; lots of space for work materials and ideas (temporarily), large tables
Lots of free space
7) (Coffee) breaks: Some sort of kitchen or a dedicated space for a coffee break was
important for 6 participants. This aspect was mentioned by the educators as a possibility to
refresh and recharge between phases of intensive work (e.g. through fresh food as
mentioned by E5), while the practitioners emphasized the possibility for informal meetings
(P2 and P3). Table 7 summarizes the statements by the different participants.
338
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Table 7:
Ref. #
P1
P2
P3
E5
E6
E7
(Coffee) breaks
Statement related to (Coffee) breaks
Coffee available
Kitchen to refresh and recreate and for informal meetings
Open space for communication and (informal) collaboration with coffee and tea
Fruit as ‘brain-booster’
Breaks are important
Coffee and snacks
8) Electronic infrastructure: The need for state-of-the-art electronic equipment and
infrastructure was mentioned by practitioners and academics alike. Among the mostly
desired equipment were beamer and projection walls, good scanners and printers,
computer workstations accessible for everyone, and Wireless LAN. Table 8 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 8:
Ref. #
P1
P2
P3
P4
5E
E8
Electronic infrastructure
Statement related to electronic infrastructure
Projection wall, Beamer, large monitor, WiFi
Projection wall, Scanner, Computer work stations
State of the art equipment
Projection space/wall (ceiling for new perspective); state-of-the-art equipment and
infrastructure (Skype, printer, etc.), audio system
Beamer, Computer, big touchscreen display; mobile (Computer-) workstations
Additional mobile equipment (moveable beamer)
9) Knowledge storage: Many of the participants mentioned the desire for knowledge
repositories within the space that could be accessed by others. P1, P2, E5, and E7
requested entire writeable walls, and P2, E5 and E9 also mentioned more conventional
flipcharts, chalk boards, or pin boards. Table 9 summarizes the statements by the different
participants.
Table 9:
Ref. #
P1
P2
E5
E7
E9
Knowledge storage
Statement related to knowledge storage
Writeable walls
Knowledge repository; ideas and information displayed on walls facilitate exchange; huge
walls to display ideas and thoughts, pin boards, flipcharts
Writeable walls, chalkboard or whiteboard
Writeable walls to exchange ideas
Pin boards
10) Access to materials: The presence of work materials, books, videos, games and toys
as a source of inspiration was mentioned by 4 participants, equally from academia and
practice. However, both practitioners (P2 and P4) mentioned also unusual aspects for
inspirational input, such as field trips, or access to digital (material) libraries. Table 10
summarizes the statements by the different participants.
339
KATJA THORING et al.
Table 10: Access to materials
Ref. #
P2
P4
E5
E7
Statement related to access to materials
Source of stimulation: books, videos, music, field trips, exhibitions; material on hand
(moderator’s kit)
Materials for modelmaking on hand and visible for tangible inspiration; access to digital
material libraries; analog material library, magazines; gadget library (hats, wigs, toys)
Games and toys as a source of inspiration
Books and videos for inspiration
11) Outdoor connection: The need for fresh air was only mentioned by the academic
participants. E5 and E7 explicitly mention the need for outdoor access and the possibility
to connect to remote spaces, e.g. through provided bikes. Table 11 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 11: Outdoor connection
Ref. #
E5
E7
E8
Statement related to outdoor connection
Sufficient light and air; make use of outside space (fresh air breaks), outdoor equipment
and furniture; bikes available to connect to other spaces
Outdoor access
Fresh air, good climate
12) General Storage: Storage was only mentioned by the academic participants, either
for storing work materials (E5, E8) or for personal belongings (E7). Table 12 summarizes
the statements by the different participants.
Table 12: General storage
Ref. #
E5
E7
E8
Statement related to general storage
Lots of storage space for work materials, second layer, high rack
Closets for storage of personal things
Elevated stage for presentations, storage space underneath
13) Privacy: The request for privacy, access control, and data security was very
important for the practitioners, only. P1, P2, and P4 envisioned a digitally controlled access
system of the co-working space only for members. P4 even suggests a fingerprint scan.
This concept results in a conflict with theme 6—open space, which suggests more of an
open and accessible workspace, and also with theme 7—knowledge repository, which
suggests an open and visible sharing of ideas and knowledge. Table 13 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 13: Privacy
Ref. #
P1
P2
P4
Statement related to privacy
24/7 Access only for members
Privacy, limited access
Schedule for access and usage; access through electronic glass doors, fingerprint scan
340
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
14) Layering: The concept of a space that is divided through several (horizontal) layers
was suggested by 3 participants. While both educators (E5 and E8) suggest layering in
order to gain more storage space, the practitioner (P4) emphasizes the importance of a
change of perspective and to activate bodily activities through the different layers. Table
14 summarizes the statements by the different participants.
Table 14:
Ref. #
P4
E5
E8
Layering
Statement related to layering
Several layers for a change of perspective, physical activity
High rack, additional layer for storage
Elevated stage for presentations, storage space underneath
15) Facilitation: The need for a responsible person (a facilitator) who takes care about
the co-working space in terms of cleanliness, order, and supply (e.g. paper or toner), was
mentioned by practitioner P4 (see Table 15).
Table 15: Facilitation
Ref. #
P4
Statement related to facilitation
Facilitator who is responsible for the space; order and structure is important for creative
work
Results of the Workshop
While during the evaluation of the cultural probes posters several interesting aspects
showed up, it was not clear whether the identified aspects were based on individual
preferences or actually related to different requirements of academics and practitioners.
Hence, we tried to clarify these arising questions through an in-depth discussion with the
participants in the follow-up workshop. Additionally, we tried to match the resulting
insights with our previously developed typology of creative spaces, in order to validate it.
During the one day workshop the participants discussed their respective cultural
probes posters in teams of two (or three, respectively). The main insights were captured as
notes and sketches, which was facilitated by one researcher per team. Afterwards, the
emerging insights were presented to the group, discussed, and prioritized. Any arising
controversies were discussed with the group until a common understanding of the
different perspectives was reached.
As a first step, the identified requirements and ideas were clustered by the participants
according to the five space types team space, solitary space, presentation space, tinker
space, and transition space, as suggested by the researchers. Blank labels for any new
category emerging from the data itself were provided to encourage also defining new
categories. All of the five suggested categories were identified by the participants to
different extents. Particular emphasis was given to dedicated solitary spaces and to the
transition spaces—all the participants agreed that a possibility for personal ‘alone time’
was very important, as was the possibility for coffee breaks or to get some fresh air, inside
or outside the room, as well as to connect to other areas on site (e.g. by provided bikes).
The tinker space, on the other hand, was identified as important, but it was agreed upon
that this was supposed to be located somewhere outside the main workspace to avoid
disturbance through noise and smells. This remote tinker space should consist of an
341
KATJA THORING et al.
analogue prototyping workshop with tools and materials, but also state-of-the-art digital
equipment, such as 3d printers. Inside the actual work space large tables should be
provided to allow for smaller prototyping tasks, e.g. using paper and cardboard.
Presentation spaces and team spaces were also identified as important space types by
all participants. There was mutual consent that these spaces should be flexible and allow
for a change between different work types and postures.
In addition to these five suggested space types, one additional category was defined by
the participants: the virtual space that would provide digital connection to ‘the outside
world’. This virtual space should provide the required technical equipment, such as (video)
conferencing hard and software, smart boards, or virtual meeting rooms in the internet.
Also, virtual marketplaces for ideas, experts, coaches etc. or the access to digital (literature
and material) libraries should be considered. The welcome space that was mentioned by
P4 in the cultural probes proved not to be of importance for the other participants. We
suggest that this could be classified as a transition space, since it is not a designated work
space but more a connection to the ‘outside world’.
In the second step, the spatial functions that emerged from the participants’ data were
compared to the five spatial functions suggested by the researchers (knowledge repository,
stimulation, social interaction, culture, and process manifestation). These five functions
were also validated in general.
According to the participants, the culture of the envisioned co-working space should be
expressed through a playful atmosphere, a use of high-quality and sustainable materials,
and it should somehow encourage out-of-the-box thinking and crazy ideas. This should be
achieved by providing toys and gadgets and through the implementation of unusual room
setups and the use of raw materials and an improvised overall character. A controversial
discussion emerged around the question of privacy. The practitioners emphasized that the
security of their data was critical and a lack of the same would be a criterion for not
participating in that particular co-working space. They suggested a so-called closed
developer space with prepared NDA templates, as well as electronic access control to the
space. The academics, however, felt almost offended by this approach and would prefer a
culture of open source and open access. The discussion could not be led towards an
agreement nor a compromise for the two target groups.
The aspect of ‘housekeeping’ was also discussed as a question of culture. Rules should
be defined that regulate cleaning and other responsibilities. A facilitator was appreciated
by some participants.
The knowledge repository was mainly envisioned as whiteboards or writeable walls to
display and share information. However, also here the practitioners suggested for example
the use of curtains to prevent unauthorized access to the information, for example
through the window view. Knowledge should also be accessible through analogue and
digital libraries for both—books and materials. External experts should be available
through expert data bases.
The spatial function of process manifestation describes the ability of the space to
enforce or prevent specific workflows. In general, this was considered not as desirable as a
flexible workspace. Mobile or adaptable furniture and equipment (foldable or on wheels)
were preferred over fixed furniture. For example, a fixed stage for presentations was
considered less desirable than a mobile or modular presentation area that could be
adapted on demand. Although the need for different work types and purposes was
342
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
acknowledged by all participants (e.g. switching between group work and more private
phone calls), but fixed spatial separators (such as separate phone booths or cells) were
rejected by most participants.
Again, the question of access control was discussed controversially. The practitioners
suggested closed and secure knowledge repositories that would regulate access through
electronic identity control systems, as well as screens on windows, which was negatively
received by the academics as too much of a spatial and mental barrier for the creative
workflow.
The space as a source of stimulation was recognized by all participants. However, the
perception of the quality of possible stimulations was quite different. While some
participants felt highly inspired by the presence of plants or pets, this was absolutely not
acceptable for others, because it would cause too much of a distraction. The same applied
to sound and noise. While for some background music and natural working noise would be
inspiring, for others this would mean a disturbance. Asking further revealed that these
were actually personal preferences and could not be related to the different requirements
of academics and practitioners. There was mutual consent about the inspirational quality
of window views or of visible materials and gadgets.
Space as a social dimension was considered one of the most important functions of a
co-working space for all participants. Social events, such as regular meet-ups, should foster
social interactions. But also the space was considered an important aspect for this goal:
informal meeting points (e.g. coffee corners, a kitchen, snack vending machines, or
information boards) should be established to enforce incidentally ‘running into each
other’. Open access to the co-working space (24/7) was desired by most of the academic
participants.
4 Theoretical Implications
Validation of the Typology
The suggested typology of creative spaces and functions (Thoring et al., 2012a, 2012b)
was mainly validated through the presented study. The only additional space type
identified by the participants was the so-called virtual space. Although we were mainly
interested in the role of the physical environment, the virtual space seemed to be
important for most of the participants and hence merits further research. However, we
consider the virtual space a specific characteristic of the technical infrastructure, and not a
space type in itself. Such a virtual space could be either a team space (e.g. a virtual
meeting room), a solitary space (e.g. a Blog for personal thoughts), a presentation space
(e.g. a prerecorded video lecture), a tinker space (e.g. a so-called sandbox to build digital
prototypes), or a transition space (e.g. Skype or other video conferencing systems that
provide a connection to other remote locations). Hence, we consider the virtuality more of
a characteristic of a space rather than a space type of its own.
Also the five spatial functions (Thoring et al., 2012a, 2012b) were validated through the
study. Although different characteristics of each function were identified by the different
participants, the main five categories of spatial functions from our typology were also
identified by the participants. Again, they suggested one additional function, which was
related to data privacy (the so-called ‘closed developer space’)—the possibility to hide
343
KATJA THORING et al.
data in locked file cabinets or behind blinds was a very important aspect for some of the
practitioners. However, we considered this not an additional function of a space, but a
characteristic (dimension) of the ‘knowledge repository’ function—which can be either
locked or accessible, or a characteristic of the ‘indicator of culture’ function of a space—
which can be either open or proprietary).
Hence, the previously presented ‘typology of creative spaces’ was confirmed through
this study.
Different Spatial Requirements in Education and Practice
The main research question that we want to answer through the present study is
whether creative practitioners and academics have different requirements regarding a
shared co-working space. Although the limited number of participants does not allow for a
statistical analysis of the results, some preliminary insights have been identified through
the cultural probes that could partly be further clarified in the follow-up workshop.
One of the most distinct requirements that only applied to practitioners was the
demand for privacy, access control, and data security. The educators, on the contrary,
were focusing more on an open space concept. While both target groups were
emphasizing the need for informal meeting points, such as a kitchen or coffee corner, the
educators were interested more in its recreational functions, whereas the practitioners
regarded such spaces as workspace extensions. Outdoor access was originally only
mentioned by the educators, but during the discussions it became evident that this was an
important issue for the practitioners as well. The demand of storage was mainly raised by
the educators. A lack of storage space (e.g. for personal items) seems to be a problem in
educational contexts. While all participants were appreciating high-quality materials, the
educators saw the additional value in raw materials and improvised atmospheres, to foster
creativity. For the practitioners, a representative style of the space was more important,
along with the possibility to welcome guests.
5 Conclusion
Contribution
The present study with nine participants from academia and practice is regarded as a
first step towards the understanding of different spatial requirements of creative
practitioners and educators. There exists only limited number of scientific literature about
spatial requirements for co-working spaces. Spinuzzi (2012) analyzed what is co-working,
who co-works and why people co-work. However, he did not analyze the co-working
space. Lumley (2014) looked at how co-working in a library could facilitate entrepreneurial
activities. Bilandzic et al. (2013) presented an information system for co-working spaces
that shows the skills and needs of the people who checked in. Only few papers discussed
the spatial characteristics of co-working spaces, for example, Parrino (2013) looked at the
effect of proximity on knowledge sharing in co-working spaces. However, peculiar
requirements might apply to co-working spaces in university-affiliated research centers or
incubators, where educators and practitioners work together in a shared space. This
particular situation is the focus of our study. To the best of our knowledge such an analysis
has not been conducted, so far. The present study contributes to the discussed literature
344
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
by analyzing the spatial requirements of co-working spaces and by identifying the different
needs of practitioners and educators.
Limitations
This paper describes a qualitative study with its immanent limitations. Our study
involved only a small number of participants. But through the in-depth research and
discussions some promising insights were raised that warrant further investigation.
Future Work
The presented study focuses on identifying differences between spatial requirements
of practitioners and academics. Other possible influences (e.g. preferences based on
gender or cultural background) were disregarded at this point. Future research might focus
on these aspects. As the next step we are planning to analyze different spatial
requirements based on cultural differences. Moreover, we are going to conduct expert
interviews with architects, interior architects, educators, and spatial designers to gain new
insights on the actual influence of spatial characteristics on creative co-working.
Acknowledgements: Part of this work was supported by UniKasselTransfer.
References
Bilandzic, M., Schroeter, R., & Foth, M. (2013). Gelatine: Making coworking places gel for
better collaboration and social learning (pp. 427–436). Presented at the Proceedings of
the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference: Augmentation,
Application, Innovation, Collaboration, OzCHI 2013.
Davies, A., & Tollervey, K. (2013). The style of coworking: contemporary shared
workspaces. Munich: Prestel.
Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. Interactions, 6(1), 21-29.
Lumley, R. M. (2014). A Coworking Project in the Campus Library: Supporting and Modeling
Entrepreneurial Activity in the Academic Library. New Review of Academic Librarianship,
20(1), 49–65.
Mattelmäki, T. (2006). Design probes (PhD Thesis). University of Art and Design, Helsinki.
Parrino, L. (2013). Coworking: assessing the role of proximity in knowledge exchange.
Knowledge Management Research & Practice. http://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2013.47
Spinuzzi, C. (2012). Working Alone Together Coworking as Emergent Collaborative Activity.
Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4), 399–441.
Sundsted, T., Bacigalupo, T., & Jones, D. (2009). I’m Outta Here: How Co-Working Is Making
the Office Obsolete. Brooklyn: Lulu.
Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2012a). Creative Space In Design Education: A
Typology of Spatial Functions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on
Engineering and Product Design Education. Antwerp, Belgium.
Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2012b). Where do we Learn to Design? A Case
Study About Creative Spaces. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Design
Creativity. Glasgow, UK.
Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2013). Opening the Cultural Probes Box: A
critical reflection and analysis of the cultural probes method. In Proceedings of the
345
KATJA THORING et al.
International Congress of International Association of Societies of Design Research.
Tokyo, Japan.
346
Architecture: Teaching the Future/Future of Teaching
Gemma BARTON
University of Brighton
G.Barton@Brighton.ac.uk
Abstract: Driven by a need to examine the trajectory of architectural education
and staffing, this paper questions academic recruitment and education strategy
in relation to the 2015 Royal institute of British Architects (RIBA) education
forum in the UK. Interviews with key academics actively challenging the future of
higher education models were undertaken; London School of Architecture, AA
Little Architect scheme and Free School of Architecture showcase detailed and
reactionary approaches to the changing relationship between education,
industry and the marketplace. An international survey was conducted gathering
data from academics, the findings of which indicate a lack of clarity and
consistency in the transition from architectural education into academia. The
paper analyses the context of the results and proposes improvements to
recruitment and staffing strategies both inside and outside of the traditional
university framework. This research contributes to the wider discussion around
future development and employment in arts education. If the discipline lies in the
hands of the educators, then the future of the discipline lies in the hands of the
future educators. To be truly forward thinking about the direction of practice we
must first address our approach to academic recruitment, with a specific focus
on early career academics.
Keywords: architecture, pedagogy, academic recruitment, academic pathways
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
GEMMA BARTON
The Academy
An Introduction
‘A university is not a machine for achieving a particular purpose or producing a
particular result; it is a manner of human activity.' (Oakeshott, 2001)
The identity of the architect is being questioned, the relevance of the profession is
under scrutiny and the structure of its education and establishment are in flux. March
2015 saw the RIBA (Royal Institute of British Architects) hold a comprehensive examination
of UK architectural education. The reform meeting was a part of the RIBA’s two-year
review, setting an agenda for changes in structure, content and delivery of UK architectural
education. In the run up to this a panel discussion took place at the Architecture
Foundation in London about the future of architectural education. Sitting on this panel
alongside myself was Professor Neil Spiller, Professor Robert Mull and Professor Peter
Clegg we discussed wide-ranging topics such as education as commodity and the need for
radicalism. On 24th March 2015 the RIBA Council engaged SCHOSA (The Standing
Conference of Heads of Schools of Architecture), UK schools of architecture, progressive
practitioners and statutory bodies in a day long review at Portland Place, London where
the council voted and agreed proposals to modernize the education structure in line with
other European countries. In short, this means eradicating the previous three-part system
and replacing it with a seven year integrated system enabling graduates to reduce the time
it takes to qualify as an architect by up to three years.
This has been the most rigorous and collaborative review of architectural education in
fifty years via an extensive consultation with architects, students, academics and
clients.’ (Hodder, 2015)
Methodology
Whilst the RIBA review is a step towards streamlining and equalizing ground for the
UK’s aspiring architects, it is focused on modifications to existing education convention and
does not specifically consider the role academic staff recruitment plays in determining
quality learning experiences. The case studies featured in this paper exercise more lateral
approaches to the requirement for modernization and consider a variety of staffing
strategies. The Free School of Architecture, London School of Architecture and AA Little
Architect Programme are at this very moment are challenging the future of architectural
education, each of which are responding uniquely to current social and fiscal
circumstances. The future of architecture and the future of architectural education are
inextricably linked to the role of university and of the lecturer. To truly develop
educational strategy one must implicate academic staff recruitment into the conversation.
This paper presents an analysis of data collected and proposes solutions for clarifying and
introducing new routes into architectural academia. An online survey questioned sixty
academics globally who were asked ten simple questions, the most prevalent being ‘Do
you think more should be done to encourage architecture students/graduates to consider
academia as a career path?’ Of the sixty respondents 60% answered YES highlighting a
growing concern amongst academics about current staffing procurement, with a specific
focus on early career academics. Other answers provided by the respondents showcase
348
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
the multiplicity of entry routes into academia including traditional postgraduate
conversion courses, mentoring/recommendation and entry via practice.
[1] REACTIONARY EDUCATION MODELS
Current debate about the value of higher education is dominated by talk of debt and
income rather than learning and welfare. Teaching in this commodified space stigmatizes
and confuses the role of the educator; it affects both the abilities and perceptions of staff
and students alike. It marketizes what should be a ‘fail, fail and fail better’ process of
iterative learning – design courses are suffering more than most in this marketized climate
as one-to-one tutoring is relatively expensive when compared to lecture theatre teaching.
The three case study projects (Figure 1) and interviews that follow have developed in part
as a response to the changing relationship between education, industry and the
marketplace, and have been selected for analysis on this basis. Each case study takes a
different approach to teaching and staffing policy, such as disassociating architectural
education from the university, embedding education within practice and reconditioning by
educating primary school children with architectural principles
The Free School of Architecture founded by Phil Watson based in Wales is an ongoing
venture focused on liberating the teaching of architecture from the traditional and
commercial university framework. The Free School has been evolving slowly for more than
a decade as a reaction against the path-of-least-resistance trajectory that the discipline
seems to have followed - Watson believes this lack of fortitude and foresight has seen
architecture become dismantled, The Free School hopes to reinstate it’s future, in the
future.
London School of Architecture (LSA) founded by Will Hunter is a new education
establishment intent on providing an alternative RIBA Part II experience focused on
practice-based placements and self-directed learning. The program is currently seeking
ARB approval and is due to welcome its first cohort September 2015. Hunter and his team
established the streamlined LSA in response to the rising cost of higher Education in the UK
and the introduction of the £9000 fee structure for all university students in a hope that
architectural education can be more accessible and affordable.
Architecture Association (AA) Little Architect Programme founded by Delores Garrido is
part of the AA, the first school in the UK to offer a structured program of architectural
instruction. Little Architect is an education and learning platform for teaching architecture
in London’s primary schools. Established in January 2014 the program seeks to teach
holistic learning practices through the vehicle of architecture, as an intentional move away
from subject-based compartmentalization.
349
GEMMA BARTON
Figure 1
Reactionary architectural education models.
350
Source: Author
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
a) DISASSOCIATE - Free School for Architecture
Figure 2
The Persephone Project
Source: The Free School of Architecture
Phil Watson is an established academic with firm opinion on the current state of
architecture and it’s education. We met to discuss these opinions as well as his Free School
of Architecture venture that propagates the removal of architectural teaching from the
traditional university set up.
‘I’m interested in how to take architecture out of the institution, because all these
young people come here for a label. They don’t need these institutions to become
good designers in fact they often get flattened out by the demands of the systems and
the professional bodies – they are haunting them for recognition to enable the
certificate/piece of paper. They all have to jump the same hoops. The Free school is
about none of these things, it is about how to think, how to be human. I have been
doing something similar with masters students for about 15 years now, since before I
was teaching you. We take 6 weeks away in the summer and the students stay on my
land in Wales. About 10 students, we meet every evening, talk and speculate and build
and generate. We cook together. They stay on our properties but the students don’t
pay. In the Free School they will pay for the accommodation but not the teaching.’ I
asked Watson, ‘So why formalise this now?’ he responded ‘People aren’t doing the
interesting stuff any more, being less and less understanding about things like
philosophy. So now is the time to make the world more exciting and interesting. I see a
lot of students who are victims of the institution, destroyed by poor teaching practice,
its shameful.’ (Watson, 2015)
351
GEMMA BARTON
When asked to sum-up at the Architecture Foundation panel discussion, I posed
questions about the real need and value of assessments, curricula, learning outcomes and
grading (which was met with solemnity) I asked the audience of educators and students,
how would you teach/learn if the output were not predetermined? I extended this
conversation with Watson, we discussed the need for architecture and it’s (over)
classification. Watson says in response ‘Pedagogy for me is about engaging the imagination
and how you can bring materials and ideas into somewhere else. The Free School is about
setting up enquiry, making in roads with speculative imaginations about methods and
tactics not geared towards the piece of paper, not marked and with no assessment criteria.
A group of people working together to fashion out new ideas about what architecture
might become.’ (Watson, 2015)
‘Architecture has become a victim because people have not pushed on the subject in
the way they should have. It has fallen behind. The subject has to be totally redefined.
The classical notion of what the subject is has been completely dismantled. You can
have maybe 15-20 different types of architects, not necessarily architects but which
have a role to play. With the move from materialism to synthetic materialism the
philosophical debate about prescriptive morphologies brings in to questions how we
manufacture architecture and out of what. We are still working on the perception that
someone manufactures a façade out of inert material – fixed and rigid – with no
plasticity and no motion – it is just a cave.’ (Watson, 2015)
I asked Watson about the admissions process and the selection criteria for staff at the
Free School, he tells me ‘We don’t want people to just come in and think they can play
with architecture with us!’ (Watson, 2015) The Free School does not (as yet) have a
website, Watson’s reputation is likely attraction/justification enough for staff and students
but whether this informal and closed approach towards recruitment might be an act of
protection against dilution and over complication remains to be seen. This bottom up,
hands on, active approach is admirable but one might question the scalability and
sustainability of such an (currently) inward looking model. This is unfortunate because this
speculative inability to grow could halt its ultimate societal and educational progress. Will
such a selective environment ever successfully contribute to the larger debate around
architecture to the extent it desires?
b) EMBED - London School of Architecture (LSA)
‘I don’t think that routes into academia are unclear: the path of doctorates and
publishing is both well trodden and institutionalized. If very talented people are being
deterred, I suspect the prospects are not sufficiently attractive to them. I think it is
unhelpful to set up academia and practice in binary opposition to each other; the
future of the discipline is something that everyone involved in architecture should be
concerned with.’ (Hunter, 2015)
352
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
Figure 3
Vision and Mission for LSA Source: LSA Part 2 Handbook
Practice and academia should be mutually inclusive; students should be introduced to
all career options whilst studying, without too heavy an emphasis on preparing graduates
solely for practice employment. Choice is the key, architecture as an industry is wide
ranging with disciplines on the thresholds of many fields of interest. Therefore as
educators we should prepare our students for that very wide choice, which must include
academia. With regards to teaching, the LSA handbook states, ‘The quality of teaching staff
is the single greatest factor to developing intellectual creative capital in students.’ So I
asked Hunter how do you define teaching quality? He responds, ‘We see one of our
primary responsibilities as a school as ‘developing intellectual creative capital in students’.
We measure our success on the impact we make in generating debate and change within
the profession and discipline of architecture and, ultimately, what our graduates go on to
do.’ (Hunter, 2015) In Year One at LSA the students spend their time in practice placement
(from one of the fifty practices in the practice network) learning from real life projects and
working in the realities of an office environment, essentially blurring the line between
educator and practitioner. I asked Hunter how he hopes to govern the quality and equality
of the tuition and guidance given to the students who will be spread across London
receiving disparate learning experiences. He responds, ‘There was an open call for
Expressions of Interests from practices (a formal process) and other collaborators, and I am
very proud that the LSA has – as a start-up – managed to launch with such a diversity of
talents. Everybody has been selected for their ability to contribute to our mission and
values.’ (Hunter, 2015) Working within/for the Practice Network will be a unique and
rewarding opportunity for all students assuming training is provided and regular
quality/assessment reviews are planned and undertaken.
This model of education is lateral and practical in many ways; taking the university out
of the estate managed core as a response to fiscal pressures (the LSA has no buildings
instead it ‘borrows’ and arranges the use of space with London based institutions thus
significantly reducing the cost to the student) and embedding it within the realities of
353
GEMMA BARTON
practice. ‘By forming a closer bond with practices in London, we have created a lower cost
educational model that seeks to attract talented students into architecture – regardless of
their ability to pay – and created a place for practices to collaborate and experiment
beyond project-specific work.’ Says Hunter. ‘We are not going to ignore the market (as that
isn’t helpful), but it is not what is driving the school’s agenda: we are primarily interested
in the spatial implications of how the world is changing and architecture’s role within it.’
(Hunter, 2015) One might question whether in tying the education model at the LSA so
tightly to the practice of architecture that it places an unequal focus on one career
trajectory, practice. On the other hand Will Hunter and the London School of Architecture
should be credited for stepping out and standing up, challenging our ingrained systemic
vision of higher education. It will likely inspire universities to consider how they might
develop in the future, a critical model which will no doubt change the way architecture
schools view the structure of architectural learning.
c) RE-CONDITION - Architecture Association (AA) Little
Architect
Figure 4
Source: AA LITTLE ARCHITECT PROGRAMME
The world of Architecture can be said to be egocentric: the industry, the education
system, and the illustrious nature of the lone genius. Few people channel their time and
passion to the benefit of the industry as a whole, rather than for personal/individual
benefit. Delores Garrido of the Little Architect programme, an early career academic, is
focusing on our future, helping to create an architecturally aware youth for the benefit of
the world as a whole, not just our industry. We discuss the benefits of tapping into
children’s positivity and can-do attitude with regards architecture and design and the
opposing compartmentalization of primary and secondary education in the UK. This
354
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
integrated teaching approach is not new, but bringing it in early, through the vehicle of
architecture could be very beneficial for society but also for the future of architecture and
design education.
‘We are not letting the children express their ideas, we are narrowing their faculties,
everything is linked, life does not take place in separated boxes like the taught subjects.
We have to change that aspect in education and architecture is a perfect way to do
that - the city integrates everything, from the tiniest insects passing through the
buildings to humans and our needs. I am focusing the teaching on the improvement of
children as citizens; I think that through teaching architecture and urban issues we can
make them more aware of their present and their future. I aim to approach the
government and try to get architecture (with my methodology) included in the
curriculum. What I am developing allows me to teach any of the statutory topics as a
frame: Past-Present-Future.’ (Garrido, 2015)
Should Garrido’s plan be rolled out across UK schools then societies generational
understanding of the built environment will completely shift. A greater knowledge of mass
citizenship will have a huge impact on the way we teach the future, in the future. During
an interview with Head of School of Architecture at Greenwich University, Neil Spiller
argued against the RIBAs (then) proposition to streamline the seven-year accreditation
process, arguing that the complexities of the profession should warrant the education to
be longer if anything, not shorter. But here we see an alternative, if the base knowledge of
society as a whole has risen; a shorter, more economical education system may be
achievable, with the power to create a pool of knowledgeable, engaged and ambitious
future educators.
As a young activist challenging the definition of the traditional academic, Garrido says ‘I
don´t think I could be teaching this programme in a public university, I would probably
need a number of papers published in journals, probably a PhD and/or years of experience
in academia.’ Garrido is a good example of new wave academics that do not focus just on
developing new content for teaching but have the capability and vision to completely
reinvent the structure of architectural instruction.
‘Universities should focus more on how learning contributes to wider social functions
such as active and ethical citizenship and shaping a democratic civilised and more
sustainable society, which is crucial if they are to play an active and responsible role in
an increasingly complex and uncertain world.’ (Sodha, Universities must place more
emphasis on teaching quality, 2015)
[2] THE PATHWAYS
Common Pathways into Architectural Academia (Figure 5) was created to disseminate
information collected via an online survey. January to April 2015 saw the collection of sixty
responses from academics around the globe holding various contracts in architectural
teaching, from Heads of School to teaching assistants. The flow diagram describes three
main pathways – a) PhD in Architecture, b) Recommendation and c) Practice – it highlights
the elements at play in progressing into and navigating through architectural academe.
355
GEMMA BARTON
Point of least clarity
Figure 5
Common Pathways into Architectural Academia
356
Source: Author
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
The routes are not mutually exclusive as the pathways are inherently fluid and person
dependent but they help to provide an insight in to timeframes and trajectories. The
survey questions touch on role, stage and length of teaching practice and personal
experience of negotiating the academic track. In formulating the questions I hoped to be
able to gauge whether/what more might be done to encourage architecture
students/graduates to consider academia as a career path. Thirty-six of the sixty
respondents (60%) believe that universities need to do more to highlight teaching as a
valid and exciting alternative/addition to the practice of architecture. Respondents were
asked to provide detailed accounts of their journey across the threshold from student to
academic and the following sub-sections highlight, through direct quotes, the three key
routes experienced; PhD in Architecture, Recommendation, Practice.
PhD IN ARCHITECTURE
‘I was offered a full-time teaching position that comes with a full scholarship to do a
full-time PhD.’ (anon. survey entry)
‘When I was working on my PhD I taught one day per week during term time in the
studio as a way of funding my research.’ (anon. survey entry)
A post graduate qualification has not always been a necessity to enter into the
academic profession, but as the career has become more professionalised over the last
few decades in many subjects you would now find not holding a PhD a severe barrier to
entry. According to an article written on the leading academic jobs website in the UK, Dr.
Catherine Armstrong explains ‘you will need a good bachelors degree (2:1 or above)
possibly a Masters and for almost all disciplines a PhD in the relevant field.’ (Armstrong,
2008)
‘There is also the problem of the ‘Fortress Academy’, a term I use to describe the very
few number of actual ‘openings’ in universities for a younger generation of scholars
who are all but obliged to ‘have or be close to completing’ a PhD, as well as ‘research
potential’ if not a ‘research record’: that is, publications.’ (Garland, 2014)
Undertaking a PhD in Architecture in the UK is expensive, it takes dedication and
money (or funding) bearing in mind the significant cost of an extended education in
architecture. The issue of postgraduate finance has risen to political prominence in the last
few years. According to the Higher Education Statistics Agency in 2010 only 19% of UK PhD
holders were working in higher education three and half years after obtaining their
doctorate. As the modern understanding of research is changing, slowly but intently, we
are seeing progress; as little as twenty-five years ago PhDs were neither preferred nor
essential as an entry into academia, nor were there such variations on the traditional
doctorate including PhD by practice and PhD by publication, which have opened up the
academic track to a greater number of people.
With the addition of further internal accreditations, as an early career academic you
are encouraged to have a PhD in Architecture to make your access more streamlined, yet
many within the institutions believe this does not constitute an ability to teach. You may
also be required upon entry to complete an internal teaching qualification (Post Graduate
357
GEMMA BARTON
Certificate of Education in the UK) - which few within architecture academies are reported
to value - you are also expected to be a gifted educator, which does not always go hand in
hand. The requirements seem to be vague and ever changing, so navigating these options
can be overwhelming, the uncertainties at the heart of this process often acting as a
barrier to both application and entry.
RECOMMENDATION
‘After doing a couple of reviews for friends/former tutors […] my name was put
forward for some teaching cover. The students then voted to extend my contract for
the rest of the year.’ (anon. survey entry)
‘I started teaching as a studio assistant while studying for my masters. I worked as a
Visiting Lecturer for four years and built up an excellent reputation. Once qualified as
an architect I got a full time post teaching Interior Design. I worked my way up to
Course Leader and then was head hunted to run the Masters in Architecture for nine
years before becoming the Head of School.’ (anon. survey entry)
Some students/graduates are recommended by (former) tutors to partake in critiques,
identified as effective mentors for other students and as such begin to develop
appropriate skills in the dissemination of information. Attending design reviews on a
regular basis often develops into a more official relationship and these (ex) students are
asked to assist on studio projects with an academic-lead, this usually forms the seeds of
the Visiting Lecturer agreement. This pathway has been around for decades and has reared
many excellent educators and will hopefully continue to do so but it has its flaws. It leaves
a great deal to chance; it is not a fair and transparent system and relies heavily upon a
given network of connection and understanding that many graduates will not possess at
such sa young age. Early career academics are be encouraged and championed, their
placement amongst other more established academics is vital for diversity and growth - to
be embedded within the system without requiring postgraduate PhD or similar
qualifications rather than being resigned to exist on the peripheries as Visiting Lecturers.
The Visiting Lecturer (also known as Hourly Paid Lecturer or adjunct in the US) track is
popular in the UK for many reasons, not least the relative remuneration to administrative
responsibility. Visiting Lecturers are a very important part of the academic make-up and
traditionally this route is popular with young graduates but it is not easy to navigate.
Equally, converting this interest and experience into an academic contract is difficult and
time consuming (it personally took me seven years) and after a similar amount of time in
education, cumulatively this for many is not a conceivable route. In the UK there is an
increase in young people with the desire to affect change, both in the institution but also
in the industry. As yet they have remained on the edge as a result are not able to make
more valuable contributions to the development of the curricula. By stifling youthful,
driven future-academics we are doing a dis-service to the future of the education system
and the industry as a whole.
‘I am engaged because I think one should do something worthwhile with one’s life.
There’s nothing heroic about it. It’s just that you have to do it, to be human.’ (Bello,
2008)
358
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
PRACTICE
‘I started teaching design studios through my practice, with my architect colleagues,
teaching at the university they had done their undergraduate degrees at. But my
'proper' role came from someone who ran the course seeing me talk at an
academic/practitioner crossover event at a time when she was thinking it would be
good to have a practitioner teaching on the course.’ (anon. survey entry)
If your work is being published in the national and international architectural press and
you are creating a buzz in the industry, seen to be active and involved in the life of the
profession and have connection to academia (no matter how loose) you are very likely to
be invited to take part in student tutorials/reviews and possibly as a studio tutor as a
Visiting Lecturer (VL) or Hourly Paid Lecturer (HPL). Teaching experience is not essential,
nor is being a qualified architect, however that might hold you back should you wish to
progress up to Head of School level.
Working as a para-academic in this way, with a foot in architectural practice and a foot
in architectural academia is a position of advantage, for the individual, the practice and the
student body as whole. It is a great mode of exchange, and up to the minute relationship
and exchange of information – a healthy balance for all involved. Institutions such as the
London School of Architecture mark a new route into education (outside of the institution)
for practitioners.
THE FUTURE
The three pathways identified in Figure 5 are neither perfect nor redundant, the system
requires more structure, validity and security - clarification and transparency of these
routes - and a consideration of alternatives and possible improvements (Figure 6). Such a
development of the current system requires visionary students, academics and
management.
‘To find really talented educators, talented educators must be able to take time to find
people […] especially the young. This means personal contact. There is in principle no
system that can help choose, decide, select. It is human, which cannot be replaced in
the final assessment with a surrogate technical system. As such it is very simple. Time
must be taken.‘ (Anon. survey answer)
The survey data was inconclusive at best, but the sixty/forty spilt shows this subject is
very topical and that, given the changes at the hands of the RIBA now is the right time to
be discussing the future of educators as well as the future of education. The passion in the
responses both for and against a greater university involvement in developing future
academics was welcome. Some of the comments are concerning, for example, one
respondent says ‘Architecture is about making things in the built environment happen.
Until you’ve done that what value do you offer? I find this unsettling and would like to
refer the respondent to academics and practitioners who work in the realms of visionary
and ‘paper’ architecture such as Archigram, Lebbeus Woods and Perry Kulper, all of whom
have contributed richly to the wider discussions around architecture. ‘There is a form of
architecture that aims at not getting built.’ (WAI THINK TANK, 2013)
359
GEMMA BARTON
Figure 6
Prospective improvements to the process of entering academia
Source: Author
360
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
What does the future hold for aspiring architects and educators? In analyzing
respondents’ answers I have been able to identify potential strategies for improvement
both inside and outside of the traditional academic institution, outlining how universities
could/should improve on current strategies as well as forming a more defined route, with
formal qualifications so that the process is more transparent and ‘real’ for applicants. Does
the responsibility lie with the individual or the establishment and to what extent can
systems be put in place outside of the institution? Many of the respondents claim quite
rightly that as individuals they are already doing their utmost to open the student
population to the academic track by publishing students’ work in their own books and
journals, by offering help and advice on publication and career options as well as making
connections and networking within the tight discipline, making recommendations. This at
the moment seems to be happening from the bottom up, rather than a top down
approach. So universities as a whole have a wider responsibility; to support their staff
members doing this work in their own time; a shared goal with a shared responsibility.
‘The real teacher, in fact, lets nothing else be learned than learning. His conduct,
therefore, often produces the impression that we properly learn nothing from him, if
by ‘learning’ we now suddenly understand the procurement of useful information. The
teacher is ahead of his apprentices in this alone, that he still has far more to learn than
they—he has to learn to let them learn.’ (Heidegger, 1968)
In recent years there has been a move away from this Heideggerian thinking, as
curricula become more involved, learning outcomes expand and accreditation processes
get checked, assessed, reviewed and double-checked – the administration of teaching is at
risk of diluting the organic process of letting-learn. As part of the document A Marked
Improvement: Transforming assessment in Higher Education, the HEA make a case for
assessment methods to be diversified ‘to improve their validity, authenticity and
inclusivity, making them clearly relevant and worthwhile in the eyes of the students.
Grading would focus on fewer and more challenging summative assessments’ (Higher
Education Academy, 2012). Just as students are assessed on learning outcomes and
procedures, staff and universities are also assessed and accredited by statutory bodies.
The establishment is conditioned to value assessment over learning, wellbeing and
progress.
‘How do we, as academics, students, activists, teach and learn in an institution that no
longer encourages learning for learning’s sake, and which does not prioritise learning
that is accessible to all? […] With the increased marketisation and commodification of
higher education in the United Kingdom, now more than ever we need to consider the
ways in which we learn and teach, both as university educators and as members of
communities.’ ( (Wånggren & Milatovic, 2014)
Having been an architectural educator for nearly a decade I have at times felt distain at
the assumption that the myriad of industry woes all be laid at the feet of education, such
as the contentious claim that architectural education does not appropriately prepare
students for practice - I have written extensively about this misunderstanding in the
architectural press (Barton, 2015) – however more recently I have been elated by the
realization that if industry considers education to be a key part of the problem then by a
similar virtue it must also be considered a key part of the solution. From the interview with
361
GEMMA BARTON
Will Hunter we can disseminate that it is vital in any learning establishment to provide a
variety of voices and opinions; this is not the home of the lone genius or the master and
the apprentice. Age does not always equal experience and youth does not always mean
energy and vitality. We need to be passionate in our employment, we need to think
beyond the CV and see around the corners of credentials, the recruitment process of our
future educators requires a hiring panel of visionaries willing and ready to enable letlearning.
A system that is too tight and rigid is risky, it leaves no room for change and adaptation
and this has been the case for many decades in some architectural academies, those that
have flourished both economically and professionally can be said to have flexible thinkers
at the helm. Playing it safe is also risky, having youth on the team does however bring
familiarity as the most important moments of learning quite often go unnoticed, which is
exactly why they are so important. All future alternative education models, regardless of
manifestation, will require educators - our duty by being active within the system is to care
for the future of education through focusing now, on the future of our future educators.
We can do this by engaging statutory bodies and institutions about putting some of
these suggestions into practice, starting with those inside of the university establishment.
It is time to take responsibility, as students, as staff and as a university. If universities are
to attract, encourage and secure the best future educators, the process needs to be clear,
transparent, structured and rewarding (financially and socially) for applicants. The
university must take responsibility for widening the conversation about post-graduate
options and be encouraging and supportive of those keen to explore teaching. The
University must also support individual lecturers who are already vocal and proactive in
this way. Recommendation and nepotism must be replaced by fair recruitment strategies
where all vacancies are advertised effectively.
There is scope, outside of the institution, to develop public programmes to promote
academia, celebrate its influence and endorse its future educators. If the discipline lies in
the hands of the educators, then the future of the discipline lies in the hands of the future
educators. To be truly forward thinking about the direction of practice we must first
address our approach to academic recruitment, with a specific focus on early career
academics.
‘When we know something, we are already not conceiving anything any longer.’ (Lacan,
1988)
Acknowledgements: I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the
following people who graciously devoted their time for interviews; Will
Hunter, Phil Watson, Delores Garrido. I would also like to acknowledge the
following people for their time and advice on such matters - Anne Boddington,
Ruth Morrow, Raymond Quek, Harriet Harriss, Elisa Lega and Neil Spiller. As
well as all of the kind individuals who saw fit to complete the online survey to
enable me to gather the data needed to formulate elements of the content
expressed in this paper. The survey is still online (link) and I encourage more
architectural educators to complete the questions enabling further analysis.
362
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
References
(n.d.). From London School of Architecture: http://www.the-lsa.org
Abbing, E. R., & van Gessel, C. (2010). Brand-Drivven Innovation. In T. Lockwood, Design
Thinking (pp. 131-143). New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Armstrong, D. C. (2008, April). How to become a lecturer. Retrieved Jan 11, 2014 from
jobs.ac.uk: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/careers-advice/working-in-highereducation/1057/how-to-become-a-lecturer
Barton, G. (2015, Feb 05). Universities are not in the business of producing faster horses.
Retrieved Feb 05, 2015 from Architects Journal:
http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/gem-barton-universities-are-not-in-thebusiness-of-producing-faster-horses/8678031.article
Bello, W. (2008). Wy am I Engaged? Antipode.
Brown, J. B. (2015, Feb 01). The Future of Architectural Education, Episode 3. Retrieved Feb
04, 2015 from Arch Ed Podcast: http://www.archedpodcast.com
Buchanan, R. (1989). Declaration by Design: Rhetoric, Argument and Demonstration in
design Practice. In V. Margolin, design Discourse. History, Theory, Criticism (pp. 91-109).
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Caputo, J. (n.d.). ‘Education as Event: A Conversation with John D. Caputo’ . Journal for
Cultural and Religious Theory 12.2. (W. Dickinson, Interviewer)
Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking. Oxford: Berg.
Department, R. E. (2013). Education Statistics 2012-13. London: RIBA Publishing.
Du gay, P., Hall, S., James, L., & Negus, K. (1997). Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the
Sony Walkman. London: Sage Publishers.
Eger, A., Bonnema, Maarten, Lutters, E., & Van der Voort, M. (2013). Product Design. The
Hague: eleven, international publishing.
Futures in the Making Panel Discussion. (n.d.). From Architecture Foundation:
http://www.architecturefoundation.org.uk/programme/2014/futures-in-themaking/future-of-architectural-education
Garland. (2014). In Withers, & Waldrop, Para-Academic Handbook (p. 77). Hammeron
Press.
Garrido, D. (2015, Jan 17). Principal AA Little Architect Programme. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Gownder, J. (2014, Januar 17). http://blogs.forrester.com. From
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables:
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables
Heidegger, M. (1968). What is Called Thinking? London: Harper & Row.
Higher Education Academy. (2012). AMarked Improvement: Transforming Assessment in
Higher Education.
Hodder, S. (2015, March 25). RIBA COUNCIL AGREES SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS TOWARDS
EDUCATION REFORM. Retrieved April 01, 2015 from
http://www.architecture.com/RIBA/Contactus/NewsAndPress/PressReleases/2015/RIB
ACouncilagreessignificantprogresstowardseducationreform.aspx
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. London:
Routledge.
363
GEMMA BARTON
http://visc.gov.lv/en. (2015, January 28). From http://visc.gov.lv/en/hobby/:
http://visc.gov.lv
http://www.healthcare.philips.com. (2014). From
http://www.healthcare.philips.com/main/about/future-of-healthcare/:
http://www.healthcare.philips.com
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov. (2014, September 5). From
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/DataStatistics/FindDataByTopic/DentalCaries/DentalCariesAd
ults20to64.htm: http://www.nidcr.nih.gov
https://www.youtube.com. (n.d.). From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFydzXFcA-Y:
https://www.youtube.com
Hunter, W. (2015, Feb). Founder London School of Architecture. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Jones, J. C. (1992). Design methods. New York: John Wley&Sons, inc.
Joy, E. (2012). ‘Two Roads Diverged in a Yellow Wood, and I, I Took the One Less Travelled
By: Why I Resigned My Professorship’ In the Middle.
Jump, P. (2014, Sep 18). Priced out of Postgraduate Education. From Times Higher
Education: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/priced-out-ofpostgraduate-education/2015722.article
Lacan, J. (1988). The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book II: The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in
the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. (J.-A. Miller, Ed., & S. Tomaselli, Trans.) New
York: Norton.
Little Architect Programme. (n.d.). From Architecture Association:
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/VISITING/littlearchitect/
Lockwood, T. (2010). Design Thinking. New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Marrs, C. (2015, Feb 02). Universities not equipping architecture students for the real
world. Retrieved Feb 02, 2015 from Architects Journal:
http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/report-universities-notequipping-architecture-students-for-real-world/8677848.article
Mootee, I. (2013). Design Thinking for Strategic Innovation. New Jersey: Wiley.
Moreno , K. (2014, March 3). http://www.forbes.com. From
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/
Neil Spiller, N. C. (2014). Educating Architects: How Tomorrow's Practitioners will Learn
Today. Thames & Hudson.
Oakeshott, M. (2001). The Voice of Liberal Learning. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
RIBA to hold Education Reform Meeting. (n.d.). From RIBA:
http://www.architecture.com/RIBA/Aboutus/Whoweare/RIBACouncil/RIBAtoholdeduca
tionreformmeeting.aspx
Rittel, H. (1972). On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the first and second generation.
Bedriftsokonomen , 390-396.
Rolfe. (2014). Para-Academic handbook: A toolkit for making-learning-creating-acting. In
Withers, & Waldrop. Hammeron Press.
Sodha, S. (2015, Jan 11). It's time to reinvent what Universities must be. Retrieved Jan 16,
2015 from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis
free/2015/jan/11/our-universities-must-adapt-modern-world
364
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
Sodha, S. (2015, Jan 18). Universities must place more emphasis on teaching quality.
Retrieved Jan 18, 2015 from The Guardian:
http://theguardian.com/theobserver/2015/jan/18/the-big-issue-university-educationfees-teaching-employers
Spiller, N. (2015, Jan 21). Dean Greenwich School of Architecture. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Stevens, G. (n.d.). A history of architectural education in the West. From
http://www.archsoc.com/kcas/Historyed.html
The Economist. (2009, November 17). Triple bottom line. It consists of three ps: profit,
people, planet. The Economist , p. http://www.economist.com/node/14301663.
Ulrich, K., & Epinger, S. (2004). Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
WAI THINK TANK. (2013). A Manifesto. Retrieved Jan, 2015 from WAI Think Tank:
http://www.waithinktank.com/filter/Manifesto/Narrative-Architecture-Manifesto
Wånggren, L., & Milatovic, M. (2014). Para-academic Handbook. Hammeron Press.
Watson, P. (2015, Jan 21). Founder Free School of Architecture. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Wrigley, C., & Bucolo, S. (2013). Teaching New Product Development to Design Led
Innovation. DRS//CUMULUS 2013, 2nd International Conference for Design Education
Researchers (pp. 1843-1855). Oslo: DRS//Cumulus.
365
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and
Pleasure
Miguel NAVARRO-SANINT*, Lina M. ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, Carolina ROJASCESPEDES and Annelie FRANKE
Universidad de los Andes
*mi-navar@uniandes.edu.co
Abstract: The Design Challenges are learning activities for design students. The
students (either in teams or individually) receive different briefs according to the
topic and follow a Design Thinking approach to solve a design task in 24 hours.
So far 6 different topics have been part of the Design Challenges: Wiring,
Illustration, Viral, Builders, Junk and Type. Each one of these Challenges will be
presented on this paper, focusing on the method, the brief and the outcome.
After more than 10 challenges, with a total participation of around 400 students,
we expose the advantages of group work in a challenging environment, and the
results of keeping the pressure during a design project. We also present the
possibilities of these kinds of dynamics when creating learning environments and
supporting learning communities.
Keywords: design, challenges, learning, communities
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
What are the Design Challenges?
The Design Challenges are learning environments where students discover the role of
media in design projects. Each Design Challenge focuses on a different design topic, and
creates a space for students to explore a full loop in the design process starting from
observing and understanding the situation proposed by a given brief, and ending in a
working prototype that manifests their design idea.
The origins
The Design Challenges started on 2011 at the Universidad de Los Andes as the result of
a bachelor degree final project that presented an approach for learning interaction, design
thinking and media, based on closed briefs and short times, to design and build tangible
interactive prototypes using the Wiring platform (Wiring. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26,
2015, from http://www.wiring.org.co).
Wiring Challenges were designed as a learning experience around interactive media,
with the purpose of supporting and contributing to learning and creative environments;
not only by immersing participants in a short design process using closed briefs, but also by
spreading knowledge and building a community around these explorations of interactive
media in art and design.
Since 2011, more than 6 Wiring challenges have been developed at the Universidad de
Los Andes, in which more than 200 students, supported by the Wiring Challenges team,
explored interactive media. Participants spent around 24 hours together designing and
building tangible interactive prototypes based on different topics that seek to enhance or
enrich the experience of the educational community in different places of the campus.
As an outcome of those experiences it was possible to understand that the challenges
were a perfect excuse to enable teamwork relationships -building community- and to
enhance skills and understanding of a medium in design.
The above, considering that the experience of the challenges should be lived during
short time periods to keep the working pressure and to get early and fast iterations in
research, ideation and prototyping stages. Thus, students not only designed and built a
physical and functional prototype in each Challenge but also learned, shared and had fun
living this experience.
With this background and because of particular interests of the Department of Design
of the Universidad de Los Andes, in 2013 emerged the idea of creating other challenges
using the same principles of its origin -creating learning communities and keeping the
pressure in short time projects- Illustration, Viral, Builders, Junk and Type were added to
the challenges to involve new students and participants through different design media by
spending a night together to develop plenty of interesting and fun design projects.
The background
From these previous experiences emerged the framework of the Design Challenges,
composed by three important concepts: pressure, motivation and learning communities, in
a creative practice environment. We consider that these three concepts are essential in
any design project.
367
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
We can agree that every design practitioner has felt the pressure produced by the
apparently or not unlimitedness of creativity that is only restricted by time. Some authors
have already studied the impact of pressure in creative working environments (Amabile et
al., 1996; Gutnick et al., 2012). Both, Amabile et al. and Gutnick et al., recognize a
difference between two different kinds of pressure:'excessive workload pressure' and
'challenge'. The first one being recognized as having a negative impact on creativity, and
the second one as having a positive impact on creativity. According to Amabile et al.
(1996), the pressure that is perceived as a 'challenge' in the workplace has a positive
influence on motivation and creativity, contrary to 'excessive workload pressure' that
diminishes creativity by bringing up the pressure to an undesirable level. In these
challenging situations, pressure is perceived as ‘a necessary concomitant of an important,
urgent project’ (p. 1162). It is this ‘urgent, intellectually challenging nature of the problem
itself’ that sets the conditions for the situation to the perceived as a challenge (p. 1161).
Some other authors have also studied the role of pressure in learning environments.
Although they use the word 'stress' instead of 'pressure', they partially refer to the same
concept if we consider stress as ‘an individual's psychological response to a situation [that]
taxes or exceeds the individual's capacity or resources’ (LePine et al., 2004, p. 883).
LePine et al. (2004) established that stress can have a positive relation with motivation
in learning situations. They expose two different perceptions of stress, being the first
'challenging-beneficial', associated to a high motivation to learn; and the second
'threatening-harmful', associated to a low motivation to learn. If during the learning
process the learner identifies the challenging situation as positive and changeable, he
invests more resources and effort, directing his behavior and increasing the intensity and
persistence towards learning (LePine et al., 2004). The main risk in this process is that
students start to feel that their resources are depleted, resulting in a lack of energy, and
entering into a state of exhaustion (p. 884). When students enter into this state their
motivation diminishes and therefore their learning performance also decreases (p.884).
However, some authors have explored the implications of the basic concepts of the
Design Challenges in learning situations, it is important to remark that, even if there is few
documentation in literature around the exact topic of learning design spaces under
pressure (or Design Challenges), there have been some practical explorations around it.
The 'Research Derby' of Favaro et al. (2013) is defined as a pressure cooker for creative
and collaborative science. Different groups of researchers meet to compete around a
research challenge related to 'ecology and evolution'. At the end, the best research project
wins. Favaro et al. define two key aspects of these challenges: (i) a maximum amount of 4
researchers on each group, between junior and senior members, making clear that they
will all have the same influence in the group and that they have to be open for all ideas; (ii)
time has to be less than what participants think they need. The authors concluded that this
pressure cooker environment can result on stressful group dynamics because people who
had never worked together had to quickly converge into a team detonating role conflicts
due to role ambiguity. This finding is consistent with LePine et al. (2004) affirmation of a
negative relation between stress associated to group dynamics and performance.
Also, the Design Council has explored with a similar kind of projects, under the same
name that we use: 'Design Challenges'. The Design Council works with partners to identify
a challenge. Then, they create an open 'Call for Ideas', on the search for better solutions
through better design products and services. Based on that they select the best teams and
368
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
finance and support them, so they can achieve a real social impact. The outcome is then
monitored and measured to have feedback about the real impact. In their approach time
pressure is not a key aspect (Design Challenges. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/design-challenges).
Similarly, The Real World Design Challenge (RWDC) in the USA is an annual competition
that convokes high school students to create teams and face a real challenge that leading
industries also face. Each team can find on the website and on their mentors a set of
resources that gives them the necessary resources to go through the design process. At the
end, the results are judged and the best solutions are selected to earn a prize (Real World
Design Challenge. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.realworlddesignchallenge.org/).
In both cases the challenge arises, as defined by Amabile et al. (1996, p. 1161), from
the challenging conditions of the problematic situation itself. The Design Council and the
RWDC work as a leaders/mentors that support the different teams, reducing pressure.
Likewise, The Museum of Science in Boston has workshops that introduce visitors in
engineering design cycles by creating learning spaces of participation in which visitors
design, build and test a prototype that responds to a given problem. They present these
Design Challenges as being a fun and engaging experience (Museum of Science, Boston.
(n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from http://legacy.mos.org/designchallenges/). Here
challenges are used as motivating and creative learning environments (LePine et al., 2004).
The Challenges
We can argue then that well managed pressure in the form of a challenge, can impact
positively on motivation, creativity and learning performance in a fun and engaging
environment. This supports our definition of the Design Challenges as creative and
motivating learning environments where students can explore diverse media through
design projects.
In the same way, an essential goal of the Design Challenge is the support of learning
communities in the bachelor program of design and in related networks, e.g., the Wiring
Community; assuming that those learning communities can generate in the students more
engagement and a higher intellectual and social development. Correspondingly, this would
reflect on more time and effort dedicated to academic and educational goals and more
responsibility towards their own learning, impacting on the student experience and his
grades and lowering the risk of student desertion (Zhao and Kuh, 2004, p. 124). To achieve
this, we recognize the importance of creating a feeling of identity with the different
practices of the learning community, paired with the assurance of the reproduction cycle
of the community by integrating old students with new students so that they can exchange
their knowledge and learn from each other (Jonassen and Land, 2000).
We define several conditions as basic to every Design challenge:
As initial conditions:
Any student of the Bachelor in Design can register, even if there is a priory on the
registration of first year students, this way we ensure the reproduction cycle of the
learning community.
369
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
The challenge is free for every student who wants to participate. The only expense is
from buying materials that will be used during the challenge.
Each student and guide receives a bracelet of a distinctive color with the name of the
challenge in which he is participating to achieve the above mentioned feeling of
identity.
All the challenges start in the afternoon and end in the afternoon of the next day, this
gives the students the night for working when there is less risk of exhaustion as a
consequence of pressure: at the beginning of the challenge.
During the project development:
Some roles are predefined: the role of the guide and the role of the student. Each
Challenge has two or more guides who are in charge of giving the initial instructions
and keeping the pace of the design process. Each guide works as a leader who brings
‘informational and emotional support’ (Grutnick et al., 2012, p. 196), and brings his
knowledge to reduce stress and keep the feeling of 'challenge' in each student or
group of students, keeping motivation and creativity, e.g. During the Wiring
Challenge there is a team of experienced designers and engineers balancing the
technological complexity of the challenge.
The students are not pushed to work and can work at their own pace as long as they
respect some key moments when they have to show the state of the project.
Food is provided during the challenge to support the work of the students.
The result:
The challenges are not graded.
There is no requisite for the quality of the outcome. The final outcome is not judged.
At the end of each challenge a certificate of participation is handed in to each
participant. These certificates strengthen the feeling of support from the university
towards the students and recognize their work.
Based on this we present 6 Design Challenges with a wide range of topics. The Wiring
Challenge focuses on new media and information, the Type Challenge on creating personal
symbols and individual characters, the Illustration Challenge centers on imagery and
storytelling, the Junk Challenge centers on materials and reuse, the Builders Challenge
focuses on structures and team work, and the Viral Challenge on replicability of
unconventional ideas. All these challenges had a considerable participation of students
with a total of 154 participants in 2014, from a total of around 1000 students registered on
the design bachelor program (Table 1).
Table 1
Number of participants per Design Challenge session.
Builders Challenge
Illustration Challenge
Junk Challenge
Type Challenge
Viral Challenge
Wiring Challenge
TOTAL
April 2013
0
0
0
0
0
94
94
September 2013
45
24
0
40
0
20
129
370
March 2014
30
25
40
0
30
29
154
TOTAL
75
49
40
40
30
143
377
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Wiring Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This challenge introduces students to the use of new technologies and new media in
interaction and experience design.
Each team of 5 students had to observe, analyse and propose an information system on
which interactive media is an essential part. Then, each team had to use Wiring
(wiring.org.co) to make a tangible element that exposed emotions present in a specific
context of the university. For that each team had to identify an emotion that was already
expressed in the context and use it as the input for the proposed information system, and
then define a coherent emotion to use it as the outcome of the system.
T HE METHOD
At the start of the challenge, the guides presented a basic amount of theory to the
students to introduce them to new media and basic programming (Figure 1). Then the
brief was presented to the students to start with the design process.
Figure 1
Initial presentation at the Wiring Challenge Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2013).
Teamworking
First, the students constituted 3 teams of 5 students. This happened naturally and
without hesitation, anyway, it was just a short project with no long term consequences. All
the teams had students from different profiles. Even if all of them were part of the design
bachelor program, some of them were also part of the computer engineering; some of
them were in first year and some of them were in four (last) year.
Identify & observe
Then, each team of students had to identify and observe a context of their choice
where, according to them, they could find interesting emotions that could be revealed.
371
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
Using bodystorming (Martin et al., 2012) the students understood the emotions and
experiences where those emotions arise. In the same way, the students had to use
bodystorming to explore the different emotions that could be coherent with the input
emotion and the context. This process was supported by video recording to create a video
scenario (Binder, 1999) that exposed the expected experience and the behavior of the
information system. Based on this video scenario, each team explored the possibilities that
the different sensors gave them for expressing emotions. Correspondingly, the students
had to choose the actuators that could be used to express the emotion that they chose
before as the output emotion. Apart from the video scenario that was used to
communicate the experience and behavior, the students used diagrams to represent the
relation between the input emotion and the output emotion. These two elements (video
scenario and diagrams) were the basis for the communication between the design team
and their guides.
Build
Figure 2
Building the final protoype Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2015).
The guides, experienced designers and engineers, helped the students to build the
circuit and the code that was going to be used to transform the input into output; and to
create the working prototype (Figure 2). Finally, the team of students recorded another
video scenario with the final working prototype. This video was presented to the other
teams as a closing activity.
T HE OUTCOME
Most of the teams managed to have a working prototype at the end of the challenge: a
vibrating computer screen that reacts to the stress of the student during a computer based
372
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
exam (more stress equals more vibration), and a couple of lamps for cafeteria tables that
expresses the emotion of loneliness when nobody is on the table and the emotion of
warmth when someone is there; with a script that compares the table with more people to
trigger the one with less people to call for attention. These lamps were later presented in
an exhibition of students’ projects at the university.
Type Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This Challenge was a part of the cooperation project FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS, a
collaborative exploration of visual language that unites students, teachers, scholars, and
ideas from 6 cities across 4 continents. All participating academic partners come from
design or art schools and share the thrive to teach visual literacy, which is based on the
idea that pictures, in the broadest sense, can be read and communicate meaning through
the process of reading. (FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS, 2014)
This Challenge had a previous introduction, the day before the challenge dynamic,
where the guides presented to the students some theory related to the project to
contextualize the students. Based on the Phaistos Disk the purpose of the workshop was to
develop in 24 hours a character string composed by 45 symbols that have to do with a
‘personal reality’. Existential themes such as body, life, society, politics, culture were
starting points for the development of symbols (Franke, 2014), e.g. 45 symbols to explain
to an alien complexity of our world, 45 symbols describing the origin of humanity
beginning with Adam and Eve, 45 symbols to define discrimination, etc.
The Phaistos disk could be used as a source of inspiration from the meanings and
descriptions of the 45 symbols embedded on the disc. Similarly, it was also possible to
move away from the disc and seek other sources of inspiration.
T HE METHOD
Within two days the students researched and discussed the 45 symbols looking forward
to create their own interpretation and finally design a private set of symbols. This process
was divided into three steps:
Define
Professor Olivier Arcioli of the Academy of Media Arts in Cologne Germany gave a brief
theoretical overview of the Phaistos disk and visual codes and its communication, which
showed the context in which the students had to be dealing with.
Explore
The 45 symbols matrix shows interpretations of each symbol and suggests questions to
ask in order to define the meaning for the chosen entity. The output at this point was a list
of words and no visualizations yet. There were no right or wrong answers; it really
depended on the working group and personal background. The output was a set of
brainstormed words for each of the 45 symbols in relation to the entity.
After figuring related words the students had to draw with black ink their own symbol
for each word. Aproximately 700 symbols occurred and were stocked to the wall and
discussed.
373
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
Visualize
Figure 3
Students working on their symbols. Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2013)
The students designed 45 symbols following the meaning and answers created in the
step before (Figure 3). The symbols should have the same voice and tone in order to create
a connected set of icons.
T HE OUTCOME
The workshop concluded with the development of a set of very individual and free
characters, using signs, notations, letters, graphic shapes, photographs and means of
artistic expression.
At the end of the two days the students designed more than 1500 Symbols that were
hung up and discussed at the design department. The entire process was published at
Designblogs of Universidad de los Andes and on the 45 Symbols platform.
After the workshop some students improved their 45 symbols in their Typography class
until they became a symbol family. Based on this symbols the objective was to bring them
into 3-dimensions for an exhibition which took part in Cologne in KunstStation Sankt Peter
in Germany in June 2014, also resulting into improved symbols that were later part of a
publication of the Forty Five Symbols Project (FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS, 2014)
Illustration Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This challenge focuses on developing contents of publications through clear a
convincing storytelling by using imagery and representative illustrations. By the end of the
374
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
challenge the students had to create a Fanzine style publication (Pawson, M. Comic & Zine
Reviews.); the result of expressing the sensibilities within an aesthetic and thematic field.
The Zine prototype (an autonomous and versatile mean) includes design, production and
finishing within a practical mean of expression that includes analog and digital media for
drawing, layouts, printing and putting together the publication that was distributed at the
end of the challenge.
T HE METHOD
Introduction
After introducing the main themes that are necessary for the challenge, e.g. illustration
as a narrative technique for short stories and fanzines as a coherent editorial support for
illustrated contents, the guide explained the proper theoretical and practical tools that
provided the necessary vision for a proper development in every stage of the challenge.
Development
The process began with the definition of the topics and the creation of the contents
that would make part of the publication. For this purpose, the students came up with
some questions to produce some ideas as answers to those questions. These
interrogations had no limit; it could be something platonic, fantastical, magical, illogical,
complex or simple, e.g. Why does the earth tremble? Why is the sky blue? What is the
purpose of silence? Why do cats purr? From a metalogue point of view, not only the
problem itself was discussed, but the whole structure that surrounds it, so it became a
great support in the process.
According to Gregory Bateson (Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind:
Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. University of
Chicago Press.) the metalogue or meta-dialogue is a dialogue about dialogue itself (analog
to meta-language), meaning that it is a communication form where implicitly and maybe
explicitly, it talks about how we communicate, while at the same time some other of the
author's matters for concern are being discussed. In an analogous manner to the platonic
dialogue and the renaissance colloquium, the metalogue is a combination of rhetoric and
didactics, which seeks to make a certain topic comprehensible in a dynamic way.
Storytelling
After the questioning phase, the students formulated the topics. They developed the
story's narrative for each publication. To do so, an answer must be given to each question
through the publication itself taking its format into account, i.e. that if it was an eight-fold
sheet, the questions must be answered in eight steps, but if the format is booklet style
with sixteen pages, the story is told in those sixteen frames.
In some cases, only one answer was recorded, so the student distributed the
corresponding story according to that sole question using the different available spaces in
the publication. In other cases, the student proposed several answers that were resolved
in each page or fold of the sheets.
Illustrate and visualize
After creating the story the media type the students defined the format, the technique
and the materials that were coherent with the essence of the stories and the
375
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
characteristics of the exercise; immediacy and quality of fluency were needed for these
academic challenges.
Once the narrative concluded, and the format was selected, the students had the task
to illustrate the proposed situations. For this purpose, they worked analog techniques that
involved the use of precision methods, e.g. ink, technical pens and markers, and worked
using only one color ink (black), so that at the end the printing would be at a low cost and
easily reproduced in black and white.
Build
After finishing the illustrations, the participants continued with the technical
digitalization process, with the purpose of touching up and refining their designs as well as
making a layout that follows the narrative logic for each page.
At the end the layout process, editorial design, and other components along with the
corresponding printing and paper selection tests, according to the proper quality needed
in the printing and folding of the expected publication, were finalized. The design process
for the publications was completed, followed by its reproduction and distribution to each
person involved in the challenge.
T HE OUTCOME
Each student completed the design of Illustrated fanzine style publication that
answered to the challenge of creating a story, drawing, touching up, printing and puting
together an individual edition. They experienced the work role in its entirety, learning to
make decisions, manage techniques and proper linking of analog and digital media,
enabling them to visualize different possibilities, build images and create a publication
quickly and diligently.
The exercise contributes to an interesting insight on producing an illustrated book using
experimental formats and published independently, important topics to those interested
on this media. Likewise, this practice has helped to understand the essence of illustration,
the meaning of interpretation and the dynamic of working with multiple purposes of
communication.
Viral Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This challenge explores different topics around branding, consumer experiences,
communication strategies, etc. The challenge was to explore the idea of the 'cell concept',
creating a tangible representation that spreads through a network; following principles of
'guerrilla marketing' (Levinson, 2007): low cost, easy replicability and use of
unconventional channels.
T HE METHOD
After a short presentation of the key concepts and a wide range of references the
students were asked to create groups, and explore different topics of interest and the
available possibilities of intervention by observing and analyzing different contexts. Then,
after some small tests of their concepts, the students planed and executed a bigger
intervention.
376
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
T HE OUTCOME
Each team of students intervened a different physical or virtual space. Some of the viral
interventions took place on twitter and were supported by people outside the challenge,
other interventions were on the physical space of campus intervening sculptures, stairs,
elevators, etc.
Builders Challenge
T HE BRIEF
Create together a structure based on folded cardboard. The cardboard structure had to
be modular and had to sustain itself. The final result had to be a combination of different
modules created by different participants.
T HE METHOD
This Challenge started with a presentation of collaborative structure for public spaces,
followed by a short introduction into folded paper structures.
Each student had to use these bases to create scaled models of structures using paper.
The students had a restriction on the initial shape, meaning that each structure had the
same amount of polygons, having all of them a different shape, but keeping the proportion
between all the different creations. Subsequently, the students selected some structures
to build together a scaled model by connecting them.
The following step consisted on a collective creation of the structure. All the students
built a real size structure using cardboard.
T HE OUTCOME
All the students together built a structure made out of cardboard. This resulting
cardboard structure was self-supported although not so stable, with five pillars and a roof
that could shelter all the participants. The structure was finally assembled in an open space
of the university's campus.
Junk Challenge
T HE B RIEF
This Challenge was based on the reuse of junk, extending their function or altering it
completely to create new objects. Each group of students had to create a lighting device
using the available junk that the integrants of the group brought to the workshop.
T HE METHOD
Each group started by an exploration of the concept of the lighting device that they
were planing to build. Each student produced a considerable amount of drawings that
could respond to the brief. The guides helped the students to express their ideas giving
advices and exploring technical ways of communicating their ideas, and pushing the
students to explore more concepts. Afterwards, the students explored in groups the
possibilities of the junk they had for building one of the creations that they had previously
drawn. During this construction the guides helped with crafting abilities to achieve a final
prototype, resulting from the conversation of the students' idea and the affordances of the
377
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
junk in a process similar to the one exposed by N. Frishberg (2007) with the concept of
junk prototyping.
T HE OUTCOME
The outcome was a wide range of lighting devices that used shades, reflection and
refraction to play with light using hacked junk in a wide variety; from hanging lamps, to
lighting water fountains.
What did we learn?
Among the challenges we recognized 3 different kinds of work:
The Illustration and the Type Challenges requested mostly individual work from the
students. The Junk and the Builders Challenge used mixed dynamics between individual
and group work, starting with individual work that was then joined as a source for
inspiration to produce team work. The Viral and the Wiring Challenges requested the work
to be done by teams.
In all the cases the difference between working in teams or working alone was
noticeable. In some cases, like the Type Challenge, even if the outcome was relevant and
the students were proud of what they achieved, some of the students did not work until
the end of the challenge and abandoned during the night because of exhaustion. In
contrast, when the students worked in teams, pressure was a reason to trust on their
colleagues. The students started a dynamic of passing the pressure to the more capable
one of facing it at that moment. This could be essential for supporting learning
communities on the design program as it creates links between students that could be
extended to other practices.
Also, we recognized two different approaches to each challenge in terms of time and
pressure. Some of the challenges had a 9 hour break for going home and sleeping, some
other challenges did not. This marked a difference between keeping the pressure during
the process and releasing it for some time. In the case of individual work, keeping the
pressure diminished creativity and motivation; in that case a long break during the night
could avoid exhaustion allowing the students to maintain their learning motivation. In
contrast, in the case of group work, keeping the pressure works because the students rely
on each other and share their resources avoiding exhaustion and keeping group
motivation and creativity.
In a context of pressure, exhaustion is really likely to happen, specially when working
straight during 24 hours. Group/team work is essential for facing each challenge. When
one of the group members looses all his resources, another team member comes up to
replace him. In contrast, during the Type Challenge, a considerable amount of students
abandoned the challenge during the process because of exhaustion as there was no team
member to support the work.
378
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Figure 4
Student wearing several bracelets from different years. Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2015)
But, this team dynamic has also other implications apart from supporting in case of
exhaustion, it can also strengthen the community. Many students still wear their bracelet
identifying themselves as part of the community. Above that, from all the participants, 29
students participated in at least 2 different Challenges (Figure 4), this shows an interest
from some of the students for participating in these dynamics. Even if this is not a clear
proof that the Design Challenges are supporting learning communities, we understand
these as indicators of interest from the students towards complementary academic
activities, that could evidence the existence of a learning community around the
Challenges. If we take into account that the participation of students in out-of-class
activities creates connections with affinity groups of peers and that this is important for
‘student retention, success and personal development’ (Zhao and Kuh, 2004, p. 116), these
Design Challenges could increase the integration of students to the university and reduce
student desertion.
Likewise, the presence of students from different years of the design program created
an interesting dynamic when working in teams. The less experienced students had support
from more experienced practitioners and had the chance to learn from them, not only
from their specific design abilities, but also from their ability to face pressure and to deal
with the uncertainty of a design process.
In the same way, each Challenge builds on the experience of the participants so they
feel that they have enough knowledge to face the challenge. In case that they do not have
the required knowledge, some assistants are available, e.g. the inability to program on
Wiring is compensated by the Wiring Team, an experienced group of designers and
engineers that helps the students to write the code. This prevents the students from
seeing the proposed challenge as a threat, risking motivation and creativity.
We also identified that quality pressure is stated by the students among them even if
the Challenges guides did not established any quality requirements. A sort of competition
arises between the different teams and between the students, when working individually.
379
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
This competition leads to an improvement off the quality. Likewise, students also try to
give the best of themselves just because of the challenging context, without any need for
imposing a quality standard to the outcome. Time pressure in a challenging context and
competition seems to generate an increase on the quality.
These Design Challenges have produced many interesting dynamics and might been
transforming the design community of the Universidad de los Andes. We consider that
these challenge dynamics can also work with students coursing master programs and that
these would enrich a lot more the team dynamic. With the participation of private
companies, the Design Challenges could also be a good source for innovation in other
contexts as they can be a source for generation of creative ideas in short periods of time.
Acknowledgments: Thank you to all the students who participated in the
Design Challenges and all the teachers and voluntaries who guided the
challenges. Thanks to all the supporters for making these challenges a reality
every year.
References
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work
environment for creativity. Academy of management journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
Antolinez Benavidez, L. M. (2011). Wiring challenges.
Design Challenges. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/design-challenges
Martin, B., Hanington, B., & Hanington, B. M. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100
ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective
solutions. Rockport Pub.
Binder, T. (1999, May). Setting the stage for improvised video scenarios. In CHI'99
extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 230-231). ACM.
Favaro, B., & Braun, D. C. (2013). The ‘Research Derby’: A pressure cooker for creative and
collaborative science. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution, 6(1).
Franke, A. (2014, February 19). Tipografía Experimental. Retrieved May 11, 2015, from
http://designblog.uniandes.edu.co/blogs/dise2607/category/type-challenge/
Frishberg, N. (2006). Prototyping with junk. interactions, 13(1), 21-23.
FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from http://45symbols.com
Gutnick, D., Walter, F., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. (2012). Creative performance under
pressure an integrative conceptual framework. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(3),
189-207.
Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments.
Museum of Science, Boston. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://legacy.mos.org/designchallenges/
LePine, J. A., LePine, M. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2004). Challenge and hindrance stress:
relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 89(5), 883.
Levinson, J. C. (2007). Guerrilla Marketing: Easy and Inexpensive Strategies for Making Big
Profits from Your SmallBusiness. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
380
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Real World Design Challenge. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.realworlddesignchallenge.org/
Wiring. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from http://www.wiring.org.co
Zhao, C. M., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student
engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115-138.
381
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Philip REITSPERGER*, Monika HESTAD and John O’REILLY
Central Saint Martins College of Arts and Design
*mail@philipreitsperger.com
Abstract: The term Design Thinking has been given increasingly more attention
in existing and forthcoming MBA postgraduate courses. The paradigm set is that
management students will profit from practices used in design by approaching
management problems like design problems. Design Thinking, however, still
seems to be an enigmatic concept, in which attention is clearly focused on
‘designing for non-designers’ notably in management education rather than in
design education. As it is likely there is applicability of Design Thinking in both
management and design education, this paper investigates interviews with
students with design background from MA Innovation Management at Central
Saint Martins London, a course at the boundaries of both fields, and how they
received Design Thinking during their education. With Interpretative
Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) the authors identified four emerging fields: (I) a
shift of ownership in a plurality of interpretations, (II) a shift in self-interpretation
between creative and/or analytical mind-sets, (III) a common language shared
by several discourses, and (IV) the importance of exploration and pace. The
results of the interviews are reconnected to the body of literature around Design
Thinking and illustrate insights about the possible positions of designers in a
non-design specific context.
Keywords: design thinking, innovation management, learning experience,
phenomenology
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Introduction
In reaction to an ever more complex world in which organisations have to navigate an
opaque and uncertain environment the term Design Thinking has been given increasingly
more attention as a promising way to engage with the future (Berger, 2009; Brown, 2008;
Martin, 2009; Neumeier, 2009; Lockwood, 2010; Hobday, Boddington, and Grantham,
2011 and 2012). Opposing the paradigm of analytical scientific thinking (Golsby-Smith,
2007), Design Thinking was implemented in organisations, businesses and eventually
education; especially in existing and forthcoming MBA and MA postgraduate courses of
the past five years (Dunne and Martin 2006; Glen, Suciu and Baughn, 2014; Kimbell in
Cooper, Junginger, and Lockwood, 2011; Hestad and Brassett, 2013; Wastell, 2014). This
has led to an increased interest in how designers are educated to think, as this seems
particularly relevant to organisations that seek to change their long and short-term
strategies for developing new products and services (Vogel, 2009 p. 17). The premise is
that management students will profit from practices and behaviours used in design within
a decision-making context through three principal means. Firstly, in the perspective of
frame creation through the investigation of themes (Dorst, 2011). Secondly, by adding
design practices of observation, collaboration, visualisation, rapid concept and prototype
development to already existing management practices (Lockwood, 2010). Thirdly, in a
process-focused aspect by which managers approach management problems the same
way designers approach design problems (Dunne and Martin, 2006).
As it is likely that there is applicability of Design Thinking in both management and
design education, understanding students’ experiences of engaging with Design Thinking
holds insightful implications for developing a curriculum between the edges of
management and design. Design students today are confronted with a constant shift of
their theoretical as well as professional practices (Yee, Jefferies and Tan, 2013); concepts
and approaches taught in the environment of universities become as quickly obsolete as
the short period in which an MA course passes. The recent development of design in
moving to a more strategic foundation for business indicates that future
design practitioners will work in a distinctive different setting than what
designers experience today. This means that people involved in the disciplines of Design
Thinking, especially those with design backgrounds, have to have a vision of where they
need to dissolve between their craft based and theoretical skills, push through edges, and
where to regroup and reorder in new emerging forms (Brassett, 2013b, p. 7).
In order to explore the dynamic of Design Thinking a good model for the study of such
boundaries is the MA Innovation Management course at Central Saint Martins London,
which is situated between MBA and Design Management programmes (Brassett 2013a,
p.16). The course has several distinctive elements. First, the student cohorts are composed
from diverse professional and cultural backgrounds creating multidisciplinary teams for
student projects; second, its unique location in an art and design college influences its
design-driven approach as well as its practitioners who study in a community working and
learning environment similar to notions of the ‘design studio' (Lawson and Dorst, 2009, p.
224-250); third, its curriculum is designed to allow students to develop their
theoretical and practical skills in an interplay of tasks; and fourth, the recognition of Sir
George Cox’s definition of innovation from 2005: the successful exploitation of new ideas
(cited in Brassett, 2013a, p. 13) allows students to explore innovation beyond the
383
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
generation of profits and new revenues. Design Thinking, among others, is taught and
developed during the course and defined as: ‘an integral part of working as an innovation
manager (Hestad et al., 2013, p. 2033)26.
This paper’s concern with Design Thinking is therefore to show how students with
design background in the course of MA Innovation Management give meaning to Design
Thinking in its particular applicability in a course composed from various actors and
various professions. First, the paper provides a short overview in the from of a literature
review of perspectives on Design Thinking to set the stage, second, it describes in a
phenomenological study the students’ and their peers’ experiences with Design Thinking.
With Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) the authors identified four emerging
themes: (I) a shift of ownership in a plurality of interpretations, (II) a shift in selfinterpretation between creative and/or analytical mind-sets, (III) a common language
shared by several discourses, and (IV) the importance of exploration and time in the
process. Finally, the findings of the interviews are reconnected to the body of literature
around Design Thinking and illustrate insights about the possible positions of designers in a
non-design specific context.
Design Thinking – Ownership From Various Perspectives
Students today encounter Design Thinking from two points of origin, namely
management and design. In these two perspectives several, sometimes opposing,
discourses declare ownership of the term; the consequence is that Design Thinking is
received as an enigmatic concept with various meanings that allow different definitions
and viabilities. Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla, and Çetinkaya (2013) showed in their
comprehensive discourse analysis on the literature of Design Thinking that the ambiguity
of approaches is a result of the multifaceted meanings of design itself and the missing
connection of managerial Design Thinking to design theory, or what they call ‘designerly
thinking’. Throughout the past six decades design has been conceptualised from various
perspectives: (I) as a human activity – changing existing situations into preferred ones
(Simon, 1996, p. 111), (II) as an iterative reflective practice and profession (Schön, 1983),
(III) as a liberal art concerned with ‘wicked-problems’ (Buchanan, 1992), (IV) as
an individual approach of designers yet with certain recurrent themes (Lawson and Dorst,
2009), (V) as a matter of meaning creation (Krippendorff, 2006) and in means of innovation
in the business context (Verganti, 2008).
Additionally to these epistemological different perspectives on design JohanssonSköldberg et al. (2013) identify distinctive approaches on Design Thinking from the
26
The course focuses on the need to develop professionals, who have the ability to analyse critically,
synthesise creatively and successfully manage innovation. The first Unit emphasises working in
teams on projects that are collaborative, culturally and experientially diverse, to build a foundation
of knowledge and skills that are needed in Innovation Management. In the second Unit each student
undertakes a major, self-directed research project in form of a 15,000 - word dissertation, which
includes a 15-week filed-research activity with a host organisation outside of the university. Through
this students have the opportunity to develop their creative and technical capabilities, the
presentation of themselves and their work, the realisation of projects or goals; as well as more
intangible attributes such as confidence, sense of personal direction, understanding of their values
and own motivations (Brassett, 2013a, pp.16-19).
384
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
perspective of management that have accompanied the field and shape of the discourse.
First, Boland and Collopy's (2004) investigation of the ‘design attitude’ and its relevance for
management, second, the design company IDEO’s way of working and Tim Brown’s
description of the process bringing together desirability, viability, and feasibility
(Brown, 2008 and 2009), and third, Design Thinking as a necessary skill for practicing
managers of analytical qualities as well as intuitive originality in an interplay of tasks and as
an organisational resource (Dunne et al., 2006; Martin, 2009; Neumeier, 2008).
Design and Design Thinking therefore is a vast territory, which not only for students of
design and management is an arduous area to conquer. Due to MA Innovation
Management’s multi-disciplinary approach, students of the course can develop their own
understanding of Design Thinking and it relevancy to their practice. Therefore not one
approach but a plurality of interpretations is made accessible. As design practices shift and
evolve in direct response to market needs, the recent accelerated development has
allowed designers to contribute in a more strategic way to organisations as businesses
need to rethink how they engage with the world (Yee et al., 2013, p. 232) as well as
managers to declare ownership of design specific skills like visualisation and prototyping.
This has fostered a debate about what Design Thinking really is. Hestad et al. (2013) build
on Kimbell (2011) in concluding that a more differentiated perspective on Design Thinking
might be insightful: ‘[…] any ‘design thinking’ should not merely instruct in how to use a set
of prescribed techniques or methods, but should be open to both a range and depth of
situated intellectual and practical acts.’ Design Thinking therefore, should be better
understood as not one but many approaches, used by various people with various
outcomes – a complex network students concerned about innovation have to navigate.
Design Thinking Meets its Critics
According to Martin, Design Thinking should be included in MBA education to change
management practice:
It [Design Thinking] means, first, getting MBAs to think in terms of projects where you
solve wicked problems using abductive reasoning, in addition to deductive and
inductive skills. Second, MBAs have to learn collaborative skills. They have to learn to
listen to other people and understand their reasoning process. […] Third, a great design
school would have the student go much, much deeper on understanding the user and
the user experience than we do in business schools. (cited in Dunne et al., 2006, p.
514)27
Most managerial Design Thinking conceptions today recall Herbert Simon’s normative
definition of design from 1969: ‘Everyone designs who devises courses of action aimed at
changing existing situations into preferred ones’ (1996, p.111). Simon’s definition
resonates very well with the practice of management as well as other practices and allows
a multitude of professionals especially form non-design background to join the field of
design. It is notable, however, that it took fifty years from Simon’s conceptions of design
27
Abduction is a form of reasoning first explicated by C. S. Pierce in generating a new hypothesis to
explain observed phenomena partly by guesswork or speculation. (Abduction. (2011). In The
Cambridge Encyclopedia of the Language Sciences. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge
University Press.)
385
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
until academic and popular management publications began to argue in favour of design’s
value; most of them missing elaboration of the meaning of expertise involved in the design
processes but showing a simplified and generic Design Thinking approach.
A number of articles and books stressed the issues of simplification of Design Thinking
in the managerial discourses (Brassett, 2013b, McCullagh, 2010, Nussbaum, 2013, Yee
et al., 2013). Moreover former advocates became more critical about Design Thinking.
Fred Collopy, co-author of the book Managing As Designing (Boland et al., 2004), stated: 'I
cannot help thinking that we are selling our ideas short given the momentum behind the
current choice of language. And I wonder, how much designing and/or thinking has
actually gone into ‘design thinking’’ (Collopy, fastcompany.com, 2015). Design Thinking
also meets critics in the design-community. Kevin McCullagh, founder of product strategy
consultancy Plan, argued for a more elaborated use of the approach. For McCullagh (2010,
p. 38) Design Thinking in a codified form is merely a design approach for non-designers
that might work well with managers but loses 'the pivotal importance of talent and
craft'. Banny Banerjee, founder and director of Stanford ChangeLabs, addresses these
power struggles between perspectives:
Design Thinking is certainly becoming democratized, and people with varying levels of
experience, talent, education and skills are using it with different levels of expertise.
However, complex challenges of difficult design tasks demand a level of expertise that
only comes with extensive training and experience. (cited in Yee et al. 2013, pp. 194195)
The problem might be rooted in design's simplified reputation as a problem solving
activity. According to Kees Dorst (2006, p. 10) design is a much more complex combination
of activities and cognitive processes. For Dorst fixed design problems do not exist at any
stage of the design process, but are a matter of a co-evolving process between problem
and solution that eventually fix in an emergent bridge between both. Thomas Lockwood
(2010, p.xi), past president of the Design Management Institute, defined Design Thinking
as an emerging human-centred innovation process that uses tools essential to the design
process: observation, collaboration, visualisation, rapid concept and prototype
development. Comparably, the authors and designers Ambrose and Harris (2009, p.12)
saw Design Thinking practiced by designers in seven stages: definition, research, ideation,
prototyping, selection, implementation, and learning. To perform and use these tools and
behaviours, however, a combination of mental processing and physical acts is required.
According to Lawson et al. (2009) design consists of several interlinked skills: formulating,
representing, moving, evaluating, and reflecting. Although the skills named here are
presented in a sequential way they fluently overlap and should not be seen as separable
from one another. In order to be effectively applied designers often need years to
develop and master them. Design Thinking is therefore, from the designer's point of view,
a network of experiences and embodiments of skills; a complex form of thinking in an
interplay of analysis, synthesis, reflection, and creativity leveraging inductive, deductive,
and abductive reasoning patterns. According to Bryan Lawson (2004, p. 84) this positions
the designer in a conversation with the situation. Lawson refers to Donald Schön’s
reflective practitioner (1983) arguing that Design Thinking may be conversational in
nature and therefore described it as a reflective conversation between problem and
solution in which actors, objects, practices and language constitute a temporarily reality.
386
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Methodology
The thematic purpose of the research was to discover how students with design
background receive the concept of Design Thinking during their course at MA Innovation
Management. The methodological aim of the study was to use phenomenology and
further Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis; an approach especially relevant for
exploring in detail how participants make sense of their personal and social world from
qualitative psychology (Osborn and Smith in Smith 2008, p. 53). Kvala
defines phenomenology as:
‘[…] the sense of understanding a social phenomena from the actors’ own
perspectives, describing the worlds as experienced by the subjects, and with the
assumption that the important reality is what people perceive it to be.
[…] Phenomenology was founded by Husserl at the turn of the [last] century and
further developed as existential philosophy by Heidegger, and then in an existential
and dialectical direction by Sartre and by Merleau-Ponty'. (Kvala, 1996, p. 52)
The approach of IPA was chosen because at the time of the research the principal
author was himself a student of MA Innovation Management with design background and
had a unique position in investigating the theme. The process of IPA emphasises that the
research exercise is a dynamic process with an active role of the researcher who tries to
get close to the participants’ world to take an insider perspective (Smith et al., 2008, p.53).
This allowed the researcher to create links of the IPA study to his own professional and
educational experiences as well as to the extant literature around the research topic
(Smith et al., 2008, p.56). In that sense a two-stage interpretation process, or double
hermeneutic, was involved; participants made sense of their own world and the
researcher was trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense (Smith et al.,
2008, p. 53).
At the time of the research two cohorts of students were studying at MA Innovation
Management involving about 25 people with design background. Eight interviews were
conducted; four with second and four with first year students. The interviewees came form
various cultural backgrounds: Australia, Columbia, England, Estonia, France,
the Netherlands, Norway and Thailand; as well as from various design professions: graphic
design, industrial design, design management, and architecture with different levels of
expertise. The small sample size of eight interviews in connection with IPA seemed
adequate since IPA aims to identify detailed accounts of the participants’ world in a
sufficiently defined group for which the research question is significant (Smith et al., p. 5556).
The semi-structured interviews included a sequence of themes covered and derived
from the literature review and the principal author’s experiences during his study. The first
set of questions for the interview were tested in a pilot interview – conducted to ensure
the ability of the interviewer to create a safe and stimulating environment (Kvale, 1996, p.
147; Wragg, 1973, p. 15) and were then constantly developed and adapted throughout the
process. In order to pay attention to ethical implications which arose during the interview
process for students and their learning environment (Kvale, 2007, p. 25-31) interviewees
were briefed about the purpose of the interviews and confidence was given as the
interviewees’ names were excluded and transcribed interviews were signed by the
participants before publication.
387
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
The interviews were recorded digitally and transcribed in a strict verbatim form by a
research assistant for two reasons. First, the cultural diversity and mixture of languages
involved affected the interviews, hence the protocols were used for clarification, and
second, IPA studies are concerned with the semantic level of texts, therefore all the words
spoken, significant pauses, laughs, chuckles and other significant features were
analysed (Smith et al. 2008, p.65).
IPA follows an inductive reasoning pattern and is not a prescriptive approach, however,
it provides a set of guidelines that can be adapted by the researcher to fit the relevant
research aims (Smith et al., 2008). The structure adopted in this study followed several
interlinked steps. Firstly, descriptive comments in a free textual analysis
were developed for each interview looking at explanations, emotional responses and
linguistic style. Secondly, interpretation of the descriptive comments led to emergent
theme titles that were sorted and connected in an analytical and theoretical ordering – this
process was continued through all eight interviews; and finally the convergences and
divergences in the data of all interviews were mapped which led to the identification of
master themes.
Results
The result section is organised in four interlinked themes emerging from the
interviews:
Identity/ownership in a plurality of interpretations.
Self-interpretation between a creative and/or analytical mind-set.
A common language through discourses.
The importance of exploration and pace.
Identity/ownership in a plurality of interpretations
The workshops in MA Innovation Management allow students to explore Design
Thinking as an approach of ‘learning by doing’. Intrinsic motivation is a precondition of the
course; the workshops aim to empower the students and give them the possibility to
explore and test their own assumptions, hence the students are not given any explicit
definition of Design Thinking. This leads to several interpretations and power struggles of
the participants.
The students observed that Design Thinking from a design, as well as from a
management perspective, was only a marginal topic in their prior education. Some
students encountered Design Thinking in management literature before the course;
however, most had no explicit knowledge about it and came in contact with Design
Thinking during the workshops the first time. Students with extended experience in design
before the course, connected Design Thinking closely to their own design approach and
perspective:
As a designer it's [Design Thinking] something that I've been doing all my life. […] Now
after reading these books I realise that you can show this to other industries so they
can be more creative and think outside the box.
Other participants perceived Design Thinking in a more differentiated manner. Some
students saw it as a possibility to combine their craft-based design skills with more
388
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
strategic and social skills. One participant described the course as offering her the option
to explore the approach beyond its ‘commercial’ orientation as a ‘deeper concept’ –
showing her hope of discovery for a redefinition. All participants clearly reflected,
however, that having a design education is beneficial in order to meaningfully make use of
the approach. This reflected the positive attitude of all participants and how they see their
involvement in the discourse of innovation:
I think we [designers] can do everything, we are open minded and creative, we can
understand different perspectives of the world and this can be mixed with other kinds
of different professions.
Creating meaningful outcomes was essential for all participants. The students,
therefore, connected Design Thinking closely to their own identity showing strong
subjectivity in the reception of the approach. Some participants were anxious how Design
Thinking affects design and further their future profession. Nevertheless, the exploitation
of design in other areas was described as a positive shift:
I think that is really good [for other professions without designers to practice Design
Thinking] – if they can achieve that. That's the thing. Design Thinking is the way of
thinking by designers, I'm not sure if everybody can do it but a lot of people claim that
anyone can. You don't have to be a designer to be creative. It would be great. I think a
lot of businesses would profit from that.
The urge to be meaningful was furthermore closely associated by all participants with
being creative. The students saw creativity as a main asset in Design Thinking and
identified themselves strongly connected:
The idea of provoking it [creativity] in people, who sort of don't see themselves as
creative is quite new to me. But that's why I like the idea of Design Thinking
[…] because I think it can put the designer out of the stereotype of design studios and
agencies.
Participants also expressed their confusion that Design Thinking was not described in
the workshops in a simple linear form. This left some students puzzled, arguing for a more
conclusion focused teaching approach in order to be able to create tangible roles and
hierarchies in pursuit of a fixed linear design goal for each project. One participant
observed: ’Students don't understand what Design Thinking is. Except the designers, I
don't know if they [students without design background] know how to apply
the approach’. Another student stated that the term Design Thinking itself might be
misleading within the course:
I think it should be something else. I don't like that it's been given the name Design
Thinking. I think it's something that should be a more natural part of the process.
Instead of putting pressure on getting results based on Design Thinking, the process
should just be used as a tool to get yourself or your team thinking for new material for
any kind of ideas.
The plurality of interpretations of Design Thinking in the course therefore, blurs the line
of its two-origination points (design and management); and whilst students redefine its
389
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
purpose by practicing it, idealistic as well as pragmatic perspectives constantly reshape its
foundation and aims.
Self-interpretation between a creative and/or analytical mindset
In addition to an environment of plurality where students are encouraged to find their
own definitions, analytical and creative practices play an important role in MA Innovation
Management since both are necessary for new and successful solutions – the MA
Innovation Management Course Handbook 2013/14 states:
This is what some call the ‘abductive’ abilities of design thinking (Martin, 2009;
Neumeier, 2010). Add to this the need to locate innovation in its contexts (sociocultural, organisational, etc.) and you have the qualities of an Innovation Manager that
we wish to promote’ (Brassett, 2013a, p. 15).
All participants described creativity as a main asset of design in the context of MA
Innovation Management and as justification of their importance in the process. Asked,
however, whether they would position themselves in a creative area, an analytical area or
between the two, the participants related how they had experienced a disruption in their
self-interpretation during the course. This resulted in a range of emotions expressed by the
participants. One student, who already had an educational background in economics and
product design before the course explains:
I am definitely both. It’s horrible. You don't know how to define yourself really – it's
really terrible. Sometimes I try to define myself as someone who is an economist and a
product designer […] I think that designers are very protective of their field and I think
it's the same with artists […] they are kind of looking at you switching from different
fields and say 'Well you are not a designer, you studied something else before',
sometimes you feel excluded.
Although analytical qualities were recognised as important in the course, students
struggled to define and describe them. One participant explained that she separates work
life in creativity and private life in analysis unable to draw a line between both areas.
Another student observed: ‘I think you've got to mix a bit of the both. You need to be
analytical … but sometimes creativity comes out of the analytical side’. One more student
on the other hand separated the conceptual and design process:
I wanted to say creative but then … I don't know because I don't see myself as an
analytical person … but when I did my [former] design course I was the one analysing
for four months and then designing for one month. […] I mean I like to create strong
concepts and then you only have to design them.
A main ambition for another participant was to position herself at the crossroad of
both areas: ‘My goal in studying MA Innovation Management is to work from the creative
part to a more analytical aspect […] I think this is good because I think I approach problems
in a more holistic way’.
In the study one group of the participants described their aim as to position themselves
in the middle between creativity and analysis as gate-keepers, while the other group
described themselves as travellers between both areas that stressed the importance of
390
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
extremes for certain tasks and situations. Interestingly, however, none of the participants
described creativity and analysis as inseparably linked in their work. The multi-disciplinary
context of Design Thinking in the course therefore, shifts the designer’s thinking and
practices. Similarly the literature on Design Thinking originates around two distinctive
streams that have yet not come together.
A common language shared through discourses
The first two themes explained that students had several different ideas on Design
Thinking as well as that their self-recognition was disrupted during the course between
creativity and analysis. Student described their main engagement with Design Thinking
during the workshops but did furthermore not conclude if Design Thinking was leveraged
as an approach during the group work for student projects or not. One student
commented: ‘We haven't been very disciplined in trying out or repeating the techniques
we've done in the workshops on the projects’. Another student elaborates:
I think in our first project we did it (Design Thinking), without knowing what it was. […]
We started just playing around and brainstorming which is a big part of Design
Thinking. The group collaboration and feeding off each other's thoughts is something
that was really important. We did this project really well. I'm not so sure if I can define
this as Design Thinking.
All the students were aware that even though misunderstandings and different
perspectives aggravated the process, they shared a common language with other
stakeholders, especially managers, involved in the collaborative work. Design Thinking in
that sense was interpreted as puzzle of symbols and semantics that can be spoken from
various perspectives. Several students, however, observed that managers had less interest
or were less willing to contribute to the more creative tasks and described that dealing
with people from non-design backgrounds was more difficult. Nevertheless, all participants
experienced the discussions with non-designers as beneficial for their own perspective:
It was good [in the project] that indeed designers approached that way of thinking but
we couldn't have done it without the people who were actually studying management.
[…] Because they brought us down which we needed at this stage. We are not free
designers anymore … we cannot go crazy … so they brought us down and then they
actually also backed up our idea.
Another student observed:
I think it's [Design Thinking] a good way of opening things up. Because usually people
have their own idea of something and if you use Design Thinking it's very easy to sort of
crowd source what other people are thinking.
Even though some students criticised the workshops for not presenting fixed tools and
processes of Design Thinking this allowed the participants to create and test their own
assumptions and learn form their peers. Collaboration and communication were
recognised as key assets in any, not only the Design Thinking, processes. One student
described:
391
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
I guess it's a good way [Design Thinking] of involving people early and creating
ownership in the process, especially with the people who are not necessarily designers
themselves. It's an inclusive process so they feel like they are taking part of the process.
[…] For a lot of the Design Thinking techniques the results are open ended… you don't
know where you and other stakeholders are going exactly, but if you involve them in
the process early on you should hopefully get to the end point together.
Open ended, explorative, processes can create an uncomfortable amount of
uncertainty, difficult to manage. The participants described that Design Thinking, whatever
it was, set a common language for all of them to do so. Designers, managers and other
professions, were able to contribute to the process and therefore formed a common, if
fragile, set of terms and definitions across and around the topic of innovation
management.
The importance of exploration and pace
In addition to collaboration and communication all participants of the study were
concerned about the importance of exploration and pace of Design Thinking. Participants
described their struggles working with linear and non-linear approaches with their peers.
One student explained regarding the work with managers: ‘They [non-designers] just like
to get the first idea that sounds good and run with it really quick – I don't really like that.
[…] I think this causes some tension [in the group] because people with design background
really like to explore and prototype’. From an opposite perspective another student who
reflected on his own working pattern observed:
As a designer I think you sometimes strike the idea straight ahead and you're not
always able to let go of it. In Design Thinking, well it depends on how it's done, you're
almost not allowed to do that until you've gone through a few other processes of
research and failure beforehand.
Although all participants acknowledged that designers approach projects distinctively
differently than managers or non-designers, some recognised that both management and
design mind-sets are beneficial for each other and show interesting implications. Other
students, however, encountered this combination of mind-sets as disruptive. One student
stated that managers were especially unwilling to immerse themselves in the research and
ideation process but would rather separate the creative and the management work for
their project. The problem of exploration and pace was further reflected on the level of
project briefs constructed by MA Innovation Management. One student suggested that the
project brief itself might be the problem and wondered whether the brief could be
changed in the Design Thinking process or not:
I mean the brief is really an important part of Design Thinking, right? Reconsidering the
brief […] – I think maybe we should first teach the people that bring us the brief before
we actually start designing.
Exploration and pace, of course, are not only of relevancy for Design Thinking. In the
interviews, however, all participants had a strong affiliation towards the ‘not known’ and
were deeply concerned how different actors involved in the course approach the black
392
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
box. Various interpretations of Design Thinking therefore, led to various appliances of the
process in which the exploration phase, or research, was managed in different accounts.
Beyond the Glory and Insignificance of Design Thinking
The aim of this paper was to explore how students with design backgrounds in a course
at the boundaries of management and design receive and give meaning to Design Thinking.
Some limitations in this study have to be considered. The course of MA Innovation
Management is an unusual environment in which designers and non-designers work
together at the nexus of disciplines. The students involved in the course constantly shift
their interpretations, as agility of critical reflection is a key factor in the discourse of
innovation management. The study therefore only illustrates a snapshot in time. It
captures the concepts and thinking derived from the way Design Thinking was taught in
the course between 2013 and 2015 to students with design background, and while it does
demonstrate through the interviewees’ responses the fluidity of the discourse, it cannot be
drawn upon to speculate about future patterns of Design Thinking as a discipline. Due to
the changing curriculum of the course, different cohorts might reflect the approach in
different ways. Moreover Design Thinking is also only one part of the study of MA
Innovation Management; the students involved in the study, as well as the principal author
who conducted the interviews, are only at the beginning of their professional careers.
Although eight interviews are a good basis for a first exploration, some of the statements
would be better served by a larger foundation of interviews.
The interviews revealed, however, several interlinked emergent themes, which
both support discussions in the literature and show possibilities for further research. First,
for design students involved in the course Design Thinking does not have the same label,
but means different things to different people. Johansson-Sköldberg et al. (2013) showed
that several discourses get involved when Design Thinking is discussed. The missing
connections between managerial Design Thinking and design theory, however, do not
seem to be particularly relevant as students in the course shift their practices more quickly
than Design Thinking literature is published. While students from a design background
claim ownership over Design Thinking as coming primarily from a design perspective of
their own embodied thinking (Lawson et al., 2009), they also share an inclusive perspective
for other actors involved. Although students did not conclude if Design Thinking was part
of their group work they definitely did share their process and perspectives with other
participants showing that perhaps not Design Thinking but designers and their practices
are important in an environment at the boundaries. The various responses of the
interviewees showed that Design Thinking was received as collaborative act between
diverse contributors in which either management or design skills are adopted and
redefined. Design Thinking, therefore was not instrumentalised as an operational process
but constantly redeveloped and reshaped.
Second, encounters with Design Thinking during the course shifted the students’ selfinterpretation between an analytical and a creative mind-set. Although creativity was still
described as one of design’s greatest assets, students began to reposition themselves
between both areas. Formulating, representing, moving, evaluating, and reflecting –
interlinked skills of design discussed by Lawson et al. (2008) therefore were experienced
differently by the participants in the heterogeneous environment of MA Innovation
Management. This is not only a consequence of Design Thinking taught in the course, but
393
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
of the general theoretical orientation that allows the academically trained designer to
reflect on his usage of inductive, deductive, and abductive reasoning. Analytical rigour was
described as a key asset that students are willing to learn and master in order to deliver
beyond their aesthetical qualities (McCullagh, 2010). Furthermore creativity 28 is more than
Design Thinking (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013) – and certainly not only linked to design. The
navigation of individuals between analysis and creativity is additionally not limited to
Design Thinking as Paulus and Nijstad show in their collection of essays about Group
Creativity (2003). Further research on the combination of other discourses, not only design
and management, might hold insightful ideas in how far various perspectives can create
successful frameworks for innovation.
Third, students in the course today have a common language they share whether they
agree what Design Thinking is or not. IDEO and other organisations set the stage by
opening design to various areas and making Design Thinking central to their approach. Yet
designers have practiced co-creation for longer than IDEO’s rise as an innovation
organisation and open innovation has been discussed for more than a decade (McCullagh,
2010). The general acceptance of design in other areas has benefited from this movement.
Design Thinking however, is more than brainstorming, or group work. Lawson (2004, p. 84)
argued that the designers’ Design Thinking is conversational in nature. Design Thinking
sometimes decentred the designers during the course as the main agent of design and
opened the dialogue to others, fostering a collaborative reflection upon the problems and
solutions that emerged. Tony Golsby-Smith stated:
In the analytic paradigm, language is descriptive. It is a tool to put labels on the world.
Its role is passive: it merely enables communication. Little wonder that the analytic
world has now passed the baton of power to mathematics as the underpinning tool of
trade. But the rhetoric road operates from a fundamentally different and emerging
belief that language creates new realities, it does not just describe them. (GolsbySmith, 2007, p. 27)
In light of this, Design Thinking in MA Innovation Management is not only a
compendium of definitions, tools, algorithms and processes but also a new temporary
reality of interlinked materials – a reality shaped by its actors who jointly shape its
meaning. The students involved in the study showed that they were able to re-design
themselves and their practices; therefore becoming something else beyond the promoted
design thinker. By identifying relevant insights from the perspective of an insider observer,
this paper hopes to contribute to their journey, and to that of other students concerned
with Design Thinking. They, as future practitioners, will define their own approaches to
deal with a diverse and complex environment in an intense conversation with other
disciplines – showing that the on-going discussion about the relevance of Design Thinking
and the ownership of the term is only one side of the coin.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank the students involved in the
interviews for their energy and honesty.
Csikszentmihalyi showed using his ‘flow’ method (study of conditions that make life meaningful
and enjoyable) that creativity is a complex set of processes by which people generate new ideas.
28
394
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
References
Ambrose, G. & Harris G. (2010). Design thinking. Basics Design 08. Lausanne: AVA
Academia.
Berger, W. (2011). Glimmer: how design can transform your business, your life, and maybe
even the world. London: Random House.
Boland, R., & Collopy, F. (Eds.). (2004). Managing as designing. Stanford, CA: Stanford
Business Books.
Brassett, J. (2013a). MA Innovation Management Course Handbook 2013/2014. Central
Saint Martins London College of Arts and Design.
Brassett, J. (2013b). Networks: open, closed or complex. Connecting philosophy, design
and innovation, part 3. Proceedings of the 2013 Tsinghua International Design
Management Symposium ‘Design-Driven Business Innovation.’ Retrieved from
http://www.tsinghua-dms.org
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and
inspires innovation. New York, N. Y: Collins Business.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.
doi:10.2307/1511637
Collopy, F. (n.d.). Thinking about ‘Design Thinking.’ Retrieved February 2, 2015, from
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1306636/thinking-about-design-thinking
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013). Creativity: the psychology of discovery and invention (First
Harper Perennial Modern Classics edition). New York: London: Harper Perennial
Modern Classics.
Cooper, R., Junginger S., & Lockwood T. (Eds.). (2011). The Handbook of Design
Management. Oxford: Berg.
Dorst, K. (2006). Design Problems and Design Paradoxes. Design Issues, 22(3), 4–17.
doi:10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.4
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6),
521–532. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design Thinking and How It Will Change Management
Education: An Interview and Discussion. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 5(4), 512–523. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2006.23473212
Golsby-Smith, T. (2007). The second road of thought: how design offers strategy a new
toolkit. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(4), 22–29. doi:10.1108/027566607107690917
Hestad, M., & Brassett J. (2013). ‘Teaching ’design thinking’ in the context of Innovaiton
Management–from process to a dialogue about principles’. DRS Cumulus Oslo 2013:
2033-2047
Hobday, M., Boddington, A., & Grantham, A. (2011). An Innovation Perspective on Design:
Part 1. Design Issues, 27(4), 5–15.
Hobday, M., Boddington, A., & Grantham, A. (2012). An Innovation Perspective on Design:
Part 2. Design Issues, 28(1), 18–29.
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design Thinking: Past,
Present and Possible Futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.
doi:10.1111/caim.12023
395
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. Boca Raton:
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand
Oaks, Calif. ; London: Sage.
Lawson, B. (2004). What designers know. Oxford: Architectural.
Lawson, B., & Dorst K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Lockwood, T. (Ed.). (2009). Design thinking: integrating innovation, customer experience
and brand value. New York, NY: Allworth Press.
Martin, R. L. (2009). The design of business: why design thinking is the next competitive
advantage. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press.
McCullagh, K. (2010). Stepping Up: Design Thinking Has Uncovered Real Opportunities.
Design Management Review, 21(3), 36–39. doi:10.1111/j.1948-7169.2010.00076.x
Neumeier, M. (2009). The designful company: how to build a culture of nonstop innovation:
a whiteboard overview. Berkeley, Calif: New Riders.
Neumeier, M. (2010). ‘The Designful Company’ in Design Thinking: Integrating Innovation,
Customer Experience, and Brand Value, edited Lockwood T. (Ed.). 15-22. New York:
Allworth Press.
Nijstad, B. A., & Paulus, P. B. (Eds.). (2003). Group creativity: innovation through
collaboration. New York ; London: Oxford University Press.
Rowe, P. G. (1987). Design thinking. Cambridge, Mass. London: MIT Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New
York: Basic Books.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Smith, J. A. (Ed.). (2008). Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods
(2nd ed). Los, Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Verganti, R. (2009). Design-driven innovation: changing the rules of competition by
radically innovating what things mean. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.
Vogel, C. M. (2009). Notes on the Evolution of Design Thinking: A Work in Progress. Design
Management Review, 20(2), 16–27. doi:10.1111/j.1948-7169.2009.00004.x
Wastell, D. (2014). Archarios: A Dialogue Between Socrates and a Novice Manager on the
Relevance of Design to Management Practice and Education. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 13(4), 641–652. doi:10.5465/amle.2013.0169
Wragg, E. C. (1982). Conducting and Analysing Interviews. Rediguides : Guides in
Educational Research / Edited by M. R. Youngman 11. Nottingham: Nottingham
University School of Education.
Yee, J., Jefferies E., & Tan L. (2013). Design transitions: inspiring stories, global viewpoints,
how design is changing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: BIS Publishers.
396
Structuring the Irrational: Tactics in Methods
Philip D. PLOWRIGHT
Lawrence Technological University
pplowright@ltu.edu
Abstract: The ability to successfully teach design in a studio environment
requires some clarity over process as well as aligning various action with
expected or possible outcomes. This paper examines the structure and purpose
of introducing self-identified ‘artistic’ or ‘irrational’ tactics into
architectural/urban design design process. The context was a large, multi-faculty
design studio lead by a master practitioner and spanning architectural, interior
and urban design disciplines. This paper used a cognitive framework approach to
design methods in order to examine the tactics that emerged through
instruction. They were analysed for their thinking structure through their
operations, product and use. The research found all irrational tactics to be either
divergent or divergent-convergent based, operating in the same capacity as
more normative design operations that share this structure. The irrationality
came from abandonment of defensibility to disciplinary values and the way the
tactics handled relevancy, delaying or deferring this point of judgement in order
to allow unexpected relationships to emerge.
Keywords: design methods, cognitive processes, irrationality, design tactics
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
Introduction
Teaching design in a studio environment requires some ability to communicate the
various processes, information sources, priorities and particular actions in a clear structure
and persistent set of relationships and effects. This allows students to access to design
thinking processes as their primary operation to achieve their desired outcome rather than
relying on hit-or-miss intuitive habits. Addressing design as deep thinking structure allows
an increase in the ability of structured self-reflection so students can refine their practice.
It also leads to an understanding on the part of the novice designer when one aspect of the
process can be adjusted or replaced by another so to change the possible range of the final
outcome.
Presenting design methods through cognitive approaches works well when handling
disciplinary standard, and historically evolved, techniques (Plowright 2014). These are
fairly well understood as approaches and directly access the various physical tools that a
design discipline uses – normative 2D drawing types, 3D drawing types, 3D model types,
and various evolved digital processes. One has to remember that the general physical
representational tool – the drawing, diagram or model – is fairly inert, only presenting a
range of possibilities of visualizing a type of information rather the actual conceptual
process. It is the not until the physical tool is aligned with certain types of content through
cognitive tactics that it takes on any sort of specificity. For example, the perspective holds
human viewshed information while the section engages spatial volume interaction – both
these are standard tools which allow the designer access to that content but don't dictate
what to do with that information.
When faced with the introduction of non-standard techniques, it can be confusing to
students to understand how these relate to core values and traditional processes. This
paper explores the intentional use of declared ‘artistic’ tactics within historically structured
design frameworks, examining the cognitive structure and expected conclusions in order
to determine why these are defined as artistic and how they relate to more standardized
tools and tactics.
Baseline Tools
In order to discuss non-standard tactics, it is important to quickly outline what are
baseline tools and tactics. This is easiest discussed in regards to a single discipline,
architecture in this case, as tools have evolved to meet certain disciplinary needs. The
priorities in architecture (projection of future formal state of the human environment),
and thus the tools that have developed to address those priorities, are necessarily
divergent to other design disciplines. This is due to the nature of disciplines as discrete and
defined territories of knowledge (Foucault 1971, 56). Other disciplines, even those closely
aligned with, or emergent from, architecture have their own priorities, primary
information sources and standards of relevance (where the outcome matches the effect).
Tools and tactics they use have evolved to be successful in the context of the discipline
(Plowright 2014, 16), and these are being referred to as baseline.
There are two types of baseline tools – cognitive tactics which limit, focus or isolate the
type of information the design process is using and physical tools which are used to
represent the cognitive content. To be slightly reductive, the primary tools of architecture
398
Structuring the Irrational
connect social and environmental information sources to formal responses. Physical tools
are primarily variations of the drawing (plan, section, diagram, map) and the model. There
is an inherent scale assigned to disciplinary content – the reason why the traditional scale
in architecture provides offerings from 3/32’=1'-0’ to 3’=1'-0’ (1:2500 to 1:1). Outside
these scales, the priority of the body diminishes and the territory overlaps with other
disciplines. However, the architectural values – the way the discipline sees and uses
information – do not change. This is why an architect pursuing urban design still thinks
with architectural priorities of the object even through the urban scale is well beyond the
sense of the individual body, but also why other professions working in urban design don't
share the same values and reach different outcomes (Adhya, Plowright & Stevens 2010;
Adhya & Plowright 2012, Adhya & Plowright 2015). Since the primary responsibility of
architecture is to manifest and refine the relationships between objects in space and the
human body, baseline tools bridge the gap between thinking and action.
An example of a baseline cognitive tactic selected by a primary organization source and
engaging the physical tools can be seen through an example of a pattern based framework,
reductive diagrams and content categories. Pattern approaches in architecture use
composition and formal relationship between objects to represent social relationships.
When teaching pattern approaches to students, what is called typology or typomorphology
in architecture and urban design, standard methods require an analysis of existing
conditions that align with the needs for the new design. So studying the formal
organization for a library, theatre, hospital, neighbourhood or city centre would return
experiences as persistent formal patterns of use. These patterns are traditionally social or
environmental in content – circulation, public-private divisions, massing, grain structure,
relationships between program elements, light access, light quality and so on. The
cognitive tactic used is pattern development through reduction, while the physical tool is
the diagram, which represents reduction well (Figure 1). These three aspects have a
traditional relationship to each other – pattern is the way to approach architectural design
(framework); exploring patterns requires reduction of complex environments to formal
arrangements to expose their essences (cognitive tactic); access and transferral of those
essences comes through the physical action of diagramming (physical tool).
Figure 1
The analysis of circulation patterns in school typology and the reduction to an essential
pattern or rule. Source: Courtesy of Nicholas Mighion.
399
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
The key is that traditional and baseline tools are chosen for their relevance to a context
as well as the type of information they uncover and document. As part of the decision
making process, the type of knowledge is predetermined by the tactic and tool, although
the results of that knowledge is unknown until the process has run. This is content that is
prioritized by a discipline as part of its value and application. When looking at design as the
flow of information, there is a consistent relationship between the application of the tool
and the type of informational that is persistently returned.
Art, Design, and Science, Oh My
While baseline tools are well integrated, and often unconsidered in normative practice,
can we address tactics borrowed from another discipline – an art to design transfer in this
case? This opens a huge debate about territories of ownership, personal identity, politics
of cultural status and so on, leading to those unresolved questions such as the difference
between art and science with their relation to design. These definitions are not necessary
as overarching categories when examining practices from the point of cognitive processes
as differences between these concepts don't exist at that scale. However, the term ‘art’ is
often thrown around in the design disciplines, especially my own of architecture, so some
exploration of the relationship of the term is warranted.
The relationship between architecture and the fine arts (painting, poetry, sculpture)
extends as far back as documentation of the priorities of the discipline, although the
blurring an art practice with a design practice was formalized in the 18th century French
schools (Kruft 1994, 141-65). It isn't until Modernism, however, that there becomes a
serious effect on design methods rather than just a general cultural alignment between
the two. This is not, however, in a positive way. Modernist practitioners were clear about
the separation between architecture and art as disciplinary categories but, at the same
time, completely inconsistent about the separation of the role of each (Gropius 1965,
Gropius 1974, Rudolph 2008, Plowright 2015). In addition, design was considered a
subcategory of both art and science as knowledge approaches, as in ‘Good planning [as
design] l conceive to be both a science and an art. As a science, it analyses human
relationships; as an art, it coordinates human activities into a cultural synthesis’ (Gropius
1974, 142). Yet, art was also seen as an aspect of design, for as Gropius wrote, ‘Virtuosity
in drawing and handicrafts is not art. The artistic training must provide food for the
imagination and the creative powers. An intensive 'atmosphere' is the most valuable thing
a student can receive’ (Gropius 1974, 28-9). In the end, the notion of art was used to
obscure the role and definition of methods in architecture. Gropius and Rudolph, as two
generations of self-identified Modernists, expressed a belief that new approaches for
design must be developed while also stressing the need to understand and apply methods.
Yet, both constantly referred to art as the mechanism in design which held non-technical,
social content, while also acknowledged that this process was indescribable and
unstructured – meaning that methods could not to be known (Plowright 2015).
There continues to be debates to whether design is art. Recently Patrik Schumacher,
director of Zaha Hadid Architects, extended a critique of the issue in a social media post,
stressing ‘Architecture is NOT ART although FORM is our specific contribution to the
evolution of world society’ (Schumacher 2014). All this shows is the continued debate and
confusion between the boundaries of the disciplines. Is art a meta-discipline, a subdiscipline or a parallel discipline to design? If there is a persistent meaning and owned
400
Structuring the Irrational
content (i.e. it is a discipline in Foucaultian terms), then the term can not operate in all
areas while still maintaining defensible boundaries. What is most likely occurring is a single
term is standing in for multiple meanings at multiple scales both linguistically and
conceptually – making the concept vague. Instead of challenging the disciplinary
boundaries and traditional ownership of territory, we can look at both art and design as a
practice at the level of events or see them as a series of associated operation and
information biases. As such, it becomes interesting at the cognitive tool level – applied
tactics that operate on information as core values in the design method.
The tactics, as conceptual and physical actions within a larger design method, that are
of interest to this paper are self-identified by those who use them as irrational (Jovanovic
Weiss 2014a). When considering processes and methods at the cognitive level, what is
important is the focus both areas have as part of creativity. James Woodfill, a Kansas City
artist and educator admits this on consideration of his own process, stating ‘I (and many
artists) often use 'design' processes within our art practices. By that I mean that I often use
both divergent and convergent tactics as equivalents to many other formal concerns
within the process of composition. As a public artist I fully engage this artistic practice to
solve design problems. As we get close to defining the line, it gets fuzzy.’ (J. Woodfill,
personal correspondence, July 30, 2014).
The Anatomy Of Design Thinking
The key to understanding the tactical level of design is to consider how information is
handled in the process. Based on the studies in creativity, design, business and psychology
from the 1970s onwards, design has been theorized to operate through two thinking styles
(Jones 1973, Rowe 1987). These are an exploratory, divergent or expansive type of
thinking (creative) combined with a reductive, convergent, evaluative (analytical) type of
thinking. J. Christopher Jones called the styles ‘divergence’ and ‘convergence’ in his early
studies (Jones 1973). Divergent thinking is involved when people use brainstorming,
questioning or other techniques to generate a series of options or information around an
idea. Divergence is non-judgemental and based on generating as many ideas as possible,
even those that seem outlandish or unexpected. Convergent thinking is the opposite –
meant to narrow choices and to make a selection. It generally occurs after divergent
thinking as it uses the cloud of ideas generated by the exploration in order to reduce that
content to a choice. At the end of a convergent process is a decision or selection. Actually
making the selection requires some more structure – a goal, a bias, an association with
other selection elements within the design and so on – but the basic operation of design is
the deployment of these two thinking patterns. As cognitive processes, divergence and
convergence are at the centre of human cognition – these operations are not unique to
design disciplines.
Based on this, one might postulate that there is no such thing as a ‘design method’.
There is, instead, an association of process tools – tactics in the form of applications that
manipulate information – that are aligned with an information source which is filtered
through judgement criteria. While this structure is persistent, each of the particular
deployments is adjustable within a range – making the visible methods seem unique and
complex. A method is simply a collection of cognitive exploratory and analytic tools, set in
a sequence, aligned to a value-set and supporting certain outcomes. All disciplines have a
401
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
naturalized way of thinking about their core content and easier access to some
information than others. This means that will be natural gravitation towards some
processes rather than others by the way they support core values or relevance of the
informational outcomes.
If the act of designing is moving through divergent-convergent couples, when we
introduce declared irrational processes, do they operate in a different way with different
concerns?
The Irrational: Analysis of action
The need to clarify the structure and use irrational approaches occurred when teaching
an advanced graduate architecture studio in which multiple faculty (4), Fellows (8) and a
large student population (71) grouped into eight competitive teams were involved. In this
educational setting, it became important to be able to communicate the use of particular
tactics as well as clearly communicate the design approach. As the context was a
charrette-style studio organized around three (3) intensive three week projects,
transparency of approach was critical due to short turn around times for a high quality of
work. An external master practitioner, Srdjan Jovanovic Weiss, was invited to frame the
studio and clearly required the process to engage what seemed to be random actions
although the studio brief described these only as ‘artistic approaches’ (Jovanovic Weiss
2014a, 2014b, 2014c). The studio required the ‘a matching, or an amalgamation between
three major visions of Western architecture and archaeology of late socialist architecture
(pre-post-socialist) in the East’ (Jovanovic Weiss 2014a) and stressed memory, ideology
and projected aesthetics as focuses. The charrette briefs all required a clear method of
approach to be followed, combining an historical Utopian aspect (Constant's New Babylon,
Yona Friedman's Spatial city and the geometry of Anne Tyng), formal objects, a future state
and particular restrictions of operations in making choices that stressed volume,
organization and surface. In studio instruction and lectures by Jovanovic Weiss, the master
practitioner presented clear and persistent ‘artistic approaches’ that emerged as a set of
tactics by which to pursue the design work. These tactics were not discretely presented as
a ready made package of actions in the brief but only communicated through oral
instruction and diagramming in the studio critique process by the studio lead as his
idiosyncratic approach to architectural design. They became more formalized as clouding,
versioning, erosion, eating, stacking, juxtaposition, swapping, and distortion.
Regardless to the tactics, the underlying framework in which they were deployed was
immediately recognizable as the historic structure of typology (Plowright 2014, 133-58).
This such, the major source for information was based on existing content reduced to an
abstraction which still held the essence of the ideas. The design approach was to then look
for variations and relationship between the essence to proposal a new synthesized whole.
All methods based on the pattern-based framework use this approach and the Jovanovic
Weiss instance, while using unique tools and tactics, is in perfect conceptual alignment
with the use of existing and past socio-spatial environments to map to a new proposal
(Figure 2). In addition to the existence of the pattern-based framework, there is another
theoretical standard in any design process – any activity within the process based on
generating possibilities will be a divergent technique, while any reduction or analysis of
content will be a convergent technique. The following discussion explores the structure of
the non-irrational tactics. All examples are from in situ process documents based on the
402
Structuring the Irrational
same project brief and focused on the same tactics. As such they are unedited, internal
documents by designers using them as tools rather than presentation documents meant
for an external public.
Figure 2
Pattern-based framework structure based on reduction to essences and repetition with
variation. Source: Author (2014, p. 145).
Clouding and versioning were recognizable as being fairly straightforward divergent
processes based in generating possibilities based on an origin point. While they were
presented as part of an alternative approach to design, both are well established as a
technique in architectural design with aspects found in historical processes of the psychogeographical mapping technique of the Situationist dérive to the parametric/digital theory
and techniques presented 2002 AD publication titled ‘Versioning’ including work by ShoP,
Rick Joy, William Massie and Office dA (SHoP 2003). It could be said that clouding and
versioning are also based on fairly normative and commonly used processes. They
represent the act of designers running through variations of possibilities in a context to
produce content for analysis – the basis of all divergent techniques. Unlike divergentconvergent techniques in other disciplines, both design-focused instances used graphic
information rather than text-based exploration. There were differences between the two
structures themselves as well as further divergence from standard divergent techniques
besides the modality. Both clouding and versioning were focused processes while still
being exploratory. There was an intentional inclusion of a bias or latent choice to influence
the type of information selected in the exploration. In both tactics, the boundaries were
set by one of the layers of the brief – for clouding it was motion and travel while for
versioning it was volume and surface.
Clouding was a process of free association, a type of visual brainstorming which applied
no judgement but documented possibilities. Just as the dérive mapped the latent
hierarchy of social space in a city by letting interest and awareness guide selection
(meaning movement wasn't random but based on latent rather than explicit decisionmaking), clouding also had the ability to uncover priorities. In this case, clouding was
applied to a path of travel between two nearby cities (65 miles/104 km apart) in order to
identity possible sites of activation for the proposal. The first phase of clouding was to just
experience the path of travel. Then one application of the tactic linked images by
geolocation (Figure 3) while a second presented groupings based on recurring patterns of
403
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
materiality and infrastructure (Figure 4). This is an example of designer's project framing
affecting the content of the outcome but not the actual tactic. The role of framing
uncovered that the tactic was not strictly a divergent technique – not simply visual
brainstorm – but included some form of analysis and organization. While not a fully
convergent technique distilling a cloud down to a single choice, there was analysis and
selection as part of the arrangements of associating collected data. This suggests that it
was a coupled divergent-convergent (or semi-convergent) process where the end of this
tactic was a range of choices and possibilities leaving decision-making open for further
interpretation. This tactic was only used in the first early moves in the project which
allowed the distillation of a complex situation down to a general thesis statement.
Figure 3
A clouding process randomly capturing images across a territory then linking back to
geolocation. Source: Photograph by Author; expansive mapping by Irsida Bejo [lead],
Stephen Bohlen, Ryan Kronbetter, Amin Toghiani, Alexis Blackwell-Brown, Breck Crandell,
Shuang Wu, Christina Jackson, Nicole Gerou, Christopher Bartholomew.
404
Structuring the Irrational
Figure 4
A clouding process randomly capturing images across a territory then organizing by
material and infrastructural categories. Source: Photograph by Author; cloud exploration
by Charlie O’Geen [lead], Irina Dwyer, Paul Eland, Randi Marsh, Scott Newsted, Devika
Sangurdekar, Laura Schneider, Christopher Theisen, Ashley Brenner, Kanqi Zhu
Versioning was presented as creating a series of variations on a pattern, acting more
like an evolutionary process of fuzzy repeatability (Plowright 2014, 136-7). There was a
difference to baseline applications that are based off the same idea. The standard
parametric (rational) version stresses distortion due to external pressures like the fitness
of an organism to environment creating a strong relationship between context and the
form. The typology-based version requires holding to the essential pattern that is usually
socially (movement) or environmental (light) relevant, as in Figure 1. Versioning as it was
applied in this process as a irrational tactic ignored any sense of context and stressed the
formal over the social (Jovanovic Weiss' volume-organization-surface basis). It selected for
image value and interest rather than responsibility. The instruction for use the tactic also
applied a series of random actions to increase the volume of possible outcomes and to
explore non-linear variations. There was also no analysis performed during the tactic –
making this a purely divergent technique. The basic tactic could also be applied in several
ways but always limited to purely formal moves. One instance isolated the sectional
outline of a fragment of a post-Soviet monument (Figure 5). As a type, the shape was then
maintained rigidly but versions created through multiplicity and assembly. The possible
outcomes where then used to move into the next phase of the design, accepted as simply
a new context. Other variations of the tactic applied a series of formal actions to a starting
state (Figure 6). In this case, the stating state was a three dimensional letter (E,F & H)
randomly chosen. Each sequence of versioning consistently distorted the previous state
with a set of self-generated rules, and then accepted the new form as the start point of the
next action. These included Z-axis projections, single line extrusions, x-y axis mirroring, 9square point extrusions and so on. The rules for each action in the versioning sequence
405
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
were rigidly held to but there was no deeper purpose behind the variations other than
what possibilities where opened.
Figure 5
Versioning using the formal outline of monument a to run permutations of composition.
Source: Anirban Adhya & Alina Chelaidite [Leads], Steven Mcmahon, Eleana Glava, Adam
Wakulchik, Jeremy Adams, Gregory Wood, Jinhan Liu, Christopher Siminski, Jonathan Tull,
Tra Page.
Figure 6
Versioning using sequential actions to explore possible formal resolutions. Source:
Photographs by Author; diagrams by Amy Swift [lead], Nick Cressman, Kirk Stefko,
Christopher Stefani, Jonathan Selleck, Guanyi Wang, Sarah Saleh, Jerry Carter, Jon Krdu,
Abhimanyu Lakhey
Moving way from iterations to single object or image based outcomes, the related
tactics of stacking and juxtaposition explored similar operations. In each process, sensible
or expected relationships were purposefully suspended and each object was treated as
separate factors of volume, organization and skin (surface). In stacking, one element was
simply placed upon another with no attempt to negotiate the relationship between them
or smooth the boundary (Figure 7). The only constraint was the interest or instinct of the
designer making the action and judgement was confined to the possibilities that were
perceived through the result of the action. There was a necessary and useful tension
created through the alignment of the dissimilar as a tactic for exploring unexpected
406
Structuring the Irrational
possibilities – this is the core operation in the divergence in this tactic. While often only a
few outcomes occurred, these were created by an exploratory, non-judgemental actions in
which the conclusion was not predetermined but allowed to emerge through the process.
The stacking did not need to be massed vertical but could also be horizontal or sectional
(Figure 7, right). In these cases, one form is simply interrupted by another without too
much reasoning or purpose. However, once it occurs, the result can be analysed for
potential and opportunities after the tactic is complete. Each orientation of stacking has its
own advantages and affects occupation.
Figure 7
Stacking submerses a fragment or object into a greater whole. Source: Photographs by
Author; model (left) by Irsida Beja et al; drawing (centre) by Aaron Jones, Wesley Taylor
et al; and diagram (right) by Stewart Hicks, Allison Newmeyer et al.
Juxtaposition was very similar to stacking as it also suspended known relationships
through physical proximity. However, where stacking had only small to no tolerance
between the parts and created a sense of a new whole, the instruction for juxtaposition
associated objects in space allowing them to maintain their sense of discreteness (Figure
8). In this tactic, there was no sense of bearing or pressure between the associated
elements, mostly orchestrated by physical distance (Figure 9). In the two dimensional
version of the tactic, there could be some confusion between stacking, juxtaposition and
the more transition medium of collage. However, neither stacking or juxtaposition works
with the intention of creating a predetermined whole out of the parts. This creates a
conceptual difference in purpose. Collage, as a technique or tactic, was not addressed
either in briefs, instruction or critique as the intention was not to create a comprehensive
composition. Both stacking and juxtaposition where operational through relational
content rather than representational through visual content. In addition, both tactics were
exploratory, placing a series of objects and images next to each other in order to gauge the
effect.
407
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
Figure 8
Juxtaposition allows objects to maintain their own identity but challenge possible
relationships. Source: Photographs by Author; model (left) by Aaron Jones, Wesley Taylor
et al; diagram (right) by Maria Simon et al.
Swapping, when examined, was also a purely divergent technique using a tactic of
replacement and axial mirroring to create a series of possible outcomes (Figure 9). It is also
another formal technique that operated on models and images. Swapping, like stacking
and juxtaposition, also imposed in the relationship between variations without any
consideration for nuances or smoothing the relationships – often causing disruptions in the
proposal. This was the embedded non-judgemental exploration, encouraging maximum
random exploration. The tactic operated through the boundaries of taking one element
and replacing it completely by another, or by ‘swapping’ one parameter with another. The
swap would be successful if the parameter has been found to introduce some advantage
or interest. The benefit of the swap came in the disruptions and the opportunities created
by this point of unexpected difference. In the example below, the form created by stacking
(see Figure7) was then operated on through swapping. First, one of the stacked plates was
removed and replaced by another object of equal height but radically different depth
(segment swap). Then the entire object was mirrored vertically (axial swap) to see if this
created any further possibilities. The later versions of this project accepted the possibilities
from the swap and began to map the disruptions as sites of opportunity (Figure 10).
Many of the previous tactics stressed the object or drawing as site and content, being
almost exclusively formal divergent operations that would then be integrated back into
architectural or urban content. Distortion required occupational or functional content as
its driving information. To use the tactic, an activity, program or use was imposed on
another activity, program or use but the interaction could not overlap or superimpose. This
meant that the introduction of an activity in an area which was already filled by a different
activity must distort the composition based on adjacency – pushing and swelling the
expected composition. Instruction on the use of this tactic stressed volumes within
volumes, sectional deformation and maintaining firm boundaries of identity for each of the
activities (Figure 11). This definition of boundary meant that an interior volume would
swell to adjust to new occupations while maintaining the core use relationships.
Exploration of how to distort physical volume, including floor plate or slab disruptions,
penetrations and interruptions, allowed the design unexpected formal results. It is difficult
408
Structuring the Irrational
to see this as a irrational process as it maintained and maximized optimal occupational,
making the tactic hyper-rational rather than irrational (i.e. the position is extreme but
logically defensible).
Figure 9
A sequence of swapping where one plate is exchanged for a different object and then the
object is mirrored vertically. Source: Photographs by Author; models by Irsida Beja et al.
Figure 10 Development of the possibilities created by the swapping tactic moving back into
architectural content. Source: Irsida Beja et al.
409
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
Figure 11 Instruction to students on how to think about distortion as a tactic. Source: Photograph
by Author; notes by Srdjan Jovanovic Weiss.
Figure 12 Visualization of a distorted grid with second program threaded through proposed
structure. Source: Amy Swift et al; Photograph by Author (below).
410
Structuring the Irrational
The use of the distortion tactic in operation required a starting position, usually a host
environment. In the example (Figure 12) the host is a structural grid which represented
one type of occupation. A second activity was introduced, considered as a bounded
volume. This, more often than not, was a conflicting or non-aligned use creating a sense of
discreteness and conceptual separation between the original and the additional volumes.
The host volume would then have to shift and distort to allow both volumes to co-exist.
Figure 13 Erosion tactic where the typological patterns of plaza, market, and street where used to
remove aspects of each other. Source: Anirban Adhya, Alina Chelaidite et al.
The final tactic documented through the studio was erosion or eating. While originally
the terms were used separately by Jovanovic Weiss, it became clear that both erosion and
eating described the same operation. The instruction for use presented the tactic as an
opposite approach to distortion. The intention of distortion was to maintain the identity of
the intersecting volumes while erosion stressed the dissolution of one aspect of the project
into another. Erosion, as such, was a tactic of removal rather than addition or shifting. In
this operation, aspects of the project were randomly removed by their intersection with
other aspects, much like a Boolean operation. This ‘uncovers’ what lies beneath, either in a
literal or metaphoric way and works even when the operators don't share the same
format. The basic technique was divergent, exploring possibilities of a new composition
but on a limited scale, similar to distortion. There was also some convergence present, as
the expectation of a refined outcome was part of the tactic. The variations generated are
quickly assessed for possibility and either accepted or abandoned focusing the tactic on a
single resolution but exploring multiple dimension. Also like distortion, the focused
outcome made erosion more surgical in its opening of possibilities rather than a bruteforce approach. The other similarity between distortion and erosion is that they both use
architectural content to operate – volume, occupation, skin, organization and so on (Figure
13). Many of the brute-force tactics, those that generated large volumes of options, were
411
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
also more architecturally simplistic, stressing only single modality generally formal/object
based.
Discussion & Conclusion
All of the tactics identified as ‘artistic’ fell into known cognitive patterns. Clouding and
versioning were brute-force divergent tactics with some minor convergent-based
clustering operating in the sorting of the content. These both focused on generating a
large volume of options in the classic style of brainstorming but using graphic content and
integrated graphical layout as a mode to undercover possibilities. Stacking, swapping and
juxtaposition were purely divergence-based but focused on smaller volumes of possibilities
discovered through accidental alignments. All five of these tactics had explicit operations
and clear instructions for use that focused the exploration, a factor that made them
discrete and repeatable processes within a larger design method. Erosion and distortion
were structured as a divergent-convergent couple, producing a single outcome but still
engaging the generation of a variety of unexpected arrangements in the divergent phase.
There were no tactics that were only convergent – a fact that was not surprising as
irrational approaches are expected to generate unexpected or unusual content rather than
be an analytic operation.
There were two interesting observations from the documentation, analysis and use of
these tactics. These emerged from an examination of the presented design processes
clearly structured and identified through the instruction when compared against
normative and historically grounding cognitive frameworks found in the architectural
discipline. Using the focus of cognitive process and informational sources as a basis of
evaluation, the first observation was that the ability to put a tactic in a category of
‘rational’ versus a ‘irrational’ came down to the defensibility of the move. The irrational
tactics communicated through the studio created random acts in order to explore
possibilities but they were still structured by the actions if not by the content. By evoking
the tactic, there did not need to be a defence to what occurred. However, there was little
explicit purpose behind them in relation to either the context or the overall architectural
values. One of the tactics which was self-identified as irrational, distortion, was more
correctly classified as hyper-rational. This was due to the alignment of form to purpose
through logical but non-normative relationships – something that didn't happen in the
other tactics. Irrational tactics, as a category, did not have any greater reason behind them
except designer interest.
The second observation was that all the irrational tactics operated through the delay of
relevance. In normative, disciplinary design processes, tools have developed to have a
strong correlation with the type of information that is desired as a return. In this way,
relevance is pre-determined as tools extract information from context in a way that
ensures the result has a relationship to its use. Architectural methods and tools stress
human movement and spatial occupation, environmental quality and scalar relationships.
The tactics explored in this study did none of these things while in operation. It was only
after the completion of the tactic application that the results were analyzed for their
potential and alignment with core architectural values. Ultimately, all of these processes
were about creating alignments that have not existed before and opening possibilities
through suspending both local context and disciplinary values. This attitude is reinforced
412
Structuring the Irrational
by comments from artists reflecting on their practice. While not a general statement of all
art-based processes, there is a strong support for actions that create possibilities through
experimentation. As Woodfill says, this aligns with ‘[...] how I think as an artist - the
deconstruction of a situation (site), the use, reuse and misuse of the debris that results
through stacking, sorting and forming relationally shifting contexts. In the studio I don't
seem to search for a resolution so much as I want to stir up a PACE.’ (J. Woodfill, personal
correspondence, July 30, 2014). The value in deferred relevance can be found in the
concept of emergence. Through the delay, space is opened for relevant discovery that is
not aligned with expected values yet also not aligned with simple intuition. At the
conclusion of the tactic, the results were still evaluated through what possibilities they
opened up, guided by disciplinary values of the refinement of spatial quality.
While the original purpose in the introduction of these tactics was to bring art
processes into a design context, they are best described irrational rather than artistic.
While it is common to use disciplinary container terms (design, art, science) to label a
process, those terms bring many adjacent content and relationship entailments. Art, in
particular, is a territory made of many disciplines, each with their own priorities, histories
and value structures. When looking at the tactic level of method, these disciplines do not
exist. Rather, it is the structure and information focus of the tactic that denotes its
membership in a larger family of aligned tools. In the end, the use of irrational tactics
within an architectural process centres not on the object but on how decisions are made –
in this case, the suspension of logical associations and chains of disciplinary specific values.
Post-tactic, irrational design events are then integrated into disciplinary values by ‘making
it work’ and reattaching relevance. The tactics have been shown to operate through
standard divergent and convergent thinking styles – just as any other design process. The
irrational, artistic approach is still a structure of decision making, not of formal expression.
In an educational environment, the implications suggest that the stress on student
learning should be on the awareness of information alignment, value judgements and
decision making in addition to, or as a structure for, graphic skill development. This moves
away from considering methods as independent and personal due to the shared
framework on which they are built. Design thinking has a persistent structure at the
cognitive process level which often has little visibility in instructional environments. In this
study, it was only through the combination of aligning cognitive science studies with
design instruction that larger patterns of application became apparent. None of the tactics
addressed above were actually presented to the students with the clarity of structure and
use that emerged through post-analysis. This lack of visibility created tension, confusion
and frustration in the student as well as limiting the success or even use of possible
reapplication of the learnt processes.
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank Srdjan Jovanovic Weiss
for his discussions and openness to discuss his process and ideology in
relationship to research in methods. Scott Shall and Anirban Adhya also
continue to provide support..
413
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
References
Adhya, A. & Plowright, P. (2015). Sustainable Architecture as Ecology: Defining shared
systemic priorities of public health and social ethics in places. Ahmed Z. Khan and Karen
Allacker (eds.). Architecture and Sustainability: Critical Perspectives for Integrated
Design. Leuven (Belgium) / Den Haag (Netherlands): ACCO.
Adhya, A. & Plowright, P. (2012). Setting Priorities: Sustainability, Environmental Health,
and Embedded Value Judgments for the Urban Design Process. Proceedings of the
EAAE/ARCC International Conference on Architectural Research, Politecnico di Milano,
Italy. 118-21.
Adhya, A., Plowright, P. & Stevens, J. (2010).’Defining Sustainable Urbanism: towards a
responsive urban design’ Proceedings of the Conference on Sustainability and the Built
Environment. King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. 17-38.
Evans, Robin. (1997). Translations from Drawing to Building. In Translations from Drawing
to Building and Other Essays, 153-193. London: Architectural Association Publications.
Foucault, Michel. (1971/1981)The Order of Discourse (Inaugural Lecture at the College de
France, given 2 December 1970). In Untying the Text, edited by Young, Robert, 52-64.
Boston, Mass.: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. 59.
Gropius, W. (1965). The New Architecture and the Bauhaus. Uniform Title: Neue
Architektur Und Das Bauhaus. English. The M.I.T. Paperback Series,; MIT21. Cambridge,
Mass.: M.I.T. Press.
Gropius, W. (1974). Scope of Total Architecture. New York: Collier Books.
Jones, J. Christopher. (1973) Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures. London: WileyInterscience.
Jovanovic Weiss, S. (2014a). TripBusStop. Studio brief. Southfield: Lawrence Technological
University.
Jovanovic Weiss, S. (2014b). Retreat Cloud. Studio brief. Southfield: Lawrence
Technological University.
Jovanovic Weiss, S. (2014c). Social Garage. Studio brief. Southfield: Lawrence Technological
University.
Kruft, H. (1994). A history of architectural theory: From Vitruvius to the present. London;
New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
Plowright, P. (2015) Methods and the Absence of Modernism. Proceedings of the 2015
ARCC Architectural Research Conference: Future of Architectural Research. Perkins &
Will: Chicago, Illinois. 458-465.
Plowright, P. (2014). Revealing Architectural Design: Methods, Frameworks & Tools. Oxon;
New York: Routledge.
Rowe, P. (1987) Design Thinking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Rudolph, P. (2008). Writings on Architecture. New Haven and London: Yale School of
Architecture.
Schumacher, P. (2014) STOP political correctness in architecture. But also: STOP confusing
architecture and art. Facebook. Retrieved January 16, 2015 from
https://www.facebook.com/patrik.schumacher.10/posts/10202631928712343
SHoP/Sharples Holden Pasquarelli (Eds) (2003) Versioning: Evolutionary Techniques in
Architecture. London: Architectural Design.
414
Structuring the Irrational
Tehrani, N. &Ponce de Leon, M. (2003) Versioning: Connubial Reciprocities of Surface and
Space in SHoP/Sharples Holden Pasquarelli (Eds) Versioning: Evolutionary Techniques in
Architecture. London: Architectural Design.
Winston, A. (2014) 'Architecture is not Art' says Patrik Schumacher in Venice Architecture
Biennale rant. Dezeen. Retrieved 13 Jan, 2015 from
http://www.dezeen.com/2014/03/18/architecture-not-art-patrik-schumacher-venicearchitecturebiennale-rant/
415
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in
Work-Based Design Management Education
Caroline NORMAN
Birmingham City University
caroline.norman@bcu.ac.uk
Abstract: Building on previous research into the value of master’s level workbased learning in design management, this case study evaluates an online
learning pilot designed to enhance the student experience and extend the reach
of work-based learning. While there is a strong case for designers to acquire
business and management skills, design education and early design careers focus
on the practical aspects of design and offer limited opportunities for professional
development. Work-based learning is well suited to the learning styles of
designers. When combined with recent developments in online learning
technology, work-based learning provides universities with an opportunity to
support designers’ professional development. Staff and students offer
contrasting experiences of technology-enhanced learning, webcast classes and
online discussion groups conducted alongside campus-based learning. Insights
into their technological, educational and social learning experiences highlight
the potential of technology-enhanced learning for design management,
particularly within the work-based mode of study. While conflicting views around
the role of online learning are valid, universities need to reconcile institutional
conservatism with their ability to innovate. The opportunity to capitalize on
technology-enhanced learning lies in the student experience, educational value
and the development of well-supported, online learning frameworks.
Keywords: Technology-enhanced learning; work-based learning; design
management; design careers.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Introduction
This paper reports on a technology-enhanced learning (TEL) pilot conducted within a
design management master’s programme that offers work-based learning (WBL) alongside
the more traditional full-time mode of study.
The purpose of the pilot was to test new online learning technologies, their potential to
enhance the student learning experience and extend the geographic reach of WBL for
design managers.
The paper evaluates both staff and student experiences of TEL whilst also considering
the institutional and technological challenges.
Before exploring the opportunity for online learning within higher education the paper
introduces the research context: the demand for design management skills, the nature of
design education and careers, the challenges designers face in acquiring management skills
and the value of WBL in designers’ professional development.
Demand for design management skills
A strong case for the development of designers’ management skills has been made for
some time. Creative & Cultural Skills (2011) identified an urgent need in the creative
industries for management and leadership, marketing, customer service and
communication skills. Prior to this the Design Skills Advisory Panel (2007, p27) highlighted
the shortfall in designers’ business skills, stating that ‘designers need skills to enable them
to better understand business drivers and markets and to work with senior management
across a range of industries and disciplines’. More recently, the European Design
Leadership Board (EDLB) expressed concern over the shortage of design management skills
and the need for design graduates to develop strategic thinking skills for business,
(Thomson & Koskinen, 2012). The EDLB also emphasised the importance of continuous
professional development in helping designers improve their ability to communicate
effectively with senior management and multi-disciplinary teams.
The challenge for those working in design is how these important skills can be acquired.
Design education and careers
The design industry has a high entry threshold, usually a bachelor’s degree, so by the
time a designer enters practice they are likely to have invested three or four years in
higher education. Once in employment designers’ early careers tend to focus on the
development of the practical aspects of design with limited opportunities to acquire
business or management skills.
The creative industries are characterized by micro businesses, freelance and selfemployment, for instance, in the UK most (96%) of design businesses employ fewer than
ten people (Creative & Cultural Skills, 2011). The small scale of these businesses means
that they are unlikely to engage in professional development planning, only investing in
training when needs arise and finances allow. As a result, practicing designers often find
themselves taking on business and management responsibilities for which they are illequipped. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) recognises that the majority of skills
development within creative businesses is likely to be informal, but it also takes the view
that more could be done to overcome the barriers involved in ‘engaging with the external
skills system’, (CBI, 2011, p. 8).
417
CAROLINE NORMAN
So what role can universities play in the development of graduates’ design
management skills?
The value of work-based learning
WBL is an established mode of study that enables practitioners to develop their skills
and embed lifelong learning behaviour whilst remaining in full-time practice.
The growth in WBL has its critics who question its quality and where it sits in relation to
training. What distinguishes university based WBL from training is the assessment of
learning and the award of credit, both of which are subject to academic regulation and
quality assurance processes (Hammersley, Tallantyre & Le Cornu, 2013.).
WBL supports lifelong learning by bringing together the learner, academia and the
workplace, it provides learners and their organisations with accredited programmes of
study. These enable the development of individual learning plans that meet learners’
personal and work related needs (Boud & Solomon, 2001). Most importantly, WBL
facilitates meaningful learning by merging theory and practice, knowledge and experience
(Raelin, 2008).
WBL is well suited to design careers and designers’ experiential learning preferences
where learning involves practice, observation, conceptualisation and experimentation
(Kolb, 1984). Practicing designers who have studied design management via WBL have
reported significant changes in their approach, being more business oriented and better
placed to understand the business context (Norman & Jerrard, 2012).
Whilst WBL has been available for some time, recent advancements in online learning
technology have created the opportunity to enhance the student experience and make
WBL more accessible geographically.
The pilot setting
The online learning pilot was conducted at the Master’s in Design Management at
Birmingham City University and builds on previous research into the postgraduate
education in design management, which linked WBL with the acquisition of strategic
business skills and knowledge (Norman and Jerrard, 2012).
The course has delivered both full-time and WBL for over ten years with both cohorts
studying alongside each other. Attendance in person is expected of all students so WBL
students are required to negotiate a proportion of time away from work, which limits
prospective students’ access to the course.
Prior to the pilot the course had already established online support for learning and
teaching via the University’s virtual learning environment (VLE) called Moodle. The pilot
focused on the introduction of web conferencing software and video chat platforms
suitable for use on computers, tablets and mobile phones.
The research was action based with UK based teaching staff and students located in
Europe, North America and Africa collaborating in the implementation and evaluation of
the pilot. The paper discusses the opportunities and challenges provided by technological
change in higher education before reporting on the staff and students’ experiences of the
pilot.
418
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Online learning and the changing higher education
context
Growth in online learning
By the end of 2014 almost 3 billion people, 40% of the world’s population were
estimated to be using the Internet (International Telecommunications Union, 2014).
Increasing internet access and new technologies are leading to a profound re-thinking of
education at all levels with the scale of change being likened to that experienced in music,
retail and journalism (Weller & Anderson, 2013). The US is witnessing a potential
revolution in schools, with applications being developed that allow students to learn at
their own level and pace, and the role of the classroom teacher moving away from the
delivery of content to one of mentor. Bushnell’s (2014) aim for school education to be as
addictive as video games may not sit comfortably with higher education. A more
appropriate vision of the future might be Wasserman’s (2014) imagined view from 2050:
Today, learning takes place everywhere – out in the community and at cultural
institutions, at fab labs, tech shops, tinker spots, arts studios, innovation hubs, and at
learning incubators and accelerators. It takes place online, on-demands, and just-intime. It is flipped, blended and open. (Wasserman, 2014, p2)
Universities responding to change
The higher education landscape is rapidly changing with universities responding in
different ways to technological opportunities and more recently the global economic
downturn.
According to the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), there has been
an overall drop in postgraduate numbers since 2011, particularly in postgraduate taught
programmes (HEFCE, 2013). A fall in full-time enrolments is indicative of economic
downturn and business schools are adapting their offer to enable students to continue
working as well as studying. Warnes (2012) cites research conducted by the Association of
MBAs which identified this fall in full-time enrolments whilst also identifying growth in part
time and flexible learning enrolments. This reflects HEFCE’s (2013) view that flexible
delivery is becoming increasingly important.
At the same time as dealing with economic change, higher education is seeing a range
of institutional responses to technological change. Hammersley, Tallantyre & Le Cornu
(2013) describe responses ranging from small scale individual course led initiatives to large
scale university re-structuring. Whilst there are contrasting views about the value and
future of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), their rapid growth and popularity have
heightened awareness of online learning and opportunities for higher education.
As Dua (2013, www) points out, universities are well placed to deliver new modes of
study, they have the ‘intellectual property, the brands, and the tradition of public service
needed to integrate these interests sustainably’.
However, the responses from universities and teaching staff to the technological
opportunity have been mixed. For example, after Harvard invested over $30m in MOOCs,
58 professors were so concerned about the cost and consequences of online learning they
chose to express their views publicly (‘Letter from 58,’ 2013). Thomas (2014) reflects on
this paradox, universities’ ability to innovate and their resistance to change:
419
CAROLINE NORMAN
Universities are places that initiate profound change, they bring new knowledge, they
bring new insights, they bring new technologies, and yet they can be intrinsically
incredibly conservative. (Thomas, 2014, www)
This conservatism would seem to be based on concern about cost saving agendas and
the impact on teaching staff, academic quality and the need for technological knowledge
and infrastructure.
As universities face increasing financial pressure, potential resistance is re-inforced by
fears that technology is being used as a means of cost saving. As evidenced by Prof
Duneier, Professor of Sociology at Princeton who withdrew from making MOOCs after
being asked to license his course for use in other US colleges (Parry, 2013).
Where finance and the threat to staff are issues to be addressed at institutional level,
the issues facing teaching staff directly are academic quality and technological challenge.
Academic quality
There is clearly scope for a wide range of perspectives and these are likely to reflect
individual approaches to pedagogy. Newton (2013) advocates online learning, describing
rigorous academic standards and quality controls, with highly engaged students in
employment who are ‘quick to grasp theory and see how it can be put into practice’,
(Newton, 2013, www). However, Professor Michael Sandel, of Harvard expresses concern
about the limitations of online learning in isolation:
I think it would be a terrible mistake for San Jose or any other University to think that
just asking students to watch my lectures can substitute for the learning that goes on in
a classroom with the sense of community of learners, teachers and students together.
(Sandel, 2014, www)
Relevant to these differences in attitudes is a survey of 2,251 professors conducted by
Inside Higher Ed which reports that appreciation of online learning quality grows with
experience. The research found that 47% of professors with experience of teaching online
believe the learning outcomes can be equivalent to campus based classes. Whereas only
17% of professors without online teaching experience believe this. (Lederman & Jaschick,
2013, www)
Social opportunities are an important factor for most learners, UK Government
research into MOOCs highlights the value of social working for networking, group
formation and a feeling of inclusion amongst distance learners (Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills 2013). Coursera, a major provider of online learning, has recognised
social value through the development of bricks and mortar learning hubs (Coughlan, 2014).
This value is reinforced by Professor Mitch Duneier of Princeton who describes the value of
live discussion, enabling both staff and students to learn from each other (Duneier, 2014,
www).
Where there are clear differences in opinion between academics, differences are also
reflected in staff and students’ experiences of online learning. Gosper, Green, McNeil,
Phillips, Preston & Woo (2008) report on a large scale study of the impact of web-based
lecture technologies (WBLT) in Australia, where geography has driven the development of
online learning. The research explored staff and students’ experiences of WBLT and
420
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
identified distinct differences in perceptions, with a much higher proportion of students
(76%) reporting positive experiences than staff (54%).
Online learning would seem to be straightforward from a student perspective with
usefulness and ease of use a priority. Gosper, et al. (2008) identify three criteria that
students apply when deciding about lecture attendance: educational value, convenience
and flexibility, and social opportunities to meet other students and exchange ideas.
Students appreciate the convenience and flexibility of access provided by WBLT as they
don’t always have to attend classes in person. However, the availability of online learning
does not always exclude lecture attendance as students describe contact with their
lecturers and peers as valuable. In the case of lecture recordings intended for remote
students, the technology is reported to blur the boundaries between remote and campus
based students who also make use of WBLT for revision.
Gosper, et al. (2008) report a range of staff approaches to WBLT with some lecturers
making little change to their practice, some adapting their lectures, and some exploiting
the technology by designing lectures to engage both campus based and remote students.
Where some staff view the educational value of WBLT positively others report concerns
that technology has a negative impact on learning. Staff also express concern about
intellectual property, the potential re-use of lectures, reduced student attendance and the
technological challenges.
Technological skills and infrastructure
Negative attitudes to online learning are not only concerned with educational value,
they are also attributed to individuals’ lack of technological knowledge and the absence of
a supporting infrastructure (Sidawi, 2013). University staff lacking in technological knowhow are reluctant to be exposed to students who are seen as sophisticated users of
technology with expectations of ‘up-to-date and relevant information and communication’
(Păunescu, 2013, p. 28).
To ensure the successful adoption of online learning and avoid the disengagement of
academics, universities need to acknowledge that staff and students are not always
technically savvy and provide appropriate resources and support. This in turn poses
challenges for IT departments in terms of staying abreast of technological change and
resourcing support. Universities also need to be prepared to deal with a wide range of
practical issues that impact on the adoption of online learning:
Global time zones, student commitments and the practicality of synchronous delivery
Selection of appropriate online technology
Potential incompatibility between hardware, operating systems and applications
Provision of cameras, microphones, lighting and other hardware
24/7 provision requires 24/7 technical support
Quality assessment of electronic resources.
(Sidawi, 2013) and (Strachan, Liyanage, Casselden, & Penlington, 2011).
Whilst online learning is changing the ways universities operate and students learn, it is
important to recognise different technologies’ strengths and weaknesses and the scale of
infrastructure required to support the adoption of these technologies.
421
CAROLINE NORMAN
Research methodology
The aim of the pilot was to test the potential of new online technology as a means of
enhancing learning quality and extending the geographic reach of WBL for designers.
The research set out to evaluate the staff and student experience, exploring
institutional and technological challenges (Sidawi, 2013), convenience and flexibility,
educational and social value (Gosper, et al 2008).
Where case study based research does not intend findings to be generalised, there is
however scope for indicative findings and valuable insights if a rigorous approach is taken
and unwarranted claims are avoided (Denscombe, 2003). This case study employed the
principles of action based research, a practical, problem-solving approach well suited to
education where ‘research is directed towards greater understanding and improvement of
practice over a period of time’ (Bell, 2003, p.10). Action research enables practitioners to
introduce changes to their practice, evaluate these and implement findings through an
ongoing, cyclical process.
Staff and students collaborated in the evaluation of the online learning, both formally
and informally throughout the pilot, with findings being implemented as appropriate. The
two staff participants were part-time lecturers familiar with the University’s VLE Moodle
but inexperienced in other WBLT. The student participants were eight full-time campus
based students and eight WBL design practitioners located in the UK, Europe, North
America and Africa.
The pilot was conducted over one year and prior to this involved staff in the research of
online learning technology over a period of six months. Online learning was then
introduced at the beginning of the academic year with campus based lectures, seminars
and workshops made accessible online.
Classes were run by teaching staff and sometimes involved guest speakers, with
students attending both in person and online. The timetabling of classes was optimised to
accommodate different time zones and where possible classes were recorded and made
available online after the event. Shortly after the introduction of online classes, online
discussion groups and group tutorials were also introduced for WBL students.
Qualitative and quantitative data were collected throughout the pilot with
triangulation achieved by gathering data through a range of methods and sources. These
included documentation generated by the staff, informal discussions with both staff and
students, and semi-structured interviews with ten of the participating students (five fulltime and five WBL) after six months of online learning. The interviews were recorded and
subsequently transcribed for analysis.
The research was conducted with the informed consent of the staff and students within
the ethical guidelines of research at Birmingham City University. The ethical approach was
designed to ensure the anonymity of individual participants and included the
dissemination of findings.
Research findings
Preparation for online learning
Staff explained that the motivation for the pilot arose from the advent of MOOCs, the
recognition that more accessible technology was becoming available and online learning’s
422
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
potential to provide for a ‘better alignment with employer needs’ (Dua, 2013, www). Prior
to the pilot, one member of staff had experimented with lecture streaming over the
internet but this had been unsuccessful as the IT department was unable to support web
casting. Staff had become frustrated with the University’s slowness to innovate (Thomas,
2014) and were concerned that an opportunity was being missed.
The pilot was a small scale, course led initiative with the specific aim (Hammersley, et
al. 2013) of improving the student experience and extending WBL’s geographic reach. Led
and implemented by the staff, there was no institutional or cost saving agenda so
resistance on these grounds was not evident. However, staff were aware of intellectual
property issues and potential sensitivities around the recording of lectures (Gosper et al
2008).
Staff described the challenge faced in the absence of an online learning framework and
their own lack of specialist IT knowledge and experience. While they had found
considerable literature concerned with online learning, they were unable to identify
sources of guidance on specialist software and learned through online searches, discussion
groups, commercial web sites, participation in training offered by software providers and
experimentation with interested colleagues within the University. Two types of specialist
online software were identified. The first was web-based lecture technology (WBLT) such
as Panopto, designed to live stream, digitally record and store lectures for distribution via
the web as a one-way medium delivering audio, video, presentation material such as
PowerPoint and other visual content captured on camera. The second was web
conferencing or ‘webinar’ software such as GoToTraining, WebEx Training, Adobe Connect
and the open source Big Blue Button, designed to share and record real-time events,
offering two-way communication. Web conferencing software shares voice, video,
presentation material and text based chat, creating virtual classrooms where participants
can raise hands, answer polls, work in breakout groups and take over as presenters.
As two-way communication and the creation of a virtual classroom were seen as
essential to the learning experience the staff chose to focus on web conferencing software.
In deciding on an appropriate software provider cost proved a key factor. The costs
associated with implementing web conferencing software were found to vary and
depended on a number of scale related factors. Over and above cost the staff encountered
an array of IT and user related factors for consideration including:
Responsibility for hosting
Compatibility with university systems
The requirement for IT involvement and resources
Functionality across operating systems, desktop and mobile devices
The number of participants supported
Ease of operation
Quality and availability of training
Reliability
24/7 support
Synchronous and asynchronous learning features
Support for different file types
Ease of editing recordings.
423
CAROLINE NORMAN
During the research into online web conferencing software, the course staff found that
the University’s VLE Moodle could provide web conferencing via Big Blue Button. However,
testing at the time identified functional issues which led to the pilot progressing with
commercial web conferencing software provided by Adobe Connect.
Implementation of online learning
The staff accounts of the pilot and the interviews of the students revealed two very
distinct experiences as highlighted by Gosper, et al (2008). Where staff inexperience led to
a challenging and sometimes stressful introduction to online learning technology, the
students described an overwhelmingly positive experience.
Early staff accounts of the pilot focused on the technological challenges, the stress
caused when classes didn’t go to plan and ‘technology got in the way’. However there was
also a strong appreciation of the educational experience from both staff and students, with
staff becoming increasingly positive in response to student feedback.
Staff explained how research, design and delivery of classes was complicated by the
need to operate the web conferencing software. One member of staff likened the early
experience to trying to fly a plane whilst presenting.
When you stand up in front of a group of students you need to concentrate on the
content, you don't want the technology to get in the way.
Despite careful preparation and rehearsal staff encountered hardware and software
problems, such as the absence of audio, the creation of sound loops or the loss of
presentation files’ appearance and functionality.
Maybe there's been something as simple as a software upgrade, or someone’s changed
the settings on the computer, then you're stuck, the clock is running and you feel
you're letting your students down.
I don't mind crashing and burning occasionally, the students are very supportive, but
you don't want to be doing that too often.
Visiting speakers posed an additional challenge, being unfamiliar with the technology
and variable in their ability to adapt and relate to the online students.
Whilst becoming familiar with the web conferencing software and its many features,
the staff would de-brief after a class and adapt for the next time.
In the early days this often involved being less ambitious in classes and accepting that
our time was limited, so the quality and editing of recordings might not be as good as
we wanted, we reined it back a bit.
Relatively early in the pilot, staff and students found that although Adobe Connect
worked well for classes it was less suited to discussion groups and group tutorials, a
simpler format was needed. Staff and students considered various synchronous and
asynchronous platforms including email, Moodle’s text chat, video chat platforms Skype
and Google Hangout. Google Hangout was chosen as it provided free, real-time, multi user
video and text chat with the only pre-requisite being a Gmail email account. Staff and
students also negotiated the timing of Hangouts to accommodate students’ work
commitments and different time zones.
424
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
As Google Hangout was a relatively new consumer platform, introduced in May 2013,
most of the staff and students had no experience but found it relatively easy to operate.
Google Hangout proved valuable for study group discussions, group tutorials and as a
means of maintaining engagement during periods of independent study.
Educational and social learning value
Staff were impressed by the levels of student engagement and interaction online. They
also described the challenge of designing meaningful learning experiences, particularly
where classes were seminar and workshop based.
Some of our classes worked better than others for the online students. Our starting
point when planning a class was still campus based. Some of the web conferenced
classes took some organization to make them work well and time was an issue.
With experience, staff found they were able to run straightforward classes with
confidence, but they felt that if they had more time they could be more imaginative and
create better classes. Reflecting on the pilot to-date staff believed they had reached a
point where they could develop several different 'models' or formats for classes that
would help make the planning of online and campus based learning easier. Staff also
observed some unexpected and worthwhile outcomes.
We noticed in some cases that online students would be running their own text based
discussion in parallel with the class, these added value as we were able to draw upon
them.
If there was only one of us running the class, keeping track of the online students was
difficult, so we started to ask the students in the room to keep track of the online text
chat, which made our life easier and made the students feel more connected.
As the pilot progressed and staff enjoyed positive feedback from the students they
reported increasing confidence in operating the web conferencing software. Staff
recognized their lack of technological skills required them to be comfortable with a degree
of risk and learning by doing (Kolb, 1984), but they still found some experiences quite
stressful. However, they reported that the collaborative nature of the pilot and students’
involvement had created a positive environment which:
Allowed us to learn together and gave us permission to get it [the technology] wrong
provided the content was still good.
Staff sometimes experienced stress over technological challenges and were concerned
about the impact on the student experience. Students were far less concerned and
surprisingly relaxed, they took the view that technology problems are to be expected and
are part of everyday life. Where staff worried about the quality of sound and video
recordings, students were generally satisfied with recording quality and were more
interested in seeing all their classes recorded and made available online.
All of the WBL students described a positive experience of the online classes. Their
views mirrored Gosper, et al (2008), identifying flexibility, convenience and the scope to
achieve a work, study, life balance as a priority. One student took the view that attendance
online was of equal value to attendance in person.
425
CAROLINE NORMAN
I don’t feel any difference between being there in person or online.
Students also adopted their own flexible approaches to online learning, for-instance if
work commitments meant it was not viable to actively participate in a class they would still
connect online and simply listen in.
When asked about their overall experience of online classes, both full-time campus
based and WBL students were very positive. Campus based students felt they added value
to the course and the shared learning experience with one international student
observing:
Love it! Very good, I could have taken the course this way.
All of the campus based students interviewed felt they benefitted from increased
exposure to the more experienced WBL students and the discussion they generated during
online classes. Campus based students also found the online recordings valuable, despite
the relatively low quality and lack of editing, using them to revisit and gain greater
understanding.
As a means of evaluating how students viewed the relative value of learning from
attendance in person, online and via Moodle, students were asked to weight the three
components of their learning by apportioning 100 per cent across the three. Responses
varied by individuals and their circumstances, overall WBL students attributed 25% of their
learning value to online learning with campus based students attributing 14%. All students
placed high value on attendance in person. Moodle was valued particularly highly by WBL
students. Whilst the student sample was very small, the findings begin to demonstrate the
blurring of boundaries between the full-time campus based and WBL students, as
described by Gosper, et al (2008).
Table 1 Students’ views on relative value: learning in person, online and via Moodle.
Full-time students
Work-based learning students
All students
In person
64%
41%
52.5%
Online
14%
24%
19%
Moodle
22%
35%
28.5%
Students took a flexible approach to their learning. Where internet access was not an
issue for most, two of the more remote WBL students occasionally suffered from
unreliable internet connections, which was a cause of frustration. In these cases they
relied more heavily upon access to recordings of classes and the accompanying narrative
provided on Moodle. In contrast, one WBL student who lived within commuting distance
preferred to attend in person, but also appreciated being linked to the other WBL students
online.
Seeing the others online is amazing, it’s [the online technology] opening up the world.
All the WBL students valued the sense of involvement and connection the online
learning provided. Google Hangouts were seen as a valuable way of staying in touch,
particularly during periods of independent study where they might otherwise feel isolated.
Staff also appreciated the social engagement arising from the introduction of video chat,
426
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
contrasting previous years’ experiences of limited contact with WBL students with the
opportunity for regular connection between staff and students across the globe.
Before we settle down to work we’ll chat about the weather and plans for the weekend
with one student sitting in shirt sleeves whilst another has a snow scape as a backdrop.
Where one-way WBLT might not support the important social opportunities identified
by Sandel (2014), the two-way technologies Adobe Connect and Google Hangout were
consistently described as valuable to the development of the learning community.
As the pilot ended the staff expressed the view that their experiences had exposed
them to the advantages of online learning, that these had far outweighed the
disadvantages and that they intended to continue support the course using the
technology.
Conclusions
If the impact of technological change on higher education is to be similar to that in
music, retail and journalism then it may not be a case of whether universities adopt online
learning but when and how.
Building on previous research that identified the value of WBL for design management,
this pilot set out to test TEL as a means of making professional development more
accessible to those in design practice.
Whilst case study research doesn’t aim to generalize findings, the pilot highlights the
potential of new developments in online learning. More specifically for the professional
development of designers, the pilot draws attention to the opportunity for higher
education to contribute to design practitioners’ lifelong learning.
The pilot was ambitious and at times the introduction of online learning was
overwhelming for staff. This was due to time limitations, lack of technological know-how
and the absence of online learning infrastructure. Despite this, both WBL and full-time,
campus based students reported positive experiences, they valued the flexibility provided
by online learning, the educational and social learning value.
The pilot highlights the investment involved in implementing new approaches to
learning. The pilot also draws attention to the collaborative approach and the supportive
environment this created for the staff, enabling them to explore the technology and take
risks.
For institutions approaching online learning, the creation of a supportive institutional
environment would seem a priority, with provision of infrastructure, expertise, time for
staff learning and a safe environment in which to experiment.
Online learning strategies that focus on educational value may be more likely to
overcome universities’ inherent conservatism. The greater conviction of those already
experienced in TEL would suggest there is value in facilitating early adopters, both staff
and students, and enabling these to become the champions for online learning.
References
Bell, J. (2003). Doing Your Research Project – A guide for first-time researchers in
education and social science (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
427
CAROLINE NORMAN
Boud, D., & Solomon, N. (Eds.). (2001). Work-based Learning – A New Higher Education?
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Bushnell, N. (Interview). (2014, February 24, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: My Teacher
Is an App: The Classroom of the Future. UK: BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03w02sj
CBI. (2011). Skills for the creative industries - Investing in the talents of our people.
Retrieved from http://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2011/09/urgentaction-needed-to-meet-creative-industries-skills-demand-cbi/
Coughlan, S. (2014, May 7, 2014). Online students can’t help being sociable. BBC. Retrieved
May 7, 2014, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26925463
Creative and Cultural Skills, (2011). The Qualifications Blueprint: A Qualifications Strategy
for the Creative and Cultural Industries. Retrieved from http://creativeblueprint.co.uk/library/item/the-qualifications-blueprint-a-qualifications-strategy-forthe-creative-and
Duneier, M. (Interview). (2014, March 3, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: The University of
the Future. UK: BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03wpf59
Denscombe, M. (2003). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social research projects
(2nd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. (2013). Maturing of the MOOC. Retrieved
December 12, 2013 from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/2401
93/13-1173-maturing-of-the-mooc.pdf
Design Skills Advisory Panel. (2007). High-level skills for higher value. Retrieved February
26, 2014, from http://www.innovationunit.org/sites/default/files/Highlevel%20skills%20for%20higher%20value.pdf
Dua, A. (2013). College for All. McKinsey. Retrieved March 27, 2014, from
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/social_sector/college_for_all
Gosper, M., Green, D., McNeil, M., Phillips, R., Preston, G., & Woo, K. (2008). The impact of
web-based lecture technologies on current and future practices in learning and
teaching. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved May 13, 2014 from
https://www.mq.edu.au/ltc/altc/wblt/research/report.html
Hammersley, A., Tallantyre, F., & Le Cornu, A. (2013). Flexible Learning: a practical guide
for academic staff. York: The higher Education Academy. Retrieved from
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/flexible-learning/fl_guides/staff_guide
HEFCE. (2013). Postgraduate education in England and Northern Ireland: Overview report
2013. Retrieved from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2013/201314/
International Telecommunications Union. (2014). The World in 2014: ICT Facts and Figures.
Retrieved December 12, 2014 from
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lederman, D., & Jaschick, S. (2013, August 27). Survey of Faculty Attitudes on Technology.
Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved March 16, 2014 from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/survey-faculty-attitudestechnology#sthash.kF7Wnlca.dpbs
428
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Letter from 58 Professors to Smith Addressing edX. (2013, May 23). Retrieved December
14, 2013 from http://www.thecrimson.com/flash-graphic/2013/5/23/edx-faculty-lettersmith/
Newton, D. (2013, May 9). Online students and teachers are no different from the rest of
academia. The Guardian. Retrieved December 11, 2013 from
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/may/08/onlineteachers-learning-higher-education
Norman, C., & Jerrard, R.N. (2012). Design management education and work-based
learning. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 11/2, 155-166. doi:
10.1386/adch.11.2.155_1
Parry, M. (2013, September 3). A Star MOOC Professor Defects—at Least for Now. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved April 9, 2014 from
https://chronicle.com/article/A-MOOC-Star-Defects-at-Least/141331/
Păunescu, M. (2013). Students’ Attitudes towards technology-Enabled Learning: A Change
in Learning Patterns? European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16 /1, 27-35.
Raelin, J. A. (2008). Work-based Learning: bridging knowledge and action in the workplace.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Sandel, M. (Interview). (2014, March 3, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: The University of the
Future. UK: BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03wpf59
Strachan, R., Liyanage, L., Casselden, B., & Penlington, R. (2011). Effectiveness of
technology to support work based learning: the stakeholders’ perspective. Association
for Learning Technology. Retrieved from
http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2171/7/RLT_A_007800_O.html
Sidawi, B. (2013). The Tutors’ Views on the Utilization of E-Learning System in Architectural
Education. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16 /2, 1-12.
Thomas, E. (Interview). (2014, February 24, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: My Teacher
Is an App: The Classroom of the Future. BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03w02sj
Thomson, M., and Koskinen, T. (2012). Design for Growth & Prosperity. Helsinki, Finland:
The European Design Leadership Board.
Warnes, S. (2012, July 3). Flexible MBA programmes are on the up in the UK. The
Independent. Retrieved December 12, 2013 from
http://www.independent.co.uk/student/postgraduate/mbas-guide/flexible-mbaprogrammes-are-on-the-up-in-the-uk-7906290.html
Wasserman, A. (2014, www). Learn! 2050 – How we transformed America’s learning
system. Retrieved April 16, 2014 from
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7dCg1fKL5EaOFg2VkxKWEJvUjg/edit?usp=sharing&pl
i=1
Weller, M. and Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in higher education. European
Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16/1, 53-66.
429
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty
Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
Monica WALCH TRACEY* and Alisa HUTCHINSON
Wayne State University
*monicatracey@wayne.edu,
Abstract: The design space is defined by uncertainty, and designers must be
prepared to manage the instability and unpredictability inherent in their work in
order to achieve meaningful design outcomes. As such, design education
programs should provide students with opportunities to explore their own
perspectives on and experiences with uncertainty. As part of a larger research
agenda exploring professional identity development in design education, this
analysis addresses changing perspectives on uncertainty in graduate design
students across the course of one semester. Students engaged in reflective
writing on uncertainty at two points in the semester and responses were coded
for uncertainty orientation. Results indicate that 58% of students shifted their
uncertainty orientation at the second reflection point, with momentum stronger
toward positive and weaker toward negative at the second prompt. Implications
for research on uncertainty in design, design education, and professional identity
development are discussed.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
Introduction
Design is characterized by the uncertainty inherent in the ill-structured and often
mutable problems that it seeks to solve. When designers are positioned as the drivers and
arbiters of the design space, their own attitudes and strategies for managing this
uncertainty may likely hold the power to influence design actions and outcomes in a
meaningful way – for better or for worse. Research findings from psychology indicate that
information processing, decision-making, and creativity may all be influenced by the way
individuals respond to situational uncertainty (Dugas et al, 2005; Luhmann, Ishida, &
Hajcak, 2011; Rosen, Ivanova, and Knäuper, 2014). Although these results were typically
generated in experimental contexts, they suggest important implications for professional
design work that draws on cognitive and creative skills for idea generation and problem
solving. Yet, despite their potential to shape the design process, relatively little is known
about how designers’ attitudes and behaviors related to uncertainty develop or unfold in
professional contexts.
One avenue for exploring attitudes toward uncertainty in design is to consider them
within a framework of professional identity, or one’s sense of self-as-designer. Professional
identity can be generally understood as dynamic yet connected narratives about
professional beliefs, experiences, values, abilities, and responsibilities that are socially
constructed and ever-evolving in response to new experiences (Luehmann, 2007). Design
education programs are a logical venue to introduce emerging designers to concepts and
experiences that will be foundational for building and maintaining their identity as
designers. However, our understanding of effective methods for integrating identity
development work into design curricula is currently constrained by a lack of research.
While professional identity and its development have been studied and incorporated into
the curriculum of many other professional fields (Luehmann 2007), the design and design
education literatures have not adequately considered these issues to date.
This paper seeks to address this need by exploring how students consider and then
reconsider their experiences and attitudes about uncertainty in everyday and professional
contexts within the setting of a graduate course in instructional design. This line of inquiry
is part of a larger research project investigating identity development in design education;
the results to date have supported the use of reflective writing as an instructional strategy
for identity work while also providing important formative feedback that has been used to
revise the class content and activities (Tracey & Hutchinson, in review; Tracey, Hutchinson,
& Grzebyk, 2014). Our prior work has focused on the aspects of reflection that students
incorporate in their work; however, for this particular project, we were interested in
understanding how narratives taken from student reflection journals may reveal patterns
of attitude change or consolidation when addressing uncertainty topics at different points
in the semester.
A brief overview of the psychology of uncertainty
Within the psychological research literature (as well as common parlance), uncertainty
is defined as of a state of instability and unpredictability due to a lack of knowledge, either
about events that might occur or have already occurred (Bar-Anan, Wilson, & Gilbert,
2009; Rosen, Ivanova, & Knäuper, 2014). Certainty is akin to assurance and security, while
431
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
uncertainty arouses doubt and instability; it is typically characterized as a psychologicallyaversive state that people actively seek to minimize or eradicate (Bar-Anan, Wilson, &
Gilbert, 2009). Particularly within the design thinking tradition, uncertainty is also seen as a
defining aspect of the design space, inseparable from the knotty and untidy human
problems that design seeks to solve (Cross, 2011). Thus, being a designer means operating
in uncertainty, a space that is inherently uncomfortable in a psychological sense.
While uncertainty may be experienced as afflictive, research from social psychology
indicates that some people are motivated to engage with uncertain situations while others
seek to avoid them; this has been termed uncertainty orientation or UO (Sorrentino &
Short, 1986; Sorrentino, Smithson, Hodson, Roney, & Walker, 2003). Although the
uncertain state is aversive in either case, those who actively engage with it do so because
they find the new knowledge gained to be suitably rewarding, while those who are
motivated to avoid uncertainty find a greater benefit in preserving their existing
knowledge. There are other approaches to understanding individual relationships to
uncertainty (and ambiguity, a related concept that is often included as a component of
uncertainty) but they are generally concerned with how tolerance of uncertainty may
contribute to psychopathology with the cognitive or motivational aspects of the construct
seen as secondary or not considered (Rosen, Ivanova, & Knäuper, 2014).
The difference between tolerance of and orientation toward uncertainty is subtle but
important. Tolerance refers to the ability to endure uncertainty with minimal impact on
cognition, mood, or behavior while simultaneously seeking to move into certainty (Rosen,
Ivanova, & Knäuper, 2014). Uncertainty orientation as it is defined by Sorrentino and
Short (1986) is more concerned with willingness to either engage with or avoid uncertain
situations and seems to provide the best fit for understanding why some people actively
seek ‘the frustration and the joy that designers get from their activity’ (Cross, 2011, p. 21).
Within this perspective, the rewards of solving the wicked problems (Buchanan, 1992) of
design are sufficiently sweet to prompt the individual designer to engage with the oftenharsh realities of uncertainty. This is not to dismiss the importance of understanding of
how uncertainty tolerance comes into play once the designer has engaged with the
uncertain design space, but rather to point out how uncertainty orientation may explain
why some people are drawn to design in the first place.
At this juncture, little is known about the relationship between uncertainty attitudes
and/or orientation and design outcomes, although differences have been found in
information seeking, information processing, decision-making, and achievement
motivation between those who tolerate or seek uncertainty and those who do not (Rosen,
Ivanova, and Knäuper, 2014; Sorrentino et al, 2003). Cognitive differences include a
tendency toward black-and-white interpretations of information as well as a bias for
recalling uncertainty-marked information, impulsive decision-making, and avoidance of
novel situations (Dugas et al, 2005; Luhmann, Ishida, & Hajcak, 2011; Rosen, Ivanova, and
Knäuper, 2014). Some research has specifically investigated the relationship between
creativity and uncertainty tolerance, with findings indicating that greater tolerance for
uncertainty is associated with higher levels of creativity (Kornilova & Kornilov, 2010; Erez &
Nouri, 2010). Situational uncertainty in and of itself may have a stifling influence the
evaluation of creative ideas, regardless of the uncertainty tolerance of the individuals
involved, leading to the rejection of creative ideas even in situations specifically designed
to elicit them (Mueller, Melwani, & Goncalo, 2011). As a caveat, however, many of these
432
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
findings arise from experimental research and it is not clear to what extent these results
can be generalized to professional design activities and designers.
Professional identity as a frame for uncertainty
orientation
Although limited, these research findings suggest that personal attitudes toward
uncertainty may hold the potential to exert a powerful influence on actions and outcomes
in the design space. This underscores the importance of understanding how individual
attributes interact with design responsibilities, an understanding that is the core of one’s
professional identity. The concept of professional identity provides a useful frame for
addressing this topic as it incorporates the individual’s evolving understanding of beliefs,
values, experiences, abilities, and responsibilities as they relate to their professional
practice (Luehmann, 2007; Tracey & Hutchinson, 2013; Tracey, Hutchinson, & Gryzbek,
2014). Identity might also be thought of as a schema that integrates a definition of what it
means to be a designer with the expression of individual traits within that characterization
to construct a durable yet evolving sense of self-as-designer. It is important to recognize
that identity is simultaneously enduring and malleable; core components are typically slow
to develop and relatively stable, but are subject to ongoing re-evaluation and reinterpretation in response to new experiences (Luehmann, 2007). Such reinterpretations
may represent refinement or confirmation of existing beliefs or values, or they may
represent a significant transformation of an existing identity component, depending on the
nature of the triggering experience. Following this, designers would benefit not only from
understanding the role of uncertainty in design, but also from exploring and continually
refining an awareness of their own attitudes and orientation toward uncertainty in the
design space.
As mentioned previously, professional identity development is an established
curriculum component in fields such as education, medicine, psychology, and other human
services, and reflective writing is commonly used as a pedagogical tool to support student
identity work including belief exploration and change via narration of personal experiences
with professional contexts and duties (Luehmann, 2007; Tillema, 2000; Tracey &
Hutchinson, 2013; Tracey & Hutchinson, in review; Tracey, Hutchinson, and Grzebyk,
2014). Reflection-on-action as outlined by Schön (1983) is widely accepted as a framework
for examining experiences and beliefs within the professional sphere although reflectionfor-action, a related concept from Schön’s work, may be equally useful for design students
who are concerned with preparing for future professional activities.
Methodology
Instructional context
Data used in this study were drawn from four consecutive semesters of an introductory
instructional design (ID) class held by a large public university in the Great Lakes region of
the United States. All graduate students (master’s and doctoral) in ID were required to
take this course during their first semester; it was also open to graduate students from
other departments as part of a certificate program in online teaching. Because the
433
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
master’s program in ID was offered entirely online, this course was also held online. In
order to model experimental approaches to course design, Google Docs was used to
construct as ad-hoc class site rather than using the institutional learning management
system (Blackboard).
ID has traditionally taken a process- or model-driven approach to design, but there has
been a shift by some in the field in recent years to incorporate design-thinking approaches
in ID education (Tracey & Boling, 2013). The course involved in this study uses a designthinking framework, spending the first seven weeks on general design principles before
integrating content specific to instructional design during the remainder of the semester.
Class activities were developed from a general constructivist perspective and included case
studies, peer groups, reflective writing, and a term project that synthesized several design
components in response to a loosely structured ID problem. In keeping with the designthinking perspective (which privileges the role of the designer in the design space), there
was a significant emphasis on exploring personal experiences and beliefs relating to design
and instruction via written reflection. This represented a marked change in the course,
which had previously emphasized the importance of learning classic ID models with little to
no attention given to individual involvement in the design process.
Participants
A total of 69 graduate students consented to participate in this study. They varied in
terms of age and ethnic background (including several international students), but more
importantly, they brought a wide range of backgrounds and experiences to the course.
Some were not far removed from their undergraduate degree, while others had significant
professional experience in ID or other fields and were interested in advancing or changing
their careers. As mentioned previously, some students were pursuing a certificate in online
teaching and came from departments across the campus, including audiology, library and
information sciences, educational psychology, and bilingual education.
An important difference between our subject population and students in other design
fields is that these subjects did not necessarily enter their graduate program either
identifying themselves as designers or aspiring to acquire that identity. Many held a
traditional conception of ID as a field that is driven by process models and came to the
class with a preconceived notion that the course would be grounded in these models.
Students from outside the field typically had very little knowledge or awareness of ID or
design and identified with their own professional discipline rather than that of a designer
(either general or instructional), at least upon entry to the course.
Data sources and collection
Data was drawn from student reflection journals that were kept in response to
assigned prompts at regular intervals, with a total of 27 prompts over the fifteen weeks of
the semester. Journals were housed online in Google docs, with permission granted to the
instructor to provide comments and assessment. During the first and fifth week of the
course, students were asked to engage in reflective writing in response to prompts
regarding uncertainty, and their responses were used as the data for this study. The texts
of the prompts follow:
Prompt 1.3 (first week, third prompt of the week): ‘Describe a time when you felt
totally uncertain. Try to remember how that felt and the greatest challenges you faced
434
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
because of the uncertainty. What did you do to handle it? Knowing that part of being a
designer is always dealing with uncertainty, how do you feel about being a designer?’
Prompt 5.5 (fifth week, fifth prompt of the week): ‘What are your thoughts about the
last slide in the PPT presentation this week? Please share where you are today.’ (The slide
referred to in the prompt emphasized the role of uncertainty in design).
The pedagogical rationale for sequencing the prompts in this manner was to allow
students to begin exploring uncertainty from a general (and presumably less threatening)
vantage point, and then tackle the more challenging issue of locating themselves in
relation to design-based uncertainty. In the interim weeks, students were exposed to
concepts and issues intended to deepen their understanding of design-thinking and the
role of the designer. Through exposure to this material, it was presumed that student
reactions to and understanding of uncertainty would become more complicated, which
was an intentional instructional strategy design to support development and growth. In
terms of the wording of the prompts, there was also an intentional movement from a very
specific and rich prompt to one that was more general, allowing freedom for a wider range
of responses but also challenging students to take ownership of the form and content of
their writing. The prompts in this case served as instructional scaffolding that supported
students who were engaging with unfamiliar material, and were gradually faded in order
to continually challenge them as they gained more experience with the content and
confidence in their writing.
After final grades were submitted at the close of each semester, students were asked
to give their consent to participate in the study; the instructor then removed any
identifying information from the journals of participating students and sent them to the
research team. An additional review was performed by the second author to verify that
journals were anonymous, then relevant journal responses were organized into separate
files by prompt and semester. Response sets were forwarded to the assigned data coders,
drawn from our coding team of eight instructional technology graduate students and one
educational psychology graduate student, all of whom made coding decisions
independently. As mentioned, a total of 69 students gave consent to include their journals
in the study. Of this group, 67 subjects provided a response to Prompt 1.3, 68 provided a
response to Prompt 5.5, and a total of 66 students responded to both prompts.
Data Assessment
All responses (N=135) were coded for orientation toward uncertainty using the
following categories: positive (overall positive attitude signaling an embracing of
uncertainty); negative (overall negative attitude signaling avoidance of uncertainty); mixed
(attitude incorporating positive and negative aspects); and not indicated (response either
did not discuss the subject’s personal uncertainty orientation or was unclear in some other
way). Our approach to this coding scheme was based on the UO orientation described
previously, although the binary approach of that construct was not adequate for our data,
as many subjects had a mixed perspective on uncertainty or did not indicate a clear
personal orientation.
Two data coders initially categorized each response using the uncertainty orientation
criteria. If these two coders agreed, the categorization decision was accepted as final. In
the event that they disagreed, a third reviewer independently coded the response and if
that decision matched one from the first coding round, the coding for that response was
435
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
considered final. When all three coders disagreed, the principal researchers collaborated
to deliberate and adjudicate the coding decision.
Results
Table 1 displays the counts for each uncertainty orientation category by prompt and
semester. Figure 1 displays the results as percentages, allowing for an easier comparison
across semesters. An increase in positive orientation from 44% to 54% can be seen from
Prompt 1.3 to Prompt 5.5. There was no meaningful difference in mixed orientation (24%
to 25%); while negative orientation decreased from 9% to 3% and not indicated/unclear
orientation decreased from 24% to 18% (see Figure 1).
Uncertainty
Orientation
N
Semester
Prompt 1.3
17 20 11
S1 S2 S3
20
S4
68
All
Prompt 5.5
17 21 10
S1 S2 S3
19
S4
67
All
135
TOTAL
P
N
M
NI/U
3
4
5
5
12
1
4
3
30
6
16
16
8
0
4
5
11
0
5
3
36
2
17
12
66
8
33
28
11
0
5
5
4
1
3
3
12
2
4
3
5
0
4
1
Table 1: Uncertainty orientation by prompt and semester. Adapted from Tracey & Hutchinson (in
revision). Uncertainty, reflection, and designer identity development.
In total, 38 subjects, or 58%, shifted their uncertainty orientation in response to
Prompt 5.5 when compared to their response to Prompt 1.3. The changes between
prompts can be better understood by considering patterns of movement from one
category to another, illustrated by Figure 2.
Of subjects who originally displayed a positive orientation for the first prompt, 36%
shifted to another orientation category in their second response. For mixed orientation,
this rate was 71%, while negative orientation was at 100% (meaning all subjects who were
initially negative toward uncertainty shifted their perspective) and not indicated was at
67%. Looking at this from the opposite direction, of the subjects who were in the positive
category for Prompt 5.5, 49% moved there from a different category. For mixed
orientation at Prompt 5.5, 71% of responses were originally in another category, while this
rate for negative orientation was 100% and not indicated was 58%.
A final consideration is an analysis of which categories the subjects who shifted
perspective most commonly vacated and entered. First, 26% of the 38 subjects who shifted
moved out of positive, 32% moved out of mixed, 16% moved out of negative, and 26%
moved out of not indicated. Conversely, 45% of the 38 total shifters moved into positive,
32% moved into mixed, 5% moved into negative, and 18% moved into not indicated.
436
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Prompt 1.3
Prompt 5.5
NI/U
24%
18%
N
9%
3%
M
24%
25%
P
44%
54%
Figure 1: Uncertainty orientation by prompt (displayed as percentages). From Tracey & Hutchinson (in
revision). Uncertainty, reflection, and designer identity development.
Figure 2: Movement in uncertainty orientation between prompts
437
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
Discussion
As mentioned previously, professional identity is recursive in nature, emerging from
narrative interpretations of experiences as filtered through existing precedents and beliefs.
While central features of identity tend to remain stable over time, as individuals build
initial schemas of their sense of professional self, flux and revision is to be expected. The
goal of this study was to examine patterns of change in subjective perceptions in a group
of student designers as they moved from considering uncertainty as a general topic to
reconsidering it as a component of their professional life. The patterns that emerge from
this particular pool of subjects is not intended to be representative of the experiences of
all design students, but rather illustrative of possible developmental trajectories that may
inform future research on identity development and design education.
First, it is important to note that well over half of all subjects shifted their position on
uncertainty; this may be attributable to the change in focus of the prompts (from a general
to a professional context) as well as exposure to content related to design and uncertainty
in the learning experience that unfolded between prompts. It is also worth noting that the
second prompt fell during the fifth week of the class, and students were anticipating the
start of an ID project during the upcoming weeks that would represent a significant portion
of their final grade (up to 60% in some semesters) and thus were staring design
uncertainty in the face. However, even with this atmosphere of uncertainty and the
complications that come from going deeper into the content, the strongest momentum
was in the direction of the positive category, as almost half of those who switched
positions moved into positive. Likewise, the positive category had the lowest rate of
departure, losing only 36% of its original subjects (the lowest outbound percentage of the
four categories). While these findings may seem to indicate that subjects were more
willing to embrace uncertainty at the time of Prompt 5.5, it is important to remember that
the results speak only to subjects’ self-perceptions, not the objective reality of their
actions. It is possible that responses were influenced by the desire to adopt attitudes that
were presented as characteristic of the profession rather than representing a genuine
change in mindset regarding uncertainty. Part of professional identity development
involves trying out new schemas about the self-as-designer in order to assess whether they
fit the individual (both in terms of their own qualities, perceptions of self, and feedback
from others in their community of practice). Thus, it is not surprising to see the most
movement in student responses toward a positive orientation for uncertainty, as the
course content emphasized the need for designers to be able to live with and in
uncertainty in their professional life.
In line with this finding, the negative category generated the least inbound momentum
within this group; its six original members all shifted to either the mixed category (four
subjects) or the positive category (two subjects), while only two students moved into the
negative category at the second prompt (both shifting from a previously mixed
orientation). Not surprisingly, one of the two indicated doubts about committing to a
design-focused profession while the other remained committed to design but still very
resistant to choosing a profession that rests in uncertainty (and even acknowledged that
they may not find as much joy in their work as others did). This suggests that uncertainty
orientation may be a useful filter for students whose temperament is not well suited to
design. It should be noted that resistance to uncertainty does not necessarily preclude a
438
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
career in design, but a designer who feels this way may need to develop different coping
strategies to successfully negotiate the design space than one who embraces it. This
speaks to the importance of providing students with the opportunity to reflect on their
personal qualities as they relate to design in order to give them an opportunity to provide
them with an adequate foundation to meet professional challenges. Likewise, given the
amount of belief change exhibited by these subjects, it may be beneficial to give students
multiple opportunities to reconsider uncertainty in light of new experiences, as students
who initially exhibit enthusiasm may find that uncertainty becomes tedious while others
who initially resisted uncertainty may become more comfortable with it over time, if they
are otherwise highly motivated and equipped to become a designer.
The mixed category generated the second-highest level of outbound momentum (with
71% shifting from an initial mixed orientation to another category, predominantly positive)
as well as the second-highest level of inbound change (with 32% of shifters moving into
mixed, and 71% of final mixed responses moving there from another category). Only five
subjects retained a mixed orientation for both prompts; since this category represents an
orientation that allows for both positive and negative aspects of uncertainty to be
acknowledged and externalized, it is possible that it serves primarily as a way station
(rather than a stable position) when this aspect of identity is in flux.
Similar to the mixed category, the not indicated category may act as a transitional state
as two-thirds of its original inhabitants shifted into another category for Prompt 5.5, and
58% of its final members moved into this category from another. Not indicating
orientation can be considered an act of avoidance and suggests that subjects in this
category were not prepared to externalize their stance toward uncertainty. There are
several possible motivations for this: perhaps the topic was too novel or too threatening,
or perhaps internal turbulence surrounding the development (or rejection) of new schema
was an obstacle to articulating a position. Again, it is important to note that this is a valid
position from an identity-development standpoint, as it is to be expected that the
narratives generated in this process are dynamic in nature and thus may be difficult to
articulate while in a state of incubation or transition.
The value that comes from examining these reflection patterns is that they illustrate
some (but by no means all) paths that professional identity development can take, any of
which may be valid in a given situation for a given individual. Some students may need to
step away from taking a position while taking in a new experience that challenges their
current understanding of self-as-designer, while others may have a more durable and
stable orientation that weathers a variety of external conditions. As long as students are
genuinely engaging with identity issues, the outcome of that engagement at any one point
in time may not be overly important since identity development is a dynamic process with
a natural ebb and flow.
From the perspective of design education, the goal is not to push students toward a
professional identity that mimics some Platonic ideal of a ‘Designer’ but rather to afford
them the space and the stimuli necessary to understand and master their own traits,
attitudes, habits, and history as they relate to the design space in order to understand who
they are – and who they might become – as designers. It is important to recognize and
reinforce genuine engagement with the material, even (or perhaps especially) when that
engagement reflects ambivalence or malleability. This may be especially important for
identity development work, which naturally involves reinterpretation and revision of
439
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
existing narratives as new ideas and experiences are layered on top of them. Students
may need multiple opportunities to revisit core issues such as uncertainty in order to
develop and maintain a stable sense of how they feel about it as well as an ongoing
awareness of their own development.
Empirical research into uncertainty in design and professional identity development for
designers are in its infancy, but we believe this study is makes an important contribution to
existing discourse on these topics. First, it is important to point out that there are many
possible research paths for exploring uncertainty in relation to design and designers. As an
example, the authors have recently initiated a study intended to develop a preliminary
typology of uncertainty in design; in other words, we are seeking to understand just what
it is that designers are uncertain about. The work of Lane & Maxfield (2005) is providing a
tentative framework for categorizing uncertainty in terms of truth (our confidence level in
the truth of a belief or idea); semantics (our confidence level that meanings are shared by
relevant parties), and ontology (what we do not know about relevant parties, their actions,
and the changes that result from those actions) based on large set of design meeting
transcripts. We believe this will be a fruitful starting point for developing a more nuanced
understanding of uncertainty in design, but there is ample room for other models and
ways of exploring this construct. As one example, Barr, Onarheim, & Christensen (2010)
considered epistemological uncertainty, or subjects’ awareness of what it is they don’t
know, in relation to design requirements and solution strategies and found that
perceptions of uncertainty mediated designer movement between depth-first and
breadth-first approaches to strategy selection.
A foundational typology of uncertainty in the design space will allow for meaningful
research into how individual designers respond to and interact with different types of
uncertainty. While we know from the psychological literature that uncertainty influences
mood, cognition, and behavior, we do not know how these influences operate in
professional design contexts and in professional designers (whether emerging or
established). For instance, an exploration of transactional relationships between designer
expertise, intuition, and personal attitudes toward uncertainty in the design space may
generate significant insight into how individual designers manage uncertainty to keep the
design process moving forward – not to mention, whether and how these relationships
evolve as a function of professional experience.
More work is also needed to understand identity development in designers (both as a
component of design education and as an ongoing process in design practice) and to
identify useful pedagogical strategies for incorporating meaningful identity work in design
curricula. The findings from this study suggest that subjective perceptions of uncertainty
attitudes are pliable, at least during the formational stage if not beyond. This means that
design educators have the responsibility to support students as they explore, transform,
and consolidate their understanding of themselves in relation to uncertainty and other
relevant professional characteristics and beliefs. While we have focused on reflective
writing as one viable instructional strategy, it will be important to explore other
approaches that afford students with opportunities to develop their sense of self-asdesigner. In some cases, the nature of the design field may dictate other approaches; as
one example, visual representations and explorations may resonant strongly for graphic
design students. Instructional designers do a tremendous amount of writing in their
design work and outputs, so reflection journals were a conscious choice as they allow for
440
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
the development of a crucial professional skill in tandem with identity exploration. We
would encourage design educators in other fields to consider reflective writing but also
investigate other modalities of expression that align with the skills specific to their
disciplines. We also believe that it will be important to understand how experienced
designers develop, maintain, and refine their professional identities, as these insights will
likely be quite valuable to design educators in terms of facilitating meaningful learning
experiences for their students. The work of Adams, Daly, Mann, & Dall'Alba, (2011)
provides one approach, an interesting phenomenological exploration of how designers
define their professional responsibilities, but more work is needed to better appreciate
how designers integrate their individual traits into their understanding of the profession
and its cognitive, behavioral, and emotional territories.
Closing remarks
This research is preliminary in nature and is limited by its scope and subject pool, but
we believe it is a meaningful addition to the emerging bodies of work concerning both
uncertainty in design and professional identity development in design education. The
findings demonstrate that students may need multiple opportunities to reflect on
uncertainty in order to move toward a stable position, and that views on general
uncertainty versus professional uncertainty may not always be consistent. While the
willingness to engage with uncertainty is absolutely crucial for designers, it must be
acknowledged that this willingness is subject to change over time. Students who resist
uncertainty initially but still show an interest in design should be given the experiences and
space necessary to engage deeply with uncertainty and with themselves to see if workable
integration can be achieved. It is our hope that these initial results will spur further inquiry
into the role of uncertainty in design and the incorporation of identity building work in
design education.
References
Adams, R. S., Daly, S. R., Mann, L. M., & Dall'Alba, G. (2011). Being a professional: Three
lenses into design thinking, acting, and being. Design Studies, 32(6), 588-607.
Ball, L. J., Onarheim, B., & Christensen, B. T. (2010). Design requirements, epistemic
uncertainty and solution development strategies in software design. Design Studies,
31(6), 567-589.
Bar-Anan, Y., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2009). The feeling of uncertainty intensifies
affective reactions. Emotion, 9(1), 123-127.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5-21.
Dugas, M. J., Hedayati, M., Karavidas, A., Buhr, K., Francis, K., & Phillips, N. A. (2005).
Intolerance of uncertainty and information processing: Evidence of biased recall and
interpretations. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29(1), 57-70.
Erez, M., & Nouri, R. (2010). Creativity: The influence of cultural, social, and work contexts.
Management and Organization Review, 6(3), 351-370.
Kornilova, T. V., & Kornilov, S. A. (2010). Intelligence and tolerance/intolerance for
uncertainty as predictors of creativity. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 3, 240-256.
441
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
Lane, D. A., & Maxfield, R. R. (2005). Ontological uncertainty and innovation. Journal of
Evolutionary Economics, 15(1), 3-50.
Luehmann, A.L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation.
Science Education, 91, 822-839. doi: 10.1002/sce20209
Luhmann, C. C., Ishida, K., & Hajcak, G. (2011). Intolerance of uncertainty and decisions
about delayed, probabilistic rewards. Behavior Therapy, 42(3), 378-386.
Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people
desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23(1), 13-17.
Rosen, N. O., Ivanova, E., & Knäuper, B. (2014). Differentiating intolerance of uncertainty
from three related but distinct constructs. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 27(1), 55-73.
Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books Inc.
Sorrentino, R. M., & Short, J. C. (1986). Uncertainty orientation, motivation, and cognition.
Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior, 1, 379-403.
Sorrentino, R. M., Smithson, M., Hodson, G., Roney, C. J., & Marie Walker, A. (2003). The
theory of uncertainty orientation: A mathematical reformulation. Journal of
Mathematical Psychology, 47(2), 132-149.
Tillema, H. H. (2000). Belief change towards self-directed learning in student teachers:
immersion in practice or reflection on action. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 575591. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00016-0
Tracey, M.W., & Boling, E. (2013). Preparing instructional designers and educational
technologists: Traditional and emerging perspectives. In M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen, &
M.J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and
Technology (4th ed.). (pp.653-660). New York: Springer.
Tracey, M.W., & Hutchinson, A. (2013). Developing designer identity through reflection.
Educational Technology, 53(3), 28-32.
Tracey, M.W., & Hutchinson, A. (in revision). Uncertainty, reflection, and designer identity
development.
Tracey, M.W., & Hutchinson, A. (in review). Reflection, professional identity, and
instructional design education.
Tracey, M.W., Hutchinson, A., & Grzebyk, T. (2014). Instructional designers as reflective
practitioners: Developing professional identity through reflection. Educational
Technology Research & Development
442
Once Upon a Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
Andrew J. HUNSUCKER and Martin A. SIEGEL
Indiana University School of Informatics and Computing
*ahunsuck@iu.edu
Abstract: As designers we tell stories as we engage in the design process. But
how does one story differ from another? Are there storytelling types used during
different parts of the process? What form and function do these stories take? In
this paper we explore the nature of storytelling in the context of design and how
it plays different roles throughout the process: (1) during research to explain user
stories; (2) during ideation to expand the design space and explore problems; (3)
as a prototyping tool; and so on. We also will describe inappropriate uses of
storytelling in the design process; for example, telling pristine and unreal stories
rather than keeping the story ‘roughly right.’ Examples of each of these
classifications will be presented in the paper, illustrating good techniques
throughout. Finally, implications for design pedagogy will be discussed.
Keywords: storytelling, design process, prototyping, design pedagogy
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
Introduction
Stories are how humans describe their behaviors, actions, emotions and
thoughts. Storytellers build a world, and create a window for the listeners, viewers or
readers to experience that world. As designers, we work in much the same way (Gruen,
Redpath, & Ruettinger, 2002). While the window a storyteller creates could exist as a
video, the pages of a book, or a proscenium, the designer can create a window that exists
as a phone screen, browser window, or even a physical space.
While a storyteller creates characters, a designer creates personas. Where a storyteller
creates settings and mood, a designer creates interfaces and experiences. When a designer
creates a story behind a design, they are imagining a real user working with their design.
This creates a reality behind the design that reminds the designer of the real people that
will touch and interact with their design.
The designer does this by understanding the user story at every step of the design
process. ‘Good stories are memorable. They provide context (conditions). They
communicate culture as well as skill. They communicate tacit knowledge (that which is
difficult to describe in other ways).’ (Siegel, 2004, p. 7) In this paper, we will discuss what
forms these stories take at different phases of the design process: Research, Ideation,
Prototyping and Presentation. We also will examine example stories for each of these four
phases and examine them in detail, understanding how they are built, and how designers
can shape stories for different parts of the process.
Finally, we will examine the phenomenon of the ‘perfect story’ and see how designers
can avoid this common pitfall.
While this paper focuses on storytelling, it is important to understand that we do not
intend to state that a design can or should be completed with only storytelling. Rather, we
suggest that storytelling is a powerful tool (Erickson, 1996) for a designer to develop in
addition to other methods.
Although these stories may make their way into the final product’s marketing
materials, we are not describing stories here for these purposes. Our use of stories is
entirely internal for the purposes of improved product conceptualization and development
by the team—designers, programmers, stakeholders, and management.
The stories told in this paper were written by the authors, based on their experiences
with student design projects.
Stories during the design process
Research
Designers can use research to gather stories from their users, and better understand
the space and pain points that their users are encountering. They can craft the information
they gather into stories that can combine many users’ experiences into a single
story(Quesenbery & Brooks, 2010). Let’s look at an example story.
Terri arrives at work every day to sit at her desk in a windowless corner of the office. As
she works, she takes frequent breaks to stand up and walk around. When the weather
is agreeable, she walks around the corporate campus outside. If the weather is cold or
rainy, she sits down near the large windows in the lobby and looks out at the campus of
444
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
her office building. She feels this energizes her and gives her a boost to take her through
the next part of her work day. But her boss sometimes walks by her desk, or sends an
email that she expects to be answered right away.
On this particular day, when she returns to her desk, she finds that she has several
urgent emails from her boss. A system that she is responsible for is down, and she was
away from her desk. She sits down to fix the problem, embarrassed that the system has
been down for an unacceptable amount of time. She feels guilty that her co-workers
were unable to do their jobs while she was out for a walk.
The story above is not based on research, but if it were, it would give designers a good
overview of some of the problems faced by their users and allow them to start thinking
about design directions.
For example, in the story above, what is the real problem that needs to be solved? Is
the problem that Terri’s office environment isn’t sufficiently engaging? Moving Terri’s desk
near a window, or creating a program at the office to help engage employees’ minds might
be a solution. Or is the problem that the notification systems in place aren’t reaching Terri
at the right time? Email might not be sufficient for the issues that Terri has to manage. A
mobile alert or other kind of emergency notification could help. Or perhaps Terri’s
computing devices aren’t mobile enough. A more flexible office space where Terri could
choose a different workspace near a window could improve her situation.
Ideation
Once designers understand the space in which they are working, stories are an
excellent way to begin to understand what problems exist. Designers can recreate stories
from their user research, or simply use this research as a starting point to develop a
broader story. What is important is that the story is grounded in real understanding of the
users. These stories could even be shared with the user to ensure that their world is
accurately depicted. Where does the story match with your experience or expectations?
Where does it not?
Initially, these stories should be used to broaden the space, rather than to narrow it.
Think about how a user in this space goes about their tasks. What tasks are essential?
What tasks are inefficient? What can we as designers understand about their workspace?
What parts of the story are still mysterious? We can think of this type of storytelling as a
structured brainstorming. Building a story gives the designers a more complete picture of
the world that their users inhabit. Once these stories are complete, designers can use
other ideation methods like affinity diagramming to proceed with concrete ideas.
Let’s look at a different story example about self-driving cars:
Jon has been concerned about his aging parents. They are getting older and less
independent. The week before, his mother damaged their car by turning too widely and
hitting a mailbox. No one was hurt, but Jon recognizes that his parents driving
themselves everywhere will not be a valid option for long.
Jon has been examining self-driving cars, which have just started to become affordable
and available, but he was concerned with how easy the technology would be to
navigate for his elderly parents.
445
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
After taking a test drive alone, he decided he might be able to set up the system for
them by inputting common destinations and making it as simple as possible.
He gathered as much information as he could and sat down with his parents to present
his idea. His father liked the idea of being more mobile and was willing to try the selfdriving vehicle as long as Jon helped him. But he did lament the loss of being able to
drive, which he has always enjoyed.
However, his mother refused to consider the idea. She simply didn’t trust a car that she
or her husband couldn’t control themselves. The idea of a computer being totally in
charge of her car made her uncomfortable. Jon offered to take them on a test ride, but
his mother still refused.
Jon would have to find another way to make his parents safer.
In the story above, no solutions are presented, only problems. Blythe, et al. explain that
‘there is some evidence that the most effective storytelling is suggestive, rather than
exhaustive’ (Blythe, Wright, & Petrelli, 2011, p. 396). Here we ensure that the reader can
project their own values and ideas onto the story by keeping the story open.
Two possible user groups are listed: the elderly, and the children of elderly parents. In
addition, an early core is defined: keeping elderly people independent and safe.
Many stories like this could be created based on various user groups in response to a
prompt, and new cores could be found. This process could help the team decide which
user group to pursue if it has not already been defined for them by the client. Designers
shouldn’t rely on a single story to explore their(Gruen et al., 2002).
In this story, designers could choose among several problems to attempt to solve.
There is the problem of how to make a self-driving car easy enough for the elderly to use.
Designers could also attempt to solve the problem for the child of an elderly parent and try
to create a system that Jon could set up to make it easy for his parents to use. Designers
could also explore how to build trust between the elderly parent and the self-driving car.
Solving any of these problems could pay dividends for other user groups.
This example is based on a self-driving car, but if the prompt were simply ‘make life
easier for the elderly,’ we would be able to explore many more issues related to the lives
of elderly people living on their own.
The importance of the story in the ideation stage is to open up the space, generating
multiple possibilities to explore. The danger of a story in this phase is that a well-told story
can make a mediocre idea sound much better than it is. Designers must be careful not to
present specific solutions in this phase. Keeping the story open is essential.
Prototyping
Storytelling can be thought of as a type of prototyping(Spaulding & Faste, 2013). Once
designers begin to understand the space through the ideation process, they can begin to
describe solutions. As they sketch these solutions, they can build a story in which their user
or persona is a main character. This story can be an extension of the stories told in the
ideation process, or a completely new scenario. In this new or extended story, instead of
being a direct recounting of the research, the character or persona can now attempt to use
the solution through the course of the story. A secondary story might also be told; these
446
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
stories might be about others affected by the new product—how it changes their lives, not
just the life of the product user. These effects can be positive or negative.
Using a story in this way can give the designers a better understanding of how the
design will be used in the real world. ‘…It can provide inspiration and motivation for design
by exploring possible design requirements within a fictional scenario before attempting
physical prototyping’(Tanenbaum, 2014, p. 22). Many design problems can be discovered
and fixed before building an expensive prototype.
Visual storytelling like storyboarding and video also can be valuable at this stage in the
process. Designers might need to hire a filmmaker or videographer to create this material,
and can use this opportunity to test the design story with a non-designer. If a director can’t
understand how to depict a character using a design solution on film, it is very likely there
is a problem with the design.
Let’s look at another example story based on the self-driving car scenario.
Jon has been exploring self-driving cars to help his elderly parents keep their
independence. He has run into a problem though: his parents don’t really trust the
technology. They want to be in control of their driving. The idea of a computer
conveying them in a car is completely alien to them.
Jon finds a car that he thinks might help them trust the technology. This car is selfdriving, but also includes a brake pedal like the user would find on a normal car. The
user doesn’t have control of the steering, but with the brake pedal, they can slow the
car down at will. As they use the brake pedal, the car learns their preferred speed and
desired separation distance from other cars; the system adjusts these variables over
time.
Jon is able to convince the dealer to loan him one for a day, and brings it to his parent’s
house. He visits with them for a while, and then asks if they’d like to go to the store.
They agree and he takes them outside and introduces them to the car.
His father is impressed with the technology, but his mother is still wary. At first, she
refuses to get into the car at all, so Jon offers to take them on a ride around the block to
prove it’s safe. His mother refuses, but his father agrees.
Jon and his father get into the car and Jon pauses, trying to figure out how to get the
car to just go around the block. After working with the map a bit, he decides to direct
the car to a nearby school. The car sets off while his mother watches warily from the
driveway.
Jon’s father asks lots of questions about the car while they take the trip. Jon shows him
that he is in control by pressing the brake. His father uses the GPS-style touchscreen
controls to examine the options. Jon is concerned that his father might change the
directions he has programmed into the computer, but his father doesn’t manage to
make any changes.
Once they get to the school Jon offers to let his father sit in the driver’s side seat on the
way back. His father agrees, and they switch sides. He shows his father how to find the
controls to get the car moving on the touch screen, and his father finds his own address
that Jon has previously saved.
447
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
He presses the ‘Go’ button and the car begins to move. Jon’s father immediately holds
down the brake pedal. The car obediently pulls over and displays a message on the
control screen asking if he’d like to cancel the current destination or continue. His father
lets go of the brake pedal, but the car simply waits for additional user input.
Jon’s father hits the ‘Continue’ button and the car slowly pulls out of the parking lot and
onto the road. As the car pulls up to a stop sign, Jon’s father presses the brake out of
habit, and the car slows down short of the sign. As Jon’s father releases the pedal
slowly, the car continues moving forward, and eventually makes it to the sign, coming
to a complete stop. He lets go of the pedal completely, while the car waits at the stop
sign. After a moment, it continues towards home.
When they arrive home Jon’s mother is still waiting outside. Jon recognizes the worried
expression on her face. The car comes to stop outside the home. Jon’s father gets out
without turning off the engine, but Jon does it for him.
Jon’s father mentions that he still prefers driving his own car, but he supposes there
might be some use for the technology.
This story has clearly chosen a design direction. It focuses on how a brake pedal might
be implemented into the controls of a self-driving car. It also explains the reasoning behind
this design. The design is outlined briefly in the second paragraph of the story. Giving the
viewer this type of overview lets them in on some of the details of the design, so they can
evaluate the user actions and detail more easily.
There are several points to note in this story. First, we reiterate the previous story that
led to this one. We don’t need to retell the entire story, but we must keep in mind ‘stories
in user experience are usually created for a specific audience and for a specific reason’
(Quesenbery & Brooks, 2010) and people who see this version might not have been privy
to the previous version.
Next, we establish the characters in the story. In the previous story, Jon’s goal is to help
his parent’s become more independent; his father is willing to try, but feels he will miss
driving his own car, and his mother is completely unconvinced. Once we have established
these traits, it is essential to maintain the reality of those points throughout the story. If
we abandon any of these character traits, the audience will quickly lose the ability to
believe in our story. Later in the paper, we will explore a storytelling framework to help us
understand how to do this.
The way we maintain the reality of the characters in this story is to show that the
mother is still unconvinced of the technology, and refuses to participate. It would be easy
to tell a story where the mother immediately consents and then slowly learns to love this
design. But that is a job for marketing, not design. The job of a story in design is to explain
how a real user would react to the design and to explore possible solutions that address
the user’s realities. If we find at this point that following the reality of the story and
characters makes the design unbelievable, then we likely have a problem with our design
that needs to be addressed.
Once we begin to tell the part of the story where Jon takes his father on a ride, details
are important. But it is even more important to include the right details. Attempting to
design every aspect of this system in detail at this point would limit the design too much at
this stage(Gruen et al., 2002).
448
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
This story is crafted to show how the self-driving car design builds trust in the user. This
story includes sufficient detail about how users will use and react to the brake pedal, and
what the car will do in each of these states. Again, it would be incredibly easy to discuss
each screen in detail during this story, but that isn’t the point. When we eventually try to
tell a story where we explain how users will react to the control system, then it may be
important to explain in detail each screen they see.
The design team likely would have created sketches during their process. These
sketches could be worked into storyboards to accompany the prototype, helping to explain
things more clearly for their audience.
In addition, a story can illustrate a range of use. After the story is told, the designer can
show exactly the use through bullet points—to make more explicit what the story
illustrates. Then the designer can define precisely the extent of the range by creating
constraining points. For this story, we would be able to explain clearly what happens when
the user completes a specific action, and how the device will only perform that action
under specific circumstances.
Table 1 – A range of use in storytelling.
Original story
Jon’s father holds down
the brake pedal while the
car is moving because he is
uncomfortable with the
idea of the car being in
total control.
Bulleted list of actions
When holding the
brake pedal down
completely, the car
safely pulls over
and waits for
further user
interaction.
Explanation of actions
This is an active, deliberate interaction
with the device; it’s not passive or
automatic. When the user holds down
the brake pedal for a certain amount of
time, the vehicle stops completely and
will not move again until the user
performs an additional action on the
touchscreen.
A table like this could be presented along with the storyboards while telling the story,
or as a handout to give the viewers while learning about the design.
Presentation
Storytelling during a presentation is an excellent way to sell your design idea to
stakeholders. Those outside the design process might not have the background in design
terminology and design thinking. They will be more interested in results. Seeing a
character in a story using a design can be a powerful tool for understanding. Storyboarding
and video again are valuable tools at this point in the process.
A good presentation story will have very similar characteristics to a story for
prototyping. But when presenting to stakeholders, the designer might be tempted to
polish the story a bit too much. When that happens, they could create the perfect story.
B EWARE OF THE PERFECT STORY
A trend seen often in design storytelling, especially among novices, is the perfect story.
In a perfect story, the characters use the design exactly as intended with no issues or
questions, and their lives are much improved just from being in the presence of the design.
449
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
While the phrase ‘perfect story’ might sound like something to strive for, in this
context, we are talking about how the characters interact in the story.
The danger of the perfect story in design is twofold. First, it is unconvincing to the
stakeholders. While the designers might be tempted to make their design look as good as
possible in a presentation, the perfect story will be open to critique from the viewers
because it is not satisfying(Boorstin, 1990). Stories include characters that face problems
that must be overcome, or challenges that must be faced. Characters in a perfect story
always achieve their goals and excel while doing it. In fan fiction literature, this
phenomenon is sometimes referred to as a ‘Mary Sue’(Chandler & Sunder, 2007).
The second issue with the perfect story is that it reveals a lack of design thinking.
Novice designers (usually students) are taught that storytelling can be an effective tool, but
don’t yet understand how to build a convincing narrative through design thinking.
Let’s continue our example with Terri and examine a perfect story:
Terri walks away from her desk for a break, and sits down in the lobby. As she relaxes
for a moment, a critical system goes down, sending the office into a panic. She
immediately receives a text on her phone alerting her to the problem.
Terri calmly opens the text message and responds with ‘R’ for reboot. The system
reboots, service is restored, and the office can get back to work. Terri resumes her
break, musing about how pleased her boss will be that the new system works so well.
The problems with this story are vast. First, the story assumes the worst case scenario
for Terri as she takes her break. Any number of work related tasks could need attention
while she is away from her desk. Unless the core of the design is to make it easy to
respond to critical failures, it will be better to lower the stakes in a story like this.
In addition, the story hides the massive amount of complexity behind a system like this.
Very few systems that are simple for the user are simple for the development team. The
designers need to sell their design not only to the people paying for the system, but the
people that will need to build it(Kolko, 2010). An acknowledgement of the complexity of a
system like this could go a long way to building a bridge to the development team and
make the story more believable. This design seems like it wouldn’t work at all, or be so
complex that it would be impossible to build effectively. While a full spec sheet of all of the
features and technical information is not necessary or even welcome in a story like this,
the designer must show an awareness of the details of their system. The design showed in
this story hints at a deep misunderstanding of what the user needs and how complex
systems work.
Finally, the last note where Terri muses about her boss being pleased is too implausible
for any story in design. Any mention of the inner thoughts of a character in the story
should be focused on aspects that will bring clarity to the design. A note like the one above
feels more like the designer is patting themselves on the back for creating such a clever
design.
While the dangers of an unbelievable story have been examined in design
literature(Spaulding & Faste, 2013), we can look directly at storytelling resources to help
craft better design stories. Jon Boorstin describes a useful framework in his book The
Hollywood Eye - What Makes Movies Work. In this framework, he describes how audiences
450
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
consume film from three different viewpoints: the voyeuristic eye, the vicarious eye, and
the visceral eye.
The voyeuristic eye is concerned with the reality of the world of the film. The vicarious
eye is examining the emotion of the film; it is concerned with creating empathy for the
characters of the film. The visceral eye is only concerned with what thrills and new
experiences the film might offer.
The fundamental criticism in the voyeur’s world is ‘that couldn’t happen,’ in the
vicarious world ‘he wouldn’t do that,’ but in the visceral world it is ‘it doesn’t get me.’
(Boorstin, 1990, p. 114)
This framework has been compared to Dewey’s aesthetic experience(Dewey, 1934;
McCarthy & Wright, 2007), but from a storytelling perspective, we can use it to better
understand how to keep our audiences engaged with our stories.
First, we must understand how film stories are different from design stories. The
language of film combines human emotion, carefully crafted visuals, music and sound
design. All of these elements are carefully controlled by a not-so-small group of talented
individuals that collaborate to craft an experience. Iterations occur during every phase of
the filmmaking process. A script progresses through many drafts, possibly even many
writers before moving to filming, where each scene can be given many takes before the
cast and crew are satisfied. And once the filming is completed, the film will be edited,
viewed, and then iterated on many times before it is considered complete.
While filmmakers generally create a story as a final product, the designer uses a story
as a method to understand how to build the final product.
Designers don’t need to worry about music and sound design, and their visuals, rather
than careful camera work, are displayed as wireframes and storyboards.
From our framework above, designers are generally not concerned with the visceral
eye. The visceral eye is useful in a film because spectacle and excitement are expected.
The stories designers create must be more practical because they must lead to concrete
results(Grimaldi, Fokkinga, & Ocnarescu, 2013; Quesenbery & Brooks, 2010). Designers
create stories to work towards a goal. Adding suspense or excitement to a design
presentation should be done with great caution. Remember in our example above, the
entire office went into a panic when the system went down. While it’s possible the office
might panic, it’s an unnecessary detail to understand the design which sacrifices the reality
of the story (the voyeuristic eye) for a weak attempt at suspense (the visceral eye). Even
so, design in and of itself is about creating a new experience. We could say that the visceral
eye is inherent within the context of the design. If the viewers feel they have seen the
exact design presented before, they will lose interest quickly.
So as designers, we can examine the voyeuristic eye and the vicarious eye. Of these,
the voyeuristic eye is paramount. Designers must maintain the reality of their story. Any
time the viewer questions the reality of the story, the design is damaged. Boorstin notes:
In movies, people don’t waste their time looking for parking places or making change,
and the audience knows it. If an actor can’t find a parking space, the audience expects
his bumbling to affect the story; if it doesn’t, the filmmakers have slowed the pace for
nothing and loosened their grip on the viewer. (Boorstin, 1990, p. 48)
451
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
In the self-driving car story, Jon’s father tries out the brake pedal several times. By
Boorstin’s reckoning, moments like that should directly affect the story. If they don’t, they
should be cut. In our case, Jon’s father testing out the brake pedal is in fact the point of the
story. We are slowing down the story by slowing down the car, but furthering our goals of
explaining the design.
Designers can look to the vicarious eye to build their personas and characters. The
vicarious eye is about the emotional truth of the story(Boorstin, 1990). The viewers must
believe that the characters are engaging in the story legitimately. Designers should have a
leg up on this, because they should be building empathy for their users throughout the
process(Wright & McCarthy, 2008). For example, the vicarious eye allows us to create a
character like Jon’s mother, who remains skeptical of the technology no matter what he
tries. With the vicarious eye, the audience must be able to put themselves in the position
of the character and understand what they are doing, or even better, imagine themselves
doing the same thing in that situation.
The emotions of others create a matching urge on our part—to comfort them, to
protect ourselves, to respond to their smile with a smile of our own. We are wired that
way. (Boorstin, 1990, p. 66)
In the perfect story, the reality and emotions are lost. The perfect story might result
from the designer being too attached to an early concept. A concept or space that hasn’t
been fully explored comes with obvious flaws. A novice designer might attempt to hide the
flaws by crafting a story where the user can use their design with none of the problems
that a real user would encounter. Instead, they should examine how the reality of the story
will lead them to a better design.
The perfect story might also result from the designer not understanding their user
group. The design might work for a different user, but as presented in the reality of the
world, it falls flat. Again, the designer can examine the story from the perspective of the
user to build a better understanding of the design.
Recognizing a perfect story requires self-awareness on the part of the designer, and a
willingness to seek constant feedback. It can be very difficult for a designer to recognize
that they have built an unrealistic story. By examining Boorstin’s three perspectives, we
can build our stories in a way that our audiences will find acceptable and satisfying.
Implications for design pedagogy
It might be argued that design instructors should spend less time on storytelling
techniques and more emphasis on design methodologies per se (e.g., field studies,
sketching, concept generation, user-testing, and so on). We certainly do not wish to
diminish the importance of these skills, but we believe that storytelling is a meta-method.
That is, it is the story that is told during the ideation phase of design that helps us more
skillfully generate possible concepts; the same is true for prototyping and every other
phase of the design process. As such, storytelling becomes an important method that
shapes the designer’s proficiencies in other methods and therefore must be included in
the design thinking curriculum.
For example, requiring student-designers to employ the technique of contrasting
stories defines the design’s limits. Contrasting stories are two stories, where both stories
452
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
share all details except those features that distinguish the design. Another pedagogical
example, requiring student-designers to develop a story illustrating abstract statements
such as the design’s core, leads to further clarification of the design’s context. These
techniques remind us that the story is the experience. A well-crafted story (or contrasting
stories) adds substance, clarity, range, and context to the design.
Conclusion
In this paper we examined several ways of using storytelling at different phases of the
design process. As designers, we must make use of every tool available in our toolkit.
Storytelling allows us to explore the spaces our users inhabit, and how they might use our
solutions in those spaces. Moreover, storytelling is an essential tool for convincing
stakeholders that our solutions are viable.
By teaching storytelling skills to designers directly, we can enhance their design skills by
giving them the ability to craft realistic characters. These realistic characters can be placed
in any imaginary design scenario, and designers can explore their reactions, keeping the
voyeuristic and vicarious eyes in mind, while seeking constant feedback to check their
assumptions.
However, we must be cautious to keep our stories realistic and grounded in our
research. Designers that create perfect stories are simply writing fan fiction about their
users and designs. A designer’s first duty is to the users. We must keep them at the
forefront of our stories the way we keep them at the forefront of our designs.
Acknowledgements: This work is supported in part by the National Science
Foundation (NSF) Grant Award no. 1115532. Opinions expressed are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the entire research
team or the NSF. The authors would also like to thank Gabe Persons and ShuChuan Chiu for their help in editing this paper.
References
Blythe, M., Wright, P., & Petrelli, D. (2011). History and experience: storytelling and
interaction design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 25th BCS conference on
Human-Computer Interaction, Swinton, UK.
Boorstin, J. (1990). The Hollywood Eye: What Makes Movies Work. New York, NY:
HarperCollins Publishers.
Chandler, A., & Sunder, M. (2007, April). Everyone's a Superhero: A Cultural Theory of
‘Mary Sue’ Fan Fiction as Fair Use. California Law Review, 597-626.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art As Experience. New York, NY: Perigree.
Erickson, T. (1996, July). Design as storytelling. interactions, 30-35.
Grimaldi, S., Fokkinga, S., & Ocnarescu, I. (2013). Narratives in design: a study of the types,
applications and functions of narratives in design practice. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and
Interafaces, New York, NY.
Gruen, D., Redpath, S., & Ruettinger, S. (2002). The Use of Stories in User Experience
Design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 503-534.
453
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
Kolko, J. (2010). Thoughts on interaction Design: Morgan Kaufman.
McCarthy, J., & Wright, P. (2007). Technology as Experience. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
Quesenbery, W., & Brooks, K. (2010). Storytelling for User Experience: Crafting Stories for
Better Design. Brooklyn, NY: Rosenfeld Media.
Siegel, M. (2004). Accelerating Insight Through Scenarios (pp. 7). Bloomington, IN: Wisdom
Tools.
Spaulding, E., & Faste, H. (2013). Design-Driven narrative: using stories to prototype and
build immersive design worlds. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), New York, NY.
Tanenbaum, J. (2014, October). Design Fictional Interactions: Why HCI Should Care About
Stories. Interactions, 22.
Wright, J., & McCarthy, P. (2008). Empathy and Experience in HCI. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New
York.
454
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Nina BJØRNSTADa* and Monika HESTADb
a Oslo
School of Architecture and Design b Central Saint Martins, University of Arts London / Oslo
School of Architecture and Design
*nina.bjornstad@aho.no
Abstract: Industrial design is in transition and there is a pressure to deal with
even more intangible concepts. This leads to the introduction of new skill bases
into the education. However, with inclusion of new skill bases the question is
what needs to go? Using an action research framework we investigated how a
university industrial design module changed when introducing more input on
research and service design. We analysed the projects from two different years
and asked whether the students had managed to integrate the input and if this
led to more informed processes or a better result. The projects from one year
had less novel solutions and less complexity than the previous year. While the
students appreciated new skills that were learned, they found that their process
was rushed. Lack of time to iterate and reflect affected the final outcome.
Exploration develops industrial designers’ sensibility and ability to facilitate
experiences, but an emphasis on formalised research led to less time to explore.
In our eagerness to ‘professionalise’ the industrial design education, are we
about to leave out our core skills?
Keywords: Industrial design, Design education, Exploration, Analysis, Design
thinking.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Introduction
Across the globe designers experience a profession in transition (Yee et al., 2010) with
the inclusion of a greater need to negotiate with external partners and become
professionalised researchers (Press et al., 2003), developing business models (Abbing
2010; Yee et al., 2013), innovation cultures (Kochargaonkar and Boult, 2014) and similar,
and with this the inclusion of more intangible concepts and questions with which to
engage.
As a result of widening the scope of what is considered part of the designers’ core
knowledge base, design education is changing. Skills associated with artisan practices of
design are no longer the only knowledge bases that designers need to acquire (Yee et al.,
2013). However, with the constant inclusion of new knowledge bases, methods and
approaches, there will naturally be pressure to leave something out. The tension explored
in this paper is, when bringing in a more rigid analytical approach from business as well as
from science, what happens to the time to explore and experiment, and how does this
change the designers’ core capabilities?
In this paper we will offer a critical examination of a module that is part of a degree
course that has experienced these transformations towards more conceptual and
intangible output. This module is the first introduction the students have to branding and
management. It is project-led, with the students developing a product concept at the same
time as they develop a brand concept. This means the students have two complex
syntheses of knowledge to make, one that includes their insights about a new product
concept and one that includes insights about the brand concept. The complexity in the task
is to make these two syntheses relate to each other as well as making the justifications of
why they do. A more detailed presentation of the syntheses will be addressed later in the
paper.
In the autumn 2014 module, the theoretical input on the course increased to meet
demands to professionalise the research that the students are building their concepts
upon, as well as to include more service design thinking. The inclusion of more knowledge
did not somehow lead to better concepts. On the contrary, it seems to have led to less
interesting concepts and created pressure on the students that was beyond what they had
the capacity to absorb. The general feeling we were left with was that, in the autumn 2014
module, the balance between time to explore and develop the project and time to obtain
the input was not right. Therefore, as part of evaluation of the course we arranged a
meeting with our students from this module. The student representatives expressed that
they were satisfied with what they learned overall this year, but that they were not
satisfied with their final solutions. They expressed less confidence in what they delivered
this year than we have experienced from previous years.
This paper offers a critical evaluation of the module before the change in 2014 and
after the change. The aim of the study is to more systematically develop the learning
environment (Light et al., 2011). The challenges identified will therefore be taken into
consideration when developing the learning module in 2015. As the research is
contextually rich it also opens up for multiple facets and dimensions; in this paper the
focus will be on the students’ ability to make the complex synthesis. In the core of making
these complex syntheses is the balance between building their insights and knowledge on
analytical processes, and on the more subjective nature that comes in a more free flowing
456
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
exploration. The balance between rigid analysis and free form exploration in developing
complex synthesis will be the key consideration undertaken in this paper.
The dynamic interplay between analysis and exploration
Design has been described as a hybrid activity that could include multiple knowledge
bodies from art, from science and from mathematics (Jones, 2009). In designing, the
navigation of these fields and identification of which of them are needed in the context
they are working on is part of the complexity. In addition the designers will have to work
with vague challenges, then to transfer insights gained about the challenge into concrete
propositions (Tovey, 2009). In order to understand and build on multiple knowledge bodies
the designer will have to engage with various experts in their processes, and will by this
need to know about different related fields but will not become the expert. Their own
expertise will be needed to navigate in this complexity, and later to transfer this into a new
concept. This navigation will include both analysis of the context as well as making creative
decisions that only in the retrospect can be explained. An important part of the designers’
expertise is form and ‘formgiving’ (Akner-Koler, 2007).
The propositions that the designer makes are often presented as visual material; it
could be sketches as well as prototypes. By making the propositions concrete, they will be
accessible for others than just the designer to engage with, to critique and to question.
How the designers are creating these propositions is not always so easy to explain and
designers are not always themselves the best to explain the designed object. An important
part of this explanation is the ‘reflection in action’ as introduced by Donald Schön (1991).
In exploration with physical prototypes the thought patterns become clearer and more
explicit. Visual communication is an intuitive way to explore ideas and proposals
(Minichiello and Anelli, 2012), but it takes skills and practice to make this a medium to
communicate a complex proposition.
The designer has an ability to make proposition and to concretise synthesis from vague
problems (Tovey, 2012), which creates new opportunity in other fields as there is
something in the way designers are thinking that proves promising to tackle other
problems outside the traditional design work. However, in the discourse around design
thinking the part of the approach that includes subjective reasoning is more challenging to
explain. According to Roger Martin, design thinking is ‘analytical mastery and intuitive
originality in a dynamic interplay’ (2009, p. 6). Design thinking, he says, brings together
both the ‘analytical’ school which is about creating rigidity behind decision making, with
the ‘intuitive’ which builds on the school of thought that is ‘the art of knowing without
reasoning’. From our experience as teachers, this ‘intuitive reasoning’ does not seem to
come of itself. The ‘intuition’ for which insights to combine, and how to combine them into
concrete proposition, comes by practice. Further, the designer also needs the skills to be
able to work with the material and create these concretisations, through exploration in
sketches (Minichiello and Anelli, 2012) or other flexible materials that can become a
medium to quickly develop their thought processes and capture their thinking. The job of
the designer becomes to understand the challenge, identify right sources for information,
gain the insights and then transform it into artefacts. This is not a straightforward job –
and it is not always easy to find the right balance between the hard facts and rigidity
needed to develop informed decisions and to allow the time needed to develop skills in
explorations.
457
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Engaging with changed social context
In the module that is evaluated in this paper, a key learning objective has been to
prepare the students to navigate complexity in the market as well as in society. The
students are encouraged to engage with major drivers of changes in society and to use
these changes as a source of inspiration as well as a tool to make relevant the concepts
that the students are developing. The module builds on theories in branding that see the
brand as a dynamic process with multiple stakeholders being part of developing what the
brand is about (Holt, 2002, 2004). The consideration in the branding literature has been
from a design perspective, where the aim is to create meaningful propositions that could
become brands.
In the academic development of teaching a similar change as the one in branding can
be observed. Building on Schön’s ‘reflective practitioner’ theory (Schön, 1991 [1983]), Light
et al. (2011) argue for a new role relevant in teaching: ‘reflective professionals’. The call for
professionalism: ‘…requires a model of practice that must account not only for the events
and situations that arise in practice but also for the changing social context of practice’
(Light et al., 2011, p.14). This has a parallel with our aim in the examined module to
develop students that move beyond reflective practitioner in dialogue with an object, to
become ‘reflective professionals’ where the object represents the synthesis of an on-going
process in dialogue with various actors as well as larger changes in society.
However, there are multiple challenges that arise in this. For example, the same insight
could give multiple interpretations, or the insight that is built upon is flawed. There could
also be practical hindrances such as that the medium chosen to communicate the insights
were not flexible enough, or that the designer did not have the skills needed to
communicate their insights. The transfer process from insights to medium can be
described as semantic transformation, and in this semantic transformation distortion may
happen (Karjalainen, 2004).
From an educational point of view there is a complexity in finding the right balance.
How can we create learning activities that both introduces the necessary analytical
frameworks they will need to create robust insights to build their propositions from, and at
the same time allow them time to learn by exploration and which is such a crucial part of
developing their intuitive reasoning? Before going deeper into this challenge, we will first
look at the Institute to give context to the challenge presented.
Constant negotiation of tensions
Oslo School of Architecture and Design offers a five-year master’s course in design. The
previous design education was an industrial design degree. In the last decade it has
changed to now offer a two years’ specialisation in interaction design and service design,
industrial design or system-oriented design on top of the three-year undergraduate years
of the course.
Changes and negotiation between different methods, knowledge basis and approaches
to design is part of the history of the institute. It can be traced back to the establishment
of the Norwegian Association of Applied Art in 1918 (Romsaas, 2009), whilst a permanent
course in industrial design was only established as late as 1983. In developing the first
syllabus, organisations from industry and politics, and representatives from the profession,
worked together. This included the Norwegian Federation of Sales and Advertisement.
458
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
The tension between the exploratory and the analytic rigidity is a part of the history.
From the very beginning the course found itself in an on-going discussion between the
Head of Industrial Design, Torbjørn Rygh, and the course’s parent institution, the National
College of Art and Design (NCAD), on whether the pedagogy was built on an aesthetical or
a technological ground. NCAD, where the course was first located, was the country’s
leading arts school. At the same time there was an academically ambitious attitude at the
Institute of Industrial Design, which suggested that the Institute should leave the arts
school (Romsaas, 2009). In 1996 the institute joined Oslo School of Architecture and
Design. The latter institution is categorised as a scientific school (specialised university)
rather than an arts school, and therefore closer to the technology ambitions that the
leadership of the Institute held.
The previous tension between aesthetics and technology are today history, as
aesthetics is one of the focus areas and technology is still part of the curricula. The
Institute has recently agreed on a ‘designerly’ approach, referring to three pillars defined
as methods, aesthetics and communication (Troye, 2014). However, the recent pressure
on including new frameworks, methods and skills as a result of including interaction design
and service design as possible specialisations seems to once again have created internal
tensions. With the current range of specialisation offered, how should the first three years
prepare the students to make educated decisions of which specialisation to apply for? This
in reality means moving away from the industrial design foundation that the course is built
upon, to allow the new disciplines such as interaction design and service design take a
greater part of the curriculum.
The module examined
The scope of the study in this paper is a four-month module named Identity in
products, services and interactions. The aim of the module is for the students to explore
how the branded context can set the agenda for the products or services and vice versa
(Abbing, 2010; Karjalainen, 2004; Hestad, 2013). The students are encouraged to create
visions that are relevant for society as well as bringing something new to the market. New
in this context could be either original products or services, but it could also be new brand
concepts.
The students get introduced to marketing and branding. In addition to the
experimentation and formgiving, the students are supposed to take the cultural,
ecological, economic, ergonomic and user-centred aspects into account. They should know
their users and they also have to interact with them. Further, the students also have to
reflect upon their solution from an ethical perspective (Keitch and Bjørnstad, 2010). The
module is project driven and the students are creating a branded context of how they
would like to propose their solutions to their imagined users.
The complexity that lies in both creating a new product or service parallel with creating
a brand context, makes the third year a good time to introduce this module. Before this
module the students should have a basic understanding of design and formgiving as well as
research, with a focus on user-centred research. Exploration in various materials as well as
digital exploration is part of their curriculum before this course. They should therefore be
able to explore and experiment in the process. Vision based design proposals demand
459
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
some experience, and the students have gained enough experience in the third year to
experiment on self-generated ideas.
In the autumn module of 2014 we introduced more formalised research classes than in
previous years and at the same time service design classes. In the design research classes
the students were introduced to creating a research plan, of various methods for
investigating the user. They were introduced to the academic theories behind these as well
as being asked to deliver a research plan and conduct their study according to that plan.
The theory and methods in the design research course were introduced at the same time
as the theory and methods on branding. These two parts took up an equal amount of time
and which meant that the students had a heavily theoretical introduction to the course.
The service design course was planned as a short introduction and was task based. The
students were introduced to new tools such as the customer blueprint and the user
journey. The service design classes did not take up that much more time of the schedule.
Also the branding and service design courses have overlapping theories and methods. In
branding it is important to express the brand through various touch points, to involve
multiple stakeholders and to understand how the brand is experienced through time
(Wheeler, 2014). These are also important considerations when developing a service.
A method to investigate the change
To investigate the change the authors planned the study as a critical evaluation of the
course and decided to do a comparative study between the projects in 2013 and the
projects in 2014. The study was planned as a combination of a case study research and
action research. Case study research is a method that can be used when the challenges to
explore are highly context dependent (Flyvjberg, 2004). Action research is a method for
when the aim is to implement changes to improve the learning environment (Koshy, 2010).
The action research is planned in cycles; observe, reflect, plan, act (Leary quoted in Koshy,
2010). A challenge is observed and reflected upon, and then a plan on how to act upon this
is formed and implemented. From this new observations are made. However, in this paper
the reflection of the change is based on a reconstruction of the already conducted module
and not as part of an ongoing module. This will therefore not be a complete action
research project. It could though form a very good starting point for an action research
project in the future.
There are several limitations of the study that needs to be addressed. We are not
independent as this is our own course that is being examined. This means that there will
be biases as to what is important to emphasise in the course as well as on how the projects
are interpreted. This is met by constantly questioning our own propositions and by being
transparent about what these are. Another challenge with contextual dependent cases is
that the material is very rich, while the write-up will have to focus on one aspect of the
case. In this article we choose to focus on the development of the complex synthesis and
the balance between analysis and explorative approaches. The reason for this is that we
see this as the most important challenge at this time.
Another issue is that this year the topic introduced to the students that was the
starting point of their project was a challenge in itself. In the autumn 2013 module the
topic of the course was to reinvent an old story. The students had to identify a story from
history that may have been lost and use this story as a starting point in their processes. In
460
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
2014 the topic of the course was far more political as the students worked with gender
stigmatization. Some of the students found this to be a personally challenging topic.
Data and analysis
Each of the years were treated as their own case, and which were then compared with
each other. In setting up the comparison of the module before and after the changes, we
chose multiple sources of information to be able to triangulate our findings. The teaching
in the module consists of a wide range of different teaching approaches (Light, et al.,
2011), from the students’ development of their own project, workshop and seminars, oneto-one supervision as well as regular discussions and lectures. The assessment is through
presentations, models or other visual representations and a report. The sources were: the
module descriptions and literature list, students’ final presentations, student reports, the
final evaluation and marks of the module (with an external examiner). Having taught in
both of these modules we knew the process the students had been through, but we also
used the student reports to verify whether our understanding was right. In addition we
issued invitations to an evaluation meeting where we discussed the modules with three
student representatives and with two of the co-teachers of the modules.
In each of the cohorts there were about 20 students. We decided to make a selection
of ten from each cohort. In this selection we went for those that were well documented so
it was possible to get an understanding of how they worked in the project, as well as those
that gave us the best indication of use of theory and practice and how this had informed
their process.
There will always be a significant number of variables to choose from in order to make
an analysis of the projects and for this paper we simplified the process. We therefore
experimented with different ways of analysing these and at the end we developed a
simplified structure that looked at the output and the input. These were visualised in order
to compare the different projects. The projects were analysed from various dimensions.
This was done to gain a better understanding of the nature of the project and provided an
indication of the students’ understanding of how to put theory into practice. From these
experimentations we found that two of these dimensions shed light on the questions that
we explored.
1. C OMPLEXITY OF THE SYNTHESES AND THE COHERENCE BETWEEN THEM
To investigate whether the students had managed to navigate the complexity in their
proposals the projects were structured into three different categories: product-driven
brand stories (e.g. stories about functionality, ergonomics, attributes, production); actordriven brand stories (e.g. stories about the heritage or origin of the company or the
creator/designer, the user, about creating together); and myth-driven brand stories. The
brand story is not directly related to the product. The product gets a symbolic role in this
story (e.g. stories about sub-cultures or society, a myth, a relation). This gave a way to see
which level of abstractions the students worked on, as well as to quickly identify the
coherence between the brand story and the product story.
2. E XPLORATION VERSUS NOVELTY
In the next analysis the processes were examined. Did the student demonstrate a high
level of either material exploration or exploration through sketches in the design process?
461
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
This analysis was of key importance as this gave the opportunity to have a critical look at
the students’ processes and how their projects had developed. In this analysis novelty was
also included. Novelty in this context refers to whether there is an established category in
the market that was already recognised (like craft beer, shoes or similar) or not, as well as
the novelty in the brand story, and novelty in expression. When the student suggested and
was able to document that this was a potentially new category (or a new direction with an
existing category), it was perceived as a high level of novelty, even if the aesthetic
expression was perceived as less novel.
Less complex synthesis?
In 2014 the majority of the students’ brand stories could be understood as productdriven (figure 1). This is not a problem in itself, however the novelty in the solutions did
not suggest a product-driven brand story would suffice. There would be many competitors
in the market and the solution they offered were not perceived as novel. The level of
innovation as well as whether the solution is market-driven or is driving-market, would
affect how the brand is perceived (Beverland et al., 2010). Further, several of the brand
stories communicated an actor-driven story in part of the product or the imagery while
other touch points, particularly in the text, communicated a product-driven story.
Figure 1: Coherence and level of abstraction in the story (autumn, 2013).
462
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Figure 2: Coherence and level of abstraction in the story (autumn, 2014).
In both of the years (2013 and 2014) we identified projects that belonged to all three
categories. However, in 2013 (figure 2) many of the projects belonged in the myth-driven
brand story. The students had managed to create products that had a symbolic role in the
brand story, and a coherence was created by the students being concerned with how the
values were informing the development of the products/services as well as all of the other
touch points that build the experience of the brand.
In 2013 there were only two stories that were product-driven. Both of these had a high
degree of novelty in the solution, which justify a product-driven brand story. These two
students were confident in how they presented the brand story and the products became
strong statements.
Another interesting finding is that the theme in 2014 was far more abstract and related
to a larger debate in society than the theme in 2013. Initially we thought this would lead to
a higher degree of ‘big questions’ that would be explored, however, the opposite
happened. The majority of the projects found niches in the market, rather than taking on
bigger questions to tackle compared with the year before.
Organising the projects on an axis between experimental and novelty (see figures 3 and
4) we found that the 2013 cohort overall had a higher degree of novelty in their solutions.
This supports our first finding that the synthesis seems to be less complex in 2014 than in
2013. It also gives an indication that there is not automatically a correspondence between
having a larger rigidity in the data collection, ultimately leading to stronger synthesis. On
the contrary, this may indicate that there seems to be a correspondence between the
novelty and choosing an experimental approach. While, in 2014, there were fewer projects
that had managed both. The most novel concept had a strong analytical approach in the
finding, however, it was less exploratory. In 2014 there were few that had both an
exploratory approach and a novel concept.
463
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Figure 3: The student projects sorted in level of Experimental Design and Novelty (autumn, 2013).
Figure 4: The student projects sorted in level of Experimental and Novelty (autumn, 2014).
464
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Overall, there seems to be less complexity in the synthesis in 2014, than in the 2013
projects. The 2013 cohort managed to design stronger statements and these were skilfully
communicated through all of the touch points to build a strong brand concept.
Time to make a synthesis
Seeing that the 2013 cohort overall demonstrated a more advanced synthesis with
multiple projects that work on a high level of abstraction and complexity, and which
appear more experimental and novel in the solutions, tells a story that the changed
teaching changed the final results. Although there could be other factors that led to this
that have not been examined in this paper. The theme the students in 2013 explored may
be a richer and easier starting point and have rich stories to be inspired from. While in
2014, the theme chosen was in general perceived as more challenging and many of the
students also chose questions that were demanding for them as individuals to relate to as
starting points.
The students’ own feedback in 2014 pointed towards a lack of time to iterate. The
module in this year appeared too full of different topics and the students felt the structure
forced them to take rushed decisions without the time necessary to reflect and iterate.
This correlates with our own observations of this year. By not having the necessary time to
work with the material, in making their own investigations, failure and successes, the
students did not have the opportunity to iterate in the process, and the results became
weaker.
In 2014 they were forced into a sequence of events, and which affected the processes
and the results. The processes overall were less experimental and the results less original.
The students were forced to make quick decisions when they worked with concept and
form development. It is not a straightforward process to concretise insights into a brand
and product concept. This is a time consuming activity that involves several iterations. The
students in this module have to learn how to capture and analyse this, and materialise the
findings in the objects. It means experimentation with materials as well as aesthetic
exploration, as they learn more about what they are making and how this responds to the
changes in society. In parallel with any creative exercise, whether it is about writing an
essay or developing a form to a product, it is a process where while working on the
solution and making adjustments, the thought processes become clearer and more
refined.
Market, society and cultural engagement at this level are new topics for the students in
this module. To come to the level of sophistication that is required to develop strong brand
stories and products that are part of telling this story, they will need to have time to
develop the story as well as the understanding of the underlying drivers. In addition the
students already have a mind-set that is about production technology when they start to
study the user. Their technology knowledge will at this stage be combined with the
knowledge of the user. The information they gather has to be processed and made into
concepts, and with the mind-set from technology it also needs to be possible to produce.
In addition we also ask them to take a strategic stand, to consider the validity of what they
offer from a commercial perspective and make ethical considerations on top of this. This
means that the task is complex and, while the students develop skills in navigating this
complexity, we also have to acknowledge the time they need to make errors and failures
465
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
before concluding, and delivering their thoughts both in written statements as well as
materialised in all the touch points as a coherent whole.
What are we about to leave out?
The students are, as Donald Schön (1991) suggests, engaging with reflective
conversations in action, which can be seen as the process between the student and the
object that is in the making. However, as the field of design develops, the process of
making must also be seen as a process of learning and engaging with insights from the
outer world. There is a complexity in navigating through a constant change in society, in
the market context and technology as well as in human behaviour. In this module it is the
first time the students iterate a synthesis of this complexity, and the learning aim of this
module has been to prepare the students to make this complex synthesis in the everchanging context they will experience in their professional life. We have learnt that in
developing our students’ ability to become the ‘reflective professionals’ (Light et al., 2011)
that can engage with the complexity in navigating change, they will have to have the time
to iterate, fail and experiment in their processes. This will be one of the most important
changes in the module. We will need to go back to the overall learning objective of this
course. Important decisions will need to be made in identifying what will be the key
objective and then planning the activities accordingly. This could help to better align the
learning objective with activities and outcomes (Biggs, 2007).
With the continuous demand we experience for including new skill sets in the module,
such as developing the student as a design researcher and similar, we seem to have lost
sight of the complexity in this module to start with. In the development of the module, as
well as the degree course it is part of, an important discussion will be whether the
emphasis on new skills is starting to reduce the time our students have to develop their
core skills. Another important consideration for us to have will be on the indication the
findings gave us that the introduction of more formalised research, while lacking time to
experiment and explore how the insights could be made into statements, leads to less
novel as well as less complex synthesis. This could be because the students are still
learners and will need time to absorb how they engage with the user insights. It could also
be that there is a lack of a critical engagement with the research conducted to gain the
insights. The students, therefore, fall into the trap of replicating what users says and using
this to verify their concepts, rather than to engage with the insights critically and translate
them into design concepts.
What we learned in our study is that aesthetic exploration in materials in the workshop
or through digital exploration that is not defined is about more than acquiring basic skills.
It is a highly necessary part of the design education for designers to develop their core
skills, their thinking and their understanding of society, and becomes the medium to
present their complex synthesis that can bring us forward. In light of this study, we will
also emphasise the importance of allowing the students time to explore. In including new
frameworks and theories from multiple disciplines we have less time for what used to be
designers’ strengths to visualise, experiment and to make the abstract concepts tangible.
An important exercise for the Institute of design will be to critically examine all of the
modules taught in the course. If the majority include more theories and frameworks that
466
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
help the students to become more analytical and make rational decisions, it is important to
identify where the students could experiment to develop their intuitive reasoning.
The design discipline has opened up to other fields and ‘designerly ways of knowing’
(Cross, 2006) becomes increasingly important in a management context as well as in
society in general. An important part of the interest in design is that designers have had a
way to navigate in complexity and to make patterns and concepts that are innovative
(Martin, 2009). The interest is based on designers’ work. However, as designers develop
into becoming facilitators, researchers or business managers, new tensions arise and new
skill sets are in demand (Yee et al., 2013). In examining our own teaching practice we have
observed that there are less students doing explorative work, and a general trend that
design school workshops are downplayed. We will ask for a pause to reflect upon industrial
design as a field, and the role of making things in developing the students’ core skills. In
design education, when preparing and developing our students to engage with bigger
questions, is it not important to understand what made us relevant in the first place? Is
there a value in exploring and experimenting as designers used to do, besides what we
already do now? The question we will need to answer is, with the inclusion of all of these
new skill sets, what is it we leave out? In relation to this, we also need to consider how
important is that which we leave out compared with that which we include.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Oslo School of Architecture and
Design’s Institute of Design, all of the GK5 students in the autumn 2013 and
2014 semesters and our lovely co-teachers. In addition we would like to thank
Dr Jamie Brassett (Central Saint Martins), Dr Håkan Edeholt (AHO) and Anders
Groenli (Brand Valley AS) for useful suggestions on how to improve the paper.
References
Abbing, E.R. (2010). Brand-Driven Innovation. London: Ava Publishing.
Akner-Koler, C. (2007). Form & Formlessness. Gothenburg: Chalmers University of
Tecnhology, Axl Books.
Beverland, M., Napoli, J. & Farrelly, F. (2010). Can All Brands Innovate in the Same Way? A
Typology of Brands, Position and Innovation Effort. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 27, 33–48.
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed. Berkshire:
Open University Press.
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing. London: Springer-Verlag.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research. In Seal, C., Gobo,
G., Gubrium, J. & Silverman, D. Quality Research Practise (pp. 390-403). London: Sage.
Hestad, M. (2013). Branding and Product Design: An Integrated Perspective. UK: Gower
Applied Research.
Holt, D. (2002). Why Do Brands Cause Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of Consumer Culture
and Branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (June 2002), 70–90.
Jones, C. J. (2009). What is designing? Design Philosophies and Theories. Design studies: A
reader. Edited by Hazel Clark & David Brody, 77–80.
467
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Karjalainen, T. M. (2004) Semantic transformation in design: communicating strategic
brand identity through product design references. Publication series of the University of
Art and Design: Helsinki.
Keitsch, M.M & Bjørnstad, N. (2010) Ethics in product design curriculum: An example from
The Oslo School of Architecture and Design. In When Design Education and Design
Research meet. The Design Society, 120–125.
Kochargaonkar, A. & Boult, J. (2014). Designing an Innovation Culture within and
Entrepreneurial Environment. Design Management and Innovation DMI:review: Design
and Entrepreneurship: Thinkers, Makers & Doers, 25:3, 10-16.
Koshy, V. (2010). Action Research for Improving Educational Practice: A step-by-step guide.
2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Light, G., Cox, R. & Calkins, S. (2011). Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: The
Reflective Professional. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Lockwood, T. (2010). Design thinking: Integrating Innovation, Customer Experiences, and
Brand Value. New York: Allworth Press.
Martin, R. (2009). The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking is the Next Competive
Advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Minichiello, M. & Anelli, L. (2012) Why do designers draw? Design and Designing: a critical
introduction. Edited by S. Garner & Chris Evans. 82–96. London: Berg Publisher.
Neumeier, M. (2009). The Designful Company: How to Build a Culture of Nonstop
Innovation. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.
Press, M. & Cooper, R. (2003). The Design Experience. The Role of Design and Designers in
the Twenty-First Century. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
Romsaas, J. (2009). The Birth of an Institute. Industrial Design. Shaping Futures. Oslo: Oslo
School of Architecture and Design.
Schön, D. (1991). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Surrey:
Ashgate.
Simon, H. (1994, [1969, 1981]). The Science of the Artifical. 2nd ed. USA: MIT Press.
Tovey, M. (2009) The Passport to Practice. Design and Designing: a critical introduction.
Edited by S. Garner & Chris Evans. 82–96. London: Berg Publisher.
Troye, R. (2014). [Institution] -Works Studies 2013-2014. Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture
and Design.
Yee, J., Jefferies E. & Tan, L. (2013). Design Transitions: Inspiring Stories, Global Viewpoints,
How Design is Changing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: BIS Publishers.
Vogel, C. M. (2010). Notes on the Evolution of Design Thinking: A Work in Progress. In
Lockwood, T. In Design Thinking: Integrating Innovation, Customer Experience and
Brand Value. 3–14.
Wheeler, A. (2006). Designing Brand Identity. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
468
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking
MOOCs
Mana TAHERI* and Christoph MEINEL
Hasso Plattner Institute
*mana.taheri@hpi.de
Abstract: Design Thinking and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have
enjoyed a widespread attention and uptake by both institutes of higher
education and media. These two increasingly popular phenomena have joined
forces in the recent years with several reputable universities offering MOOCs on
Design Thinking. However the MOOC model of learning and Design Thinking
education seem very contradictory at the first glance: Design Thinking is taught
in a learning-by-doing fashion in small teams and through various hands-on
activities. In contrast, MOOCs are most often completed individually. Hence the
seemingly unfitting characteristics of MOOCs and Design Thinking are worth
further investigation. This paper presents the initial stage of a research project
that explores the potential of teaching Design Thinking at scale. It offers a
pedagogical evaluation of the existing Design Thinking MOOCs using the
Taxonomy Table and the Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate
Education. The results shed light on how Design Thinking is being taught today in
a MOOC environment and the learning objectives that the course providers are
expecting.
Keywords: Design Thinking; Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs); Seven
Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education; Taxonomy Table.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
Introduction
The advent of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) sparked a heated debate over their
potential and role for the prospect of higher education in the recent years (Yuan and
Powell, 2013). The increasing popularity of MOOCs challenged the traditional model of
education, leaving residential universities concerned about their role and of becoming
outdated (Holford, Jarvis, Milana, Waller and Webb, 2014). However, most of the MOOCs
that are popularized today are not far from the big lecture hall model of traditional
universities themselves and not as revolutionary as some have claimed (Eisenberg and
Fisher, 2014; Bali, 2014).
The surge in media attention on MOOCs and their so-called revolutionary prospect for
education has declined but still continues. Now that the dust has settled, it is time to take
a closer and more realistic look at MOOCs and their potentials. Taking into account that
MOOCs are only the latest chapter in the long history of distant and open education
(Liyanagunawardena, Adams and Williams, 2013) there is a long path ahead for
researchers to investigate their impact and role for complementing current education and
lifelong learning.
One of the distinctive characteristics of MOOCs, which is superior to the traditional lecture
model, is their degree of flexibility (Nkuyubwatsi, 2013). MOOC is a powerful medium to
reach a wide range of audience independent from time and location; individuals can watch
the course videos according to the setting and time that is best suited to their own
learning needs. However, some critics argue that the MOOC model of teaching and
learning might not be compatible with all types of courses and disciplines. In other words,
while MOOCs seem to be a good fit for those courses that are already taught in big lecture
halls, they may not be appropriate for those requiring specific physical settings such as labs
and studios (Eisenberg and Fisher, 2014). In this light, design education is among the latter
group.
The application of creativity and design has stepped beyond creative industries and into a
wider range of business and real life challenges, largely due to the fact that solving today’s
complex problems demands different ways of thinking and designing (Lloyd, 2013).
Increasing numbers of universities and educational institutions are joining this trend by
incorporating the teaching and learning of Design Thinking, as a human-centered approach
to innovative problem solving (Withell and Haigh, 2013; Dunne and Martin, 2006). The
popularity of the method has proceeded into the world of online learning to the point
where some prestigious universities are now offering MOOCs on Design Thinking (e.g.
Design Thinking Action Lab by Stanford University).
This current trend raises the question of how compatible such courses are with a real life
Design Thinking learning experience. Design Thinking is taught and learned in a rather
unconventional and learning-by-doing fashion: interdisciplinary teamwork, hands-on
activities, rapid prototyping, various iterations, warm-ups and team building exercises are
inevitable parts of a Design Thinking learning experience. Thus Design Thinking and the
current model of MOOCs are seemingly incompatible in their core nature. Given the
emergence of Design Thinking as a discipline (Withell and Haigh, 2013) and its gradual yet
increasing uptake by MOOC providers, there is a strong case for this research project,
which investigates the main research questions of:
How can Design Thinking be best taught in an online environment?
470
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
To what degree can students gain Design Thinking expertise through the MOOC
model of learning?
How can we assess the outcomes and the students’ learnings?
This conceptual paper is the first step in investigating the MOOC potential of Design
Thinking and its impact on individuals’ learning. It offers a pedagogical evaluation of the
current Design Thinking MOOCs, shedding light on how Design Thinking is being taught
today in a MOOC environment and the learning objectives that the course providers are
expecting.
As Bali (2014) argues, since the popularized MOOC model of education is similar to college
courses, for evaluating MOOCs it is more suitable to apply those frameworks and
approaches used for higher education than those for distance education. Thus, for the
purpose of this work, we apply the Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002) and the Seven
Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education developed by Chickering and
Gamson (1987). Given the limited research on learning and teaching Design Thinking in a
MOOC environment, this research will make a significant contribution to the field of Design
Thinking education.
Design (Thinking) Education over Distance
Teaching and learning design-related disciplines is traditionally associated with a physical
setting or a design studio. The role of studio learning for design education has been
emphasized by many scholars (e.g. Lynas, Budge and Beale, 2013). Brown (2005) discusses
the importance of the studio context from various aspects: as students develop their
design, they are constantly exposed to their peers’ works as well as their respective
thinking processes. In addition they benefit from listening to feedback given by experts
and instructors to their peers’ as well as to their own work. This continuous exposure and
interaction between students offers a great learning opportunity.
Despite the above mentioned emphasis on the role of the design studio, design education
has been taught and learned in a distant model for many years in the absence of a
conventional physical studios. The Open University in the UK, for instance offered its first
course on Design, called Man-Made Future: Design and Technology in 1975 (Lloyd, 2013).
Furthermore, the technological developments in recent years have offered new ways of
educational delivery and thus the opportunity to redefine teaching and learning in some
design disciplines (Walpole, 2012).
Lloyd (2013) identifies three main developments which play an important role in enabling
teaching and learning design over distance: firstly, the advent of creative social networks
that allow for individuals to expose their work and design to a broader audience and
consequently receive feedback. Secondly the recent development of the design discipline
itself: design is no longer limited to creating aesthetic artifacts, but has expanded into
different areas e.g. into communication. Finally, with the help of technological
development, design education itself has moved from the studio-based learning model
towards a more digital environment in which students work at home and communicate the
results online for feedback.
Similar to the classic design education, Design Thinking is traditionally taught in a studiobased learning environment. During a conventional Design Thinking workshop, students
471
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
collaborate in interdisciplinary teams, in an open and creative environment, and
participate in hands-on activities to develop innovative solutions (Plattner, Meinel and
Leifer, 2011). As interdisciplinary teamwork is an inevitable part of Design Thinking
problem solving, it poses an additional challenge in replicating the real life experience in an
online environment.
Despite the seemingly incompatible nature of learning experiences of MOOCs and Design
Thinking education, there is a significant value of teaching Design Thinking at scale; in
today’s world, the impact of design goes beyond creative industries and can be applied to
a range of areas (Lloyd, 2013). Managers are becoming more interested in approaching
problems afflicting businesses using design methods (Dunne and Martin, 2006). Moreover
many day-to-day problems that people face around the globe are design challenges in
their nature (Lloyd, 2013).
As Lloyd (2013) pointed out, there is a potential advantage of teaching Design (Thinking) in
a MOOC environment. While many academic design schools have a rather homogenous
selection of students, the MOOC model can tap into the potential of diversity among its
audience. He further argues that the design knowledge transfer in any given design school
is a mix of one-to-one (between mentor and student and therefore more formal) and
many-to-many (among students in an informal manner). In an online environment a manyto-many knowledge transmission should be in the center of the course design and
supported by learning activities. This will allow for participants from different backgrounds
and expertise to be involved in the problem solving process.
Finally, Design Thinking is a human-centered approach to problem solving with the focus
on the needs of the people for whom the solutions are designed for, thus it can be applied
in different cultural contexts. Considering the ever increasing need to apply the Design
Thinking methodology and lessons to address today’s complex challenges (Owen, 2007),
and the fact that there are still limited opportunities internationally to learn and apply
Design Thinking compared to other disciplines, teaching this methodology at scale has the
potential to make a significant contribution in empowering individuals.
As the first step towards identifying how Design Thinking can be best taught in a MOOC
environment, it is necessary to explore the existing MOOCs on Design Thinking and review
the pedagogies across these courses.
Research Approach
In this section we first clarify the steps in which the Design Thinking MOOCs were
identified and present our selection criteria. Then we discuss the role of learning objectives
and their importance for the MOOC research, followed by the placement of the retrieved
objectives of the selected MOOCs into the Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002). Applying
the model of Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education (Chickering
and Gamson, 1987) will allow for assessing to which extent the expected learning
objectives were supported by the pedagogies of the courses. For this purpose we
examined each MOOC individually rather than a genre (Bali, 2014) and took the
perspective of participant observers (Nkuyubwatsi, 2013).
472
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
Selection of MOOCs on Design Thinking
Considering the constant change in the MOOC environment, using a source that provides
an overview of the related courses was crucial to this work. Four MOOC aggregators were
used, namely: Class Central, Course Talk, Open Education Europa and MOOCSE. As a first
step, we searched for the terms Design Thinking and Human Centered Design as these
terms are used interchangeably (e.g. IDEO.com uses human-centered design). This
approach resulted in identification of courses that contained these two keywords in their
titles.
Secondly, to ensure consistency in our study, the following boundaries were defined:
Courses offered in languages other than English were not considered for this review.
However, only one non-English course, taught in French was dismissed as a result. In order
to apply our pedagogical assessment across all courses, we focused on university-level
MOOCs, thus dismissing those offered by individuals on skill sharing platforms (here only
the course Design Thinking: Innovation in Style on Udemy was dismissed). Finally, only
those courses that were free of charge were included (here the course Design Thinking for
Innovative Problem Solving was dismissed).
Table 1
List of existing Design Thinking MOOCs (offered in English)
Provider
Duration
Course Code
Platform
Macromedia University
4 Weeks
DTOC
Iversity
Innovation and Design
Thinking
University of Cincinnati
7 Weeks
IDT
UC MOOCs
Design Thinking Action Lab
Stanford University
5 Weeks
DTAL
Design Thinking for Business
Innovation
Design Kit: The Course for
Human-Centered Design
University of Virginia
4 Weeks
DTBI
Stanford
Online
Coursera
+Acumen
7 Weeks
DK
NovoEd
Course Name
Design Thinking Online
Course
University of
Cincinnati
All these courses are offered on an introductory level requiring no prior knowledge on
Design Thinking from participants. At the time of this study, the following courses were
terminated and no upcoming iterations were offered: Design Thinking Action Lab (Stanford
University), and Innovation and Design Thinking (University of Cincinnati). Therefore the
research sample for our investigation consists of the three courses that were accessible,
namely: Design Thinking Online Course (DTOC), Design Thinking for Business Innovation
(DTBI) and the Design Kit: The Course for Human-Centered Design (DK). The characteristics
of the selected courses will be discussed further in this paper.
Learning Objectives of the Selected MOOCs
Since the advent of MOOCs and consequently the access to large data sets on learners’
activities, researchers have been fascinated by the use of big data through learning
analytics. However, big data does not answer all the questions about learning and teaching
473
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
by the virtue of their size (Reich, 2015). Learning analytics are useful for helping students
to make fewer mistakes and allowing course providers to adapt the pace of the course to
patterns of students’ answers. The important question that arises is how primary these
goals are in the overall learning objectives of a given course and how much they contribute
to the improvement of students’ learning experience? (Eisenberg and Fisher, 2014). Thus,
it is valuable to focus on the improvement of those objectives and goals, which have a
higher and more direct impact on students’ learning. As a first step, curricular objectives of
a given course need to be defined clearly. Once these objectives are prioritized, MOOC
research can pose those types of questions that address the most primary objectives of an
online learning experience.
In addition, identifying clear and measurable learning objectives early on in the process of
course design, enables curriculum builders and course designers to define learning
activities and instructional design for achieving these goals (Krathwohl, 2002). In this light
and with the purpose of identifying those objectives that have significant impact on the
overall learning experience, we begin our investigation by reviewing the selected Design
Thinking MOOCs and their curricular objectives using the framework of the Taxonomy
Table (Krathwohl, 2002).
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives provides educators and course designers
with a structure for classifying statements of what they expect students to achieve and
learn as a result of participation in a given course (Krathwohl, 2002). The original
Taxonomy represented a cumulative hierarchy of six categories in the Cognitive Process
domain, starting from the lower order thinking (simpler category) towards more complex
thinking skills (e.g. evaluation). The Taxonomy has been used as a guidance for educators
to develop learning objectives aiming towards higher order thinking (Bali, 2014).
The revised version of the Taxonomy allows for the separation between the Knowledge
and the Cognitive Process spectrum. Development of the six hierarchical thinking skills on
the Cognitive Process (on the horizontal axis) is tackled on four categories of the
Knowledge dimension (on the vertical axis). Thus, suggesting a possibility to represent the
objectives in a two-dimensional table called the Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002).
In this study, we extracted the learning objectives of the selected courses from their
landing page. Commonly the first page of a MOOC contains general information about the
course, instructor(s), format, as well as what can be expected from the course. It might
contain a short introductory video about the course as well. The process of extracting the
learning objectives was not straightforward, as the objectives are not always mentioned
explicitly. In such cases, they were extracted from the general information about the
corresponding course on the first page.
In order to see how the placement of the extracted learning objectives into the Taxonomy
Table was accomplished, consider the following example extracted from the course DTOC.
One of the objectives mentioned is ‘You will learn how to apply teamwork and
communications skills’. Following Krathwohl (2002) for placement of objectives along the
Cognitive Process dimension we pay attention to the verb Apply, in the statement which is
associated with the category Apply. Consequently in order to place the objective along the
Knowledge axis, consideration of the noun phrase, teamwork and communications skills, is
required, which associates with the Procedural Knowledge category.
However, the placement of some of the statements required additional considerations and
differed from the process that Krathwohl (2002) demonstrated in his work. In other words,
474
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
classifying objectives solely by focusing on the verb and the noun phrase of a given
statement is limiting for our case; consider the following objective as an example:
‘students will create prototype of their solutions’. Following the recommendation of
Krathwohl (2002) if we only note the verb Create, we would place this objective under the
Create category and consequently in the highest order thinking skill. However, creating a
prototype is one of the steps of the Design Thinking process and therefore should be
classified in the cell corresponding with the intersection of Apply and Procedural
Knowledge.
Conceptual
Factual
Table 2
Taxonomy Table of the selected Design Thinking MOOCs
Remember
Understand
DTOC:
[…] fundamentals
like historical and
theoretical aspects
of design, design
models and design
systems
DTOC:
You will gain deeper
insights into the Design
Thinking methodology
and the human-centered
design approach
Apply
Analyse
DTBI:
[…] we will look at
several stories from
different organizations
[…]all using Design
Thinking tools and
approaches
Procedural
DTOC:
You will learn how to
apply teamwork and
communications skills
Metacognitive
Evaluate
DK:
[…] equip you with the
mind-sets and methods of
human-cantered design
[…] inspire you to
approach challenges
differently
[…] experience speaking
to, prototyping for, and
testing solutions with the
people you’re designing
for
DK:
[…] identify patterns and
opportunities for concept
development
475
DTOC:
[…] will teach
you how to
evaluate
ideas and
concepts […]
DK:
[…] experience
how humancantered design
can add new
perspectives to
your own work
[…]
Create
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education
Based on research Chickering and Gamson (1987) defined seven principles on good
teaching in undergraduate education. These principles are still relevant and being used to
assure high quality teaching (Bali, 2014). According to Chickering and Gamson (1987), a
good practice in undergraduate education contains the following attributes:
Encouraging contact between the students and faculty
Encouraging cooperation among the students
Encouraging active learning
Providing prompt feedback
Emphasizing time on tasks
Communicating high expectations
Respecting and supporting diverse talents and ways of learning
Beyond their application in the context of traditional course design, these principles
translate well into the MOOC environment and can guide course designers to create good
instructional practices (Siemens and Tittenberger, 2009).
In discussing different attributes of MOOCs, it is important to define one’s point of view
(Bali, 2014). Since the authors are well experienced with applying, as well as teaching
Design Thinking, taking the perspective of a new learner was not possible. Thus, following
Nkuyubwatsi (2013), informed by our role as researchers and our experience with Design
Thinking, we enrolled and observed, without fully participating in the three accessible
courses, namely: DTOC, DK and DTBI. In each course, we tried different features and
functionalities of the platform and engaged in adequate amount of learning activities to
gain a thorough understanding of their pedagogies and instructional design. Although
these courses shared a common topic, they vary in terms of their content and approach in
teaching Design Thinking.
The course DK focuses on the application of Design Thinking in tackling challenges from the
social sector. Although it is possible to take the course individually, the course providers
highly recommend to form a team, either with colleagues and friends or joining the
already existing teams.
On the other hand, DTBI and DTOC do not require teamwork. The course DTBI emphasizes
the application of Design Thinking for innovation in business environment, as the selection
of examples presented in the course as well the recommended readings imply.
Finally, the DTOC has a theoretical and historical approach in introducing Design Thinking,
in that they allocate a significant part of the course to design theories and models.
In the following we will assess the extent to which each of the three courses has met the
above mentioned principles and consequently shedding light on some of the attributes of
these courses:
Regarding the first principle of encouraging student-faculty interaction, besides
unidirectional weekly emails and video lectures, in DTOC there was very little interaction
between students and instructors. Some answers to forum posts were occasionally signed
as Macromedia MOOC Team, by a contributor who was not mentioned in the teaching
team. Additionally, an email address for the course-related questions was provided, as well
as a Facebook page with a number of uncommented posts. However, students were not
476
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
actively encouraged to utilize them. An invitation to a webinar with the course instructor
on the topic of Design Management was announced in the last week of the course.
In DK the main content was provided through various readings and workshop guides, thus
there are no instructors talking to the camera. These are complemented by short videos
with practitioners sharing their experiences in using different tools and methods. The
course providers were actively supporting participants in the forums through two roles of
Course Catalysts (volunteers who are former participants) and the Teaching Assistants.
In DTBI apart from the weekly questions posed by the course providers to spark
discussions in the forums, in the midst of the course there was an opportunity of one hour
Google hangout, where the instructor answered several pre-compiled questions from the
tweets and forums.
The second principle of developing reciprocity and encouraging cooperation among the
students was hardly addressed in the DTOC. The discussion forum offered the space for
informal cooperation, but it was not actively utilized. Formally, no teamwork and
collaboration was required.
In DK there were various opportunities for interaction between students. The course highly
recommended students to form teams and try to have physical meetings to prepare the
assignments (team workshops) and tweet pictures of their team activities throughout the
course. In addition, participants were encouraged to explore other submissions to
contribute feedback and find inspirations for their own project. Moreover, there were a
number of opportunities for in-person meetups in some cities.
The interaction between students did not go beyond the discussion forums in DTBI. Apart
from course announcements, weekly additional emails provided updates on active
discussion threads and encouraged course participants to join.
The third principle is encouraging active learning. The DTOC relied mostly on quizzes along
some of the video lectures which required students to recall. In addition, some lessons
posed open questions, which were optional for the students to answer. In order to gain a
statement of participation, students were required to complete 80% of the course
materials (including videos and quizzes).
The DK course required participants to apply their learnings to a design challenge and
submit their results throughout the course. Weekly workshop guides provided teams with
instructions on different activities and tasks. There were no quizzes and the statement of
accomplishment was published upon completing course materials (readings and videos)
and submitting all four assignments.
There were no quizzes or weekly assignments in the course DTBI either. However in order
to gain a certificate of accomplishment, students were required to provide an example of
how they applied at least two of the tools they learned from the course.
The fourth principle emphasizes the importance of providing prompt feedback. Despite the
automatic feedback on the multiple-choice quizzes in DTOC, no hints were provided to
improve a wrong answer. This was especially confusing in the case of open questions.
In DK, besides the voluntary peer review and feedback on the assignments, there were
occasional comments from the course staff. However, not all submissions received
comments and reviews.
The only option for providing feedback in DTBI was the final submission (for those
interested in achieving a certificate), as there were no quizzes or assignments. The period
477
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
between the final submission deadline and the first news about the review status was
about a week.
The fifth principle, emphasizing time on task was missing in the DTOC. There is a fourweek course structure that participants are recommended to follow but it is not
mandatory. For multiple-choice quizzes and open questions there were no given time
constraints.
Similarly, the DK recommended soft deadlines to allow for those who joined late to catch
up and be able to submit the assignments before the course closed. Two extra weeks in
advance were allocated for the final submission. On the other hand the required time for
team workshops was estimated about two hours and the workshop guides contained
information about each task and the allocated time needed.
Finally, in the absence of quizzes and assignments in the DTBI, watching the weekly videos
and reading the optional readings were the only time consuming tasks.
Regarding the sixth principle of communicating high expectations, the expectations were
rather low in both DTOC and DTBI. In the case of DTOC, as most of the quizzes asked
students to recall, the requirements for passing the course were not challenging. In DTBI,
apart from the final optional assignment, there were no requirements or deadlines to be
fulfilled during the course.
On the other hand the expectations for completing the DK course were rather high.
Submitting four assignments required both time and team commitment. For each
assignment students needed to complete the course materials and allocate two hours for
the team workshop.
Finally, the last principle is respecting and supporting diverse talents and ways of learning.
Beyond offering a set of standard features such as quizzes, video lectures and
recommended readings, DTOC did not actively use multimedia to support diverse learning
styles.
In DTBI, the subtitle feature and the option of downloading the lecture slides was helpful
in supporting non-native speakers of the audience.
In DK a link to a Dropbox folder that included all the course materials in a single PDF
format was provided, for those groups of participants with limited Internet access.
Moreover regarding the course project, students had the freedom to choose from either
the three pre-crafted design challenges by IDEO.org, or a design challenge from their own
social context.
Conclusion
Comparing the retrieved learning objectives of the selected courses and the results of the
participant observation, allows for evaluating the extent to which the expected objectives
were supported by the practices used in these courses. It also demonstrates the existing
variations in pedagogies across these courses. It is important to point out that not all
courses need to incorporate all the principles by Chickering and Gamson. In other words
the application of good practices depends on how they can support the expected learning
objectives (Bali, 2014).
Despite the absence of assignments and peer interaction in the course DTBI, the
instructional practices of the course match its primary goal of introducing the Design
Thinking methodology and its application in real life, as the following statement extracted
478
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
from the course suggests: ‘In this course we will look at several stories from different
organizations […] all using Design Thinking tools and approaches to achieve better
outcomes.’
The pedagogies of the course DK allows for seeking its goal of enabling students to apply
their learnings to a real life design challenge. Thus, moving towards developing higher
order thinking (Apply).The final submissions of the teams that demonstrates how they
applied their learnings to their design project support this claim.
Finally, although the pedagogical approaches used in DTOC are suitable for introducing
‘…the fundamentals like historical and theoretical aspects of design, design models and
design systems’ (retrieved from the course website), they fall short in fulfilling some of the
expected objectives. For instance ‘learning how to apply teamwork and communications
skills’ in a course where cooperation between students is not encouraged, seem hard to
achieve.
As Table 2 demonstrates, there is an emphasis on objectives requiring the skill of applying
and carrying out a procedure. This implies that the focus is mostly on teaching the process
steps of the Design Thinking methodology. Thus assignments, tasks and activities need to
be incorporated that encourage students to apply their learnings. Moreover, learning a
new skill to a level of applying it requires time and commitment. Although loose schedules
and less demanding assignments might be appealing to busy adult learners, but
communicating low expectations might also hinder the potential learning that one could
get from the course (Bali, 2014).
The evaluation further highlights good practices that tap into some of the unique
potentials of MOOC model of education. The lack of student-faculty interaction for
instance, can be mitigated to some extent by engaging former students in the supporting
team, as seen in the course DK. Due to the large number of participants in each iteration,
course designers can form a strong support team in collaboration with many former
students.
Furthermore, the massive nature of the MOOCs offers a great opportunity for encouraging
cooperation among students (Stewart, 2013). Considering the fact that students
conventionally learn Design Thinking through interaction and collaboration in
interdisciplinary teams, having students from different countries and disciplines offers a
great opportunity to course designers to tap into the potential of diversity (Lloyd, 2013). A
course that puts student interaction in the center of the learning experience will allow for
participants from different backgrounds and expertise to be involved in the problem
solving process and collaborate on a design challenge.
Finally, reaching a global audience in an effective way, requires awareness of existing
challenges and limitations in different parts of the world. In another word, MOOC
designers need to think beyond their own context (e.g. video lectures with high resolution
pose a challenge to those with limited internet access). Furthermore using global examples
and incorporating stories beyond ‘Western World’ in a given course, will help to resonate
with a broader audience (Bali, 2014).
Discussion
This paper has provided a pedagogical assessment of the selected Design Thinking MOOCs
using both Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002) and the Seven Principles of Good Practice in
479
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
Undergraduate Education (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). The following remarks emerged as
a result of this work:
Firstly, in classifying the learning objectives of a given Design Thinking course using the
Taxonomy Table, the terminologies of the process steps of Design Thinking should be
taken into close consideration. In other words, classification solely based on the verb and
noun phrase will be misleading in this case.
Secondly, as Brown (2005) and Lloyd (2013) point out, there is a division between learning
about and learning to be. However some objectives claimed by the above-mentioned
courses aim for outcomes towards learning to be a Design Thinker. Achieving such
objectives requires course designers to take a more project-based teaching approach and
communicate higher expectations with the participants.
Although we limited our review of MOOCs on Design Thinking to courses taught in English,
interestingly this resulted in dismissing only one course which was taught in French. This
indicates that teaching Design Thinking in a MOOC environment has been taken up mainly
by English courses and offers a huge potential for international educators to design
courses in other languages, and thus reaching a more diverse audience.
Moreover it is important to highlight that the results of the keyword search varied among
the four aggregators, which implies that they are not covering all courses.
As a first step of a broader research project, our review has several limitations. In our
attempt to extract learning objectives of the selected courses, our sole source of
information was the welcoming page of each course. The presented objectives were those
claimed by the course providers on their web page. In order to evaluate the impact of
these objectives on students’ learning experience and their development of Design
Thinking attributes, survey and in-depth interviews with participants are required as a next
step. Thus, there shall be further collaboration with the course providers in the future.
Moreover, the pedagogical evaluation using the above mentioned frameworks was
completed by two reviewers separately, followed by a discussion. To avoid the risk of a
subjective categorization it is recommended to involve more reviewers and to measure the
inter-rater reliability.
Despite the limited number of accessible MOOCs on Design Thinking found in this study,
the authors believe that this is a positive movement in demystifying and introducing the
potential of Design Thinking methodology to a broader audience.
Acknowledgements: I am profoundly thankful to Prof. Katharina Hölzle for
her supports and constructive feedback.
References
Bali, M. (2014). MOOC pedagogy: gleaning good practice from existing MOOCs. MERLOT.
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 44-56.
Brown, J. S. (2005). New learning environments for the 21st century. In Futures Forum.
Chickering, A. W. & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. AAHE bulletin, 3, 7.
Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design thinking and how it will change management
education: An interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
5(4), 512-523.
480
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
Eisenberg, M., & Fischer, G. (2014). MOOCs: a Perspective from the Learning Sciences. In
Learning and Becoming in Practice. Boulder, Colorado.
Holford, J., Jarvis, P., Milana, M., Waller, R., & Webb, S., (2014). The MOOC phenomenon:
toward lifelong education for all? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 33:5, 569572
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic
study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open
and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202-227.
Lloyd, P. (2013). Embedded creativity: teaching design thinking via distance education.
International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 749–765.
Lynas, E., Budge, K., & Beale, C. (2013). Hands on: The importance of studio learning in
design education. Visual Inquiry, 2(2), 127-138.
Nkuyubwatsi, B. (2013). Evaluation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) from the
learner’s perspective.
Owen, C. (2007). Design Thinking: Notes on its Nature and Use. Design Research Quarterly,
2(1), 16–27.
Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2011). Design Thinking: Understand – Improve – Apply
Heidelberg: Springer – Verlag.
Reich, J. (2015). Rebooting MOOC Research. Science Magazine, 347(6217), 34–35.
Siemens, G., & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook of emerging technologies for learning.
Manitoba, Canada: University of Manitoba.
Stewart, B. (2013). Massiveness + Openness = New Literacies of Participation? MERLOT.
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 228-238.
Walpole, H. (2012). Preparing to Teach Architecture Online: The Hurdle of the Design
Studio. In ASCILITE-Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education
Annual Conference (Vol. 2012, No. 1).
Withell, A., & Haigh, N. (2013). Developing Design Thinking Expertise in Higher Education
(Vol. 2). Presented at the International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo,
Norway.
Yuan, L., Powell, S., & CETIS, J. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher
education. Cetis White Paper.
481
This page is intentionally left blank.
Author Index
ACKERMANN, L., 575
AFLATOONY, L., 563
AHMED, A., 548
AIA, 1034, 1099
AITCHISON, I., 1536
ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, L., 366
ATMAN, C., 1498
BADKE-SCHAUB, P., 330
BAKIRLIOĞLU, Y., 1569
BALL, C. E., 1701
BARNEY, D., 142
BARTON, G., 347
BASNAK, M., 683
BENKER, A., 1319
BJØRNSTAD, N., 455
BOĞA-AKYOL, M., 970
BOLING, E., 1417
BÖREKÇİ, N., 264
BRAND, A., 1255
BRAUN, J., 1585
BROWN, P., 1432
BRUNMAIR, B., 1397
BSIESY, A., 1072
CALLAHAN, K., 735
CHEVRIER, J., 1072
CHILDS, P. R., 1255
CHORNYAK, B., 45
CHU, S., 1628
CORAZZO, J., 32
COŞKUN, A., 1569
CROTCH, J., 589
DALY, 308
DANKL, K., 535
DAY, J., 1057, 1518
DE LA SOTTA, P., 1481
DEE, M., 1349
DELVAUX, F., 954
DENARDI, F., 1585
DEWBERRY, E., 1536
DIGRANES, I., 800
DISKIN, S., 1255
ECHEVERRI, D., 870
EDEHOLT, H., 673
EL AHDAB, D., 715
EL-KHOURY, N., 1287
ELSEN, C., 954
EMANS, D., 604, 1301
ENGLISH, S., 623
EROGLU, I., 156
ESTEVAN, J. A., 638
FERNÁNDEZ, J., 1381
FERREIRA da SILVA, G., 1276
FONTAINE, L., 748
FRANKE, A., 366
FREIMANE, A., 187
FRIEDMEYER, W., 991
FRY, A., 655
FUJIKAWA, M., 1255
GAO, B., 882
GIBSON, M., 1016
GILLETT, D., 80
GONÇALVES, E., 1585
GONZALEZ, 308
GONZÁLEZ RAMOS, A., 1132
GONZÁLEZ, M., 1381
GRAHAM, M., 142
GRAY, 308
GRAY, C., 1417
GRAY, C. M., 1680
GRIEVE, F., 109
GRÖPPEL-WEGENER, A., 93
GROSS, K., 19
GUERSENZVAIG, A., 1669
GUO, Y., 214
HAMDY, B., 604
HAMUY, E., 1481
HE, R., 214
HEAPE, C., 1362
HESTAD, M., 382, 455
HLAVACS, H., 1397
HOLDEN, G., 1645
HOWARD, C. D., 1680
1715
Author Index
HU, Y., 214
HUNSUCKER, A., 443
HUTCHINSON, A., 430
HYNES, W., 1002
INAKAGE, M., 1255
INGALLS VANADA, D., 278
JACOBS, J., 200
JAMES, M., 485
JANCART, S., 954
JOINES, S., 847
JONES, D., 1599, 1645
KAISER, Z., 1616
KAPKIN, E., 847
KAYA, C., 156
KAYALI, F., 1397
KEANE, L., 1034, 1099
KEANE, M., 1034, 1099
KUCZWARA, J., 1397
LAWITSCHKA, A., 1397
LAWSON, C., 518
LEHNER, S., 1397
LINN, S., 3
LOBO, T., 907
LOFTHOUSE, V., 774
LOPEZ-LEON, R., 1465
LOTZ, N., 1536, 1645
LÖYTÖNEN, T., 168
LUIPPOLD, C., 330
LUNDBERG, S., 1255
LUPINACCI, A., 230
MADANI, L., 1072
MAINSAH, H., 1701
MÄKELÄ, M., 168
MALCOLM, J., 923
MANLEY, A., 774
MANNS GANTZ, P., 1132
MARTIN, P. S., 715
MARTINEK, D., 1397
MARTINSON, B. E., 1628
MATEUS-BERR, R., 1397
McDONNELL, J., 1498
MEEK, K., 109
MEINEL, C., 469
MILLS, D., 940
MONTORE, M., 230
MORRISON, A., 1701
MUELLER, R., 330
MUELLER-RUSSO, K., 1255
MURDOCH-KITT, K., 1301
NAPIER, P., 246
NASH, K., 1616
NAVARRO-SANINT, M., 366
NEBEL, M., 1397
NOEL, L., 1118
NORMAN, C., 416
O’REILLY, J., 382
ORTHEL, B., 1518
OVERBY, C., 655
ÖZGEN KOÇYILDIRIM, D., 1569
PEÑA, J., 1381
PENNINGTON, M., 1255
PERELLI, B., 1481
PERRONE, R., 819
PETERS, K., 1397
PLOWRIGHT, P., 397
POGGIO, N., 518
POLDMA, T., 1333
RAESIDE-ELLIOT, F., 1552
REITHOFER, A., 1397
REITSPERGER, P., 382
RINGVOLD, T., 800
ROJAS, C., 57
ROJAS, F., 623
ROJAS-CESPEDES, C., 366
SANCHEZ RUANO, D., 923
SCHAEFER, K., 790
SEIFERT, 308
SELIGER, M., 131
SHAYLER, M., 774
SHREEVE, A., 80
SIEGEL, M., 443, 1432
SILBERNAGL, M., 1397
SILVA, J., 834
SMITH, A., 1552
SMITH, K., 1417
SOARES, L., 698
SOSA-TZEC, O., 1432
SPENCER, N., 623
SPRUNG, M., 1397
STALS, A., 954
STELZER, B., 575
STEVENS, J. S., 1255
1716
Author Index
TAHERI, M., 469
TAKEYAMA, N., 500
TAUKE, B., 683
TEMPLE, S., 1454
THORING, K., 330
TİMUR-ÖĞÜT, S., 970
TRIMMEL, S., 897
VAUGHAN, L., 1701
WADA, T., 246
WAKKARY, R., 563
WALCH TRACEY, M., 430
WANG, F., 1267
WEIDEMANN, S., 683
WEINSTEIN, K., 1084
WHITCOMB, A., 1319
WILSON, J., 655
WÖLFLE, R., 1397
YACOUB, C., 1333
YILMAZ, 308
YOUNG, R., 623, 1552
YU, Y., 1267
1717
Chicago, IL USA / JUNE 28–30 2015
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference
for Design Education Researchers
Editors
Robin VandeZande is a strong advocate for the teaching of design education at
the elementary and secondary levels. An associate professor of art education at
Kent State University, her research and publications include teaching sustainable
design, K-12 design education as it relates to social responsibility, the economy and
enhancement to life. She has recently completed a framework for the Principles,
Practices and Strategies of teaching design under a National Art Education
Foundation grant. Dr. VandeZande is a trustee of DESIGN-ED, Advisory Council
Robin VandeZande member of Fallingwater, Education member of the National Building Museum,
Washington, DC., past-chair of the NAEA Design Issues Group, and chair of the
Learnxdesign2015 Conference.
978- 952- 60- 0069- 5
Ingvild Digranes
Ingvild Digranes’ research interests include: curriculum studies and design education
for citizenship as well as professional challenges for design educators. Dr Digranes
chairs the course Educational Theory and Practice in Art and Design Education at
Oslo and Akershus University College in Norway, and also teaches and supervises
at master and PhD level. Ingvild has experience in policymaking through curriculum
development at local and national levels. Dr Digranes chairs the NGO Art and Design
in Education, and sits in the board for the Nordic Collaboration of Craft Teachers. She
is the guest editor for the FORMakademisk Special Issue from the conference.
ISBN 978-952-60-0069-5
Erik Bohemia
Erik Bohemia’s current research explores changes associated with globalisation and
the impact of these changes on design. Such research has been used to develop
various funded research projects, as well as an innovative international collaboration
through the Global Studio. Dr Bohemia is actively shaping the design education
agenda through co-chairing key international design education research conferences
and through editorial roles. Erik is currently leading programme development for the
Institute for Design Innovation at Loughborough University London. Dr Bohemia is an
elected member of DRS’ Executive Council, an international society for developing
and supporting the interests of the design research community.
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference
for Design Education Researchers
VOLUME I
Robin VandeZande
Erik Bohemia
Ingvild Digranes
CUMULUS Association / DRS SIG on Design Pedagogy /DESIGN-ED Coalition
Proceedings of
the 3rd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers
28–30 June 2015, Chicago, Il, USA
Volume 1
Editors
Robin Vande Zande
Erik Bohemia
Ingvild Digranes
Proceedings compiled by Laura Santamaria
Text review by Tiiu Poldma
Editorial arrangements by Erik Bohemia, Ingvild Digranes and Robin Vande Zande
©2015 Aalto University, DRS, Cumulus, DESIGN-ED and the Authors. All rights reserved
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers
ISBN 978-952-60-0069-5 (vol. 1–4)
Volume 1 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1200.7520
Volume 2 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5001.8409
Volume 3 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2904.6880
Volume 4 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2642.5440
Published by Aalto University
School of Arts, Design and Architecture
PO Box 31000, FI-00076 Aalto
Finland
Design Research Society
DRS Secretariat
email: admin@designresearchsociety.org
www.designresearchsociety.org
CUMULUS the International Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and Media
Cumulus Secretariat
Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture
PL 31000, 00076 Aalto, Finland
Secretary General Eija Salmi
Tel: +358 505 927060
email: eija.salmi@aalto.fi
www.cumulusassociation.org
DESIGN-ED Coalition
344 Crescent Avenue
Spotswood, NJ 08884
USA
www.design-ed.org
LEGAL NOTICE: The publisher is not responsible for the use which might be made of
the following information.
This conference proceedings version was produced on 26 June 2015
The DRS//CUMULUS// DESIGN-ED 2015 Chicago: the 3rd International Conference for
Design Education Researchers was hosted by The School of the Art Institute of
Chicago. The conference was organised by: DRS PedSIG, CUMULUS, DESIGN-ED, Oslo
and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Kent State University, SAIC and
Loughborough University.
Patrons of the Conference
Walter Massey, President of the School of the Art Institute
Michael Tovey, DRS PedSIG
Luisa Collina, Cumulus International Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and
Media
Conference Chair
Robin Vande Zande, Kent State University, USA
Conference co-Chairs
Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Ingvild Digranes, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
International Scientific Review Committee
Linda Keane, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, USA
Drea Howenstein, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, USA
Ingvild Digranes, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Alison Shreeve, Buckinghamshire New University, United Kingdom
Robin VandeZande, Kent State University, USA
Mike Tovey, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Liv Merete Nielsen, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Eddie Norman, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Janne Beate Reitan, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Ricardo Sosa, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Hilary Grierson, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Rande F Blank, University of the Arts, USA
Delane Ingalls Vanada, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Doris Wells-Papanek, Design Learning Network, USA
Yuan Lu, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
Nithikul Nimkulrat, Estonian Academy of Arts, Estonia
Linda Drew, Ravensbourne, United Kingdom
Kay Stables, Goldsmiths, University of London, United Kingdom
Jennifer Loy, Griffith University, Australia
Mark Evans, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Ming Cheung, University of Adelaide, Australia
Nancy Vanderboom-Lausch, College for Creative Studies, USA
Kevin Henry, Columbia College Chicago, USA
Teri Giobbia, West Virginia University, USA
David Spendlove, Manchester Institute of Education, United Kingdom
Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
International Review Board
Trygve Ask, Scandinavian Business Seating AS, Norway
Steen Ory Bendtzen, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Rande F Blank, University of the Arts, USA
Erik Bohemia, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Elivio Bonollo, University of Canberra, Australia
Kaisa Borg, University of Umeå, Sweden
Susan Braccia, AIM Academy, USA
Han Brezet, TU Delft, Netherlands
Hernan Casakin, Ariel University Center, Israel
Peter Childs, Imperial College London, United Kingdom
Stefano Chinosi, The Office of Ingenuity – Newton Public Schools, USA
Priscilla Chueng-Nainby, TU Delft, United Kingdom
Amy Cline, AIM Academy, USA
Alison Dale Crane, Blue Valley School District, USA
Alma Culen, University of Oslo, Norway
Nancy Alison de Freitas, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
Christine De Lille, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Giovanni De Paoli, University of Montreal, Canada
Gaurang Desai, American University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
Ingvild Digranes, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Linda Drew, Ravensbourne, United Kingdom
Mark Evans, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Evren Akar, UTRLAB, Turkey
Nusa Fain, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Laila Belinda Fauske, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Biljana C. Fredriksen, Vestfold University College, Norway
Philippe Gauthier, University of Montreal, Canada
Aysar Ghassan, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Jacques Giard, Arizona State University, USA
Teri Giobbia, West Virginia University, USA
Carma R. Gorman, University of Texas at Austin, USA
Mark Allen Graham, Brigham Young University, USA
Colin M. Gray, Iowa State University, USA
Hilary Grierson, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Anthony Guido, The University of the Arts, USA
Tore Gulden, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Marte Sørebø Gulliksen, Telemark University College, Norway
Robert Harland, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Oriana Haselwanter, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Garreth Heidt, Perkiomen Valley School District, USA
Kevin Henry, Columbia College Chicago, USA
Monika Hestad, Central Saint Martins College of Art and Design, United Kingdom
Jan Willem Hoftijzer, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Drea Howenstein, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, USA
Berit Ingebrethsen, Telemark University College, Norway
Konstantinos Ioannidis, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece
Bill Ion, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Derek Jones, The Open University, United Kingdom
KwanMyung Kim, UNIST, Ulsan National Insitute of Sciences and Technology, South Korea
Michael K. Kim, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA
Ahmed Kovacevic, City University London, United Kingdom
Nicole Bieak Kreidler, La Roche College, USA
June Krinsky-Rudder, Revere High School, USA
Ksenija Kuzmina, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Teemu Leinonen, Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture, Finland
Gerry Leonidas, University of Reading, United Kingdom
Fern Lerner, independent researcher, USA
Andre Liem, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway
Viveca Lindberg, University of Stockholm, Sweden
Peter Lloyd, University of Brighton, United Kingdom
Maria Cecilia Loschiavo dos Santos, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil
Jennifer Loy, Griffith University, Australia
Yuan Lu, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
Ole Lund, Gjøvik University College, Norway
Eva Lutnæs, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Patricia Ann Maunder, University of Pennsylvania, USA
Graeme Stewart McConchie, Unitec Institute of Technology, New Zealand
Janet McDonnell, Central Saint Martins, United Kingdom
C.Thomas Mitchell, Indiana University, USA
Ravi Mokashi Punekar, Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, India
Liv Merete Nielsen, Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway
Nithikul Nimkulrat, Estonian Academy of Arts, Estonia
Eddie Norman, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Jane Osmond, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Carlos Peralta, University of Brighton, United Kingdom
Tiiu R Poldma, University of Montreal, Canada
Mia Porko-Hudd, Åbo Akademi University, Finland
Janne Beate Reitan, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Mariana Rachel Roncoletta, Anhembi Morumbi University, Brazil
Aidan Rowe, University of Alberta, Canada
Bonnie Sadler Takach, University of Alberta, Canada
Norun Christine Sanderson, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Norway
Mike Santolupo, John Paul II Catholic Secondary School, Canada
Gaia Scagnetti, Pratt Institute, USA
Nicole Lotz, Open University, United Kingdom
Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarinen, Helsinki University, Finland
Hyunjae Shin, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Alison Shreeve, Buckinghamshire New University, United Kingdom
Beata Sirowy, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway
Astrid Skjerven, Oslo and Akershus University College, Norway
Liliana Soares, Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, Portugal
Ricardo Sosa, Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand
David Spendlove, University of Manchester, United Kingdom
Kay Stables, Goldsmiths, University of London, United Kingdom
John Stevens, Royal College of Art, United Kingdom
Pim Sudhikam, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
Kärt Summatavet, Aalto University, Finland-Estonia
Barbara Suplee, University of the Arts, USA
Yasuko Takayama, Shizuoka University of Art and Culture, Japan
Nanci Takeyama, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Juthamas Tangsantikul, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
Kevin Tavin, Aalto University, Finland
Michael Tovey, Coventry University, United Kingdom
Kurt Van Dexter, landscape architect/The Greene School, USA
Delane Ingalls Vanada, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
Robin Vande Zande, Kent State University, USA
Nancy Vanderboom-Lausch, College for Creative Studies, USA
Johan Verbeke, KU Leuven, Belgium and Aarhus School of Architecture, Denmark
Andrew D. Watson, Fairfax County Public Schools, USA
Heidi Weber, Fachhochschule Vorarlberg - University of applied Science, Austria
Fabiane Wolff, UniRitter - Laureate International Universities, Brazil
Mithra Zahedi, University of Montreal, Canada
Nigel Zanker, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Table of Contents
Editorial
LearnxDesign2015=Design in Kindergarten Through Higher Education
Robin Vande Zande .............................................................................................................................. i
Introductions
A Perspective on the Learn X Design Conference from the DRS Special Interest Group in Design
Pedagogy
Michael Tovey ......................................................................................................................................v
Luisa Collina ........................................................................................................................................ ix
VOLUME 1
— CHAPTER 1. —
ACADEMIC AND VOCATIONAL CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT
Prototyping Smart Devices: Teaching Interactive Electronics and Programming In Industrial Design
Silvan LINN .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Kelly GROSS....................................................................................................................................... 19
Designing the Discipline: the Role of the Curriculum in Shaping Students’ Conceptions of Graphic
Design
James CORAZZO ................................................................................................................................ 32
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Brooke CHORNYAK ........................................................................................................................... 45
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
Carolina ROJAS .................................................................................................................................. 57
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Alison SHREEVE and David GILLETT .................................................................................................. 80
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
Alke GRÖPPEL-WEGENER ................................................................................................................. 93
Whose Job Is It Anyway?
Fiona GRIEVE and Kim MEEK .......................................................................................................... 109
Research Meets Practice in Master’s Theses
Marja SELIGER................................................................................................................................. 131
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
Mark GRAHAM and Daniel BARNEY
142
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools in Industrial Design Education
in Turkey
Ilgim EROGLU and Cigdem KAYA .................................................................................................... 156
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Maarit MÄKELÄ and Teija LÖYTÖNEN............................................................................................. 168
— CHAPTER 2. —
DESIGN THINKING, MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN EDUCATION
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development For School Age Children
Aija FREIMANE ................................................................................................................................ 187
From Design Thinking to Art Thinking
Jessica JACOBS ................................................................................................................................ 200
Table of Contents
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Ying HU, Yinman GUO and Renke HE ...............................................................................................214
Educating By Design
Marcello MONTORE and Ana Lucia LUPINACCI ...............................................................................230
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum: A Framework For Shaping a Participatory, Human-Centered
Design Course
Pamela NAPIER and Terri WADA .....................................................................................................246
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Naz A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ .........................................................................................................................264
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-Making in Design Thinking
Delane INGALLS VANADA ................................................................................................................278
Hidden Value - Towards an Understanding of the Full Value and Impact of Engaging Students in
User-Led Research and Innovation Projects Between Universities and Companies
Mark BAILEY, Mersha AFTAB and Neil SMITH ..................................................................................290
What Problem Are We Solving? Encouraging Idea Generation and Effective Team Communication
Colin M. GRAY, Seda YILMAZ, Shanna R. DALY, Colleen M. SEIFERT and Richard GONZALEZ
308
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Katja THORING, Carmen LUIPPOLD , Roland M. MUELLER and Petra BADKE-SCHAUB ....................330
Architecture: Teaching the Future/Future of Teaching
Gemma BARTON .............................................................................................................................347
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Miguel NAVARRO-SANINT, Lina M. ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, Carolina ROJAS-CESPEDES and Annelie
FRANKE ............................................................................................................................................366
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Philip REITSPERGER, Monika HESTAD and John O’REILLY ................................................................382
Structuring the Irrational: Tactics in Methods
Philip D. PLOWRIGHT .......................................................................................................................397
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Caroline NORMAN
416
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
Monica WALCH TRACEY and Alisa HUTCHINSON ............................................................................430
Once Upon a Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
Andrew J. HUNSUCKER and Martin A. SIEGEL .................................................................................443
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Nina BJØRNSTAD and Monika HESTAD............................................................................................455
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
Mana TAHERI and Christoph MEINEL ..............................................................................................469
VOLUME 2
— CHAPTER 3. —
DESIGN EDUCATION TO IMPROVE LIFE AND THE WORLD
Design Thinking and the Internal: A Case Study
Meredith JAMES ..............................................................................................................................485
Empathy as Component of Brand Design
Nanci TAKEYAMA .............................................................................................................................500
From Engagement to Impact in Design Education
Cynthia LAWSON and Natacha POGGIO ..........................................................................................518
Teaching for Future Health Care Innovation
Kathrina DANKL ...............................................................................................................................535
Table of Contents
Bringing Holistic Design Education to Secondary Schools in Pakistan
Ayesha AHMED ............................................................................................................................... 548
Thoughtful Thinkers: Secondary Schoolers’ Learning about Design Thinking
Leila AFLATOONY and Ron WAKKARY ............................................................................................. 563
Getting in Touch With the Users
Laura ACKERMANN and Bernd STELZER ......................................................................................... 575
An Architecture of Experience
Joanna CROTCH .............................................................................................................................. 589
WonderBox: Storytelling and Emerging Technologies
Denielle EMANS and Basma HAMDY .............................................................................................. 604
Making Mindfulness Explicit in Design Education
Fernando ROJAS, Stuart ENGLISH, Robert YOUNG and Nick SPENCER ........................................... 623
No Sustainability Possible Without Emotion
Juan Albert ESTEVAN ...................................................................................................................... 638
Designing Financial Literacy: Research x Community
Aaron FRY, Carol OVERBY and Jennifer WILSON
655
Design as a New Futural Epistemology: Design Education Made Relevant for Climate Change and
Development
Håkan EDEHOLT .............................................................................................................................. 673
Universal Design in Architectural Education
Beth TAUKE, Megan BASNAK and Sue WEIDEMANN ...................................................................... 683
Pedagogical Encounters: Typography and Emotion
Ana Filomena CURRALO and Liliana SOARES .................................................................................. 698
A Pedagogical Prototype Focused on Designing Value
Peter S. MARTIN and Dana EL AHDAB ............................................................................................ 715
Empowering Designers Through Critical Theory
Kristin CALLAHAN............................................................................................................................ 735
Pictographic Storytelling for Social Engagement
Lisa FONTAINE ................................................................................................................................ 748
Carbon Footprinting for Design Education
Vicky LOFTHOUSE, Alan MANLEY and Mark SHAYLER..................................................................... 774
Restoring Hope Tote by Tote
Kate SCHAEFER ............................................................................................................................... 790
Future Scenario Building and Youths’ Civic Insights
Tore Andre RINGVOLD and Ingvild DIGRANES ................................................................................ 800
— CHAPTER 4. —
SYSTEMS THINKING AND ECOLOGICAL URBANISM
Integrating Fantasy Into the Creative Process
Raffaella PERRONE .......................................................................................................................... 819
Understanding the Design Project Draft Through Motion
Jose SILVA ....................................................................................................................................... 834
From Systems Thinking to Design Criteria: Synthesis Through Visualization
Engin KAPKIN and Sharon JOINES ................................................................................................... 847
Deconstruction as a Structured Ideation Tool for Designers
Daniel ECHEVERRI ........................................................................................................................... 870
Exploring Ecological Urbanism by Service Design – An Experimental Project of ‘Street Food’
Bo GAO ........................................................................................................................................... 882
Table of Contents
The Cityzens: A Serious Game for the Future
Stephan TRIMMEL ...........................................................................................................................897
Directions Towards Sustainability Through Higher Education
Theresa LOBO ..................................................................................................................................907
VOLUME 3
— CHAPTER 5. —
DESIGN INSPIRED BY NATURE (BIO-MIMICRY)
Using Nature to Inspire Design Values, Issues & Ethics
Jacquelyn MALCOLM and David SANCHEZ RUANO .........................................................................923
Integrating Art and Science in Placed-based Education
Deborah N. MILLS ............................................................................................................................940
Challenges in Teaching Architectural Morphogenesis
Adeline STALS, Catherine ELSEN, Sylvie JANCART and Frédéric DELVAUX ......................................954
Exploring Biomimicry in the Students’ Design Process
Miray BOĞA-AKYOL and Şebnem TİMUR-ÖĞÜT ..............................................................................970
— CHAPTER 6. —
DESIGN AS AN INTEGRATIVE TOOL FOR EDUCATION
Learning Through Design: Professional Development
Wendy Kay FRIEDMEYER .................................................................................................................991
Impacting Student Attitudes Towards Teamwork
Wendy HYNES ................................................................................................................................1002
Learning to Design Backwards
Michael R. GIBSON ........................................................................................................................1016
Design THIS Place: Built Environment Education
Linda KEANE and Mark KEANE.......................................................................................................1034
High-Performance Building Pedagogy
Julia DAY ........................................................................................................................................1057
Can a Smartphone Be a HomeLab?
Joël CHEVRIER, Laya MADANI and Ahmad BSIESY .........................................................................1072
Interpreting the Critique Through Visualization
Kathryn WEINSTEIN .......................................................................................................................1084
STEAM by Design
Linda KEANE and Mark KEANE.......................................................................................................1099
Creating Caribbean Stories Through Design
Lesley-Ann NOEL
1118
Human Centered Design at the Service of Educational Research
Patricia MANNS GANTZ and Alberto GONZÁLEZ RAMOS ..............................................................1132
— CHAPTER 7. —
MULTIDISCIPLINARY DESIGN EDUCATION
Grounded Theory in Art and Design
Mike COMPTON and Sean BARRETT..............................................................................................1149
A Project-Based Approach to Learning: Comparative Study of Two Disciplines
Nuša FAIN, Beverly WAGNER and Nikola VUKAŠINOVIĆ................................................................1168
Table of Contents
The Affordances of Designing for the Learning Sciences
Lisa GROCOTT and Mai KOBORI .................................................................................................... 1180
Interact: A Multi-Disciplinary Design Course
David BOYCE, Joanna CROTCH and Rosa GODSMAN .................................................................... 1196
Social Creativity and Design Thinking in Transdisciplinary Design Education
Hyun-Kyung LEE and Soojin JUN ................................................................................................... 1211
Of Dreams and Representations: Storytelling and Design
Ozge MERZALI CELIKOGLU ............................................................................................................ 1227
An Initial Model for Generative Design Research: Bringing Together Generative Focus Group (GFG)
and Experience Reflection Modelling (ERM)
Yekta BAKIRLIOĞLU, Dilruba OĞUR, Çağla DOĞAN and Senem TURHAN ..................................... 1236
— CHAPTER 8. —
LOCAL AND GLOBAL CONNECTIONS TO DESIGN EDUCATION
Design Without Borders: A Multi-Everything Masters
John Simon STEVENS, Katrin MUELLER-RUSSO, Megumi FUJIKAWA, Peter R. N. CHILDS, Miles
PENNINGTON, Scott LUNDBERG, Steve DISKIN, Masa INAKAGE and Andrew BRAND ................. 1255
Dilemma and Countermeasures of Shenzhen Industrial Design Education
Fangliang WANG and Xiaobao YU ................................................................................................. 1267
Crossed Paths: Education, Creativity and Economics
Gisele Costa FERREIRA da SILVA ................................................................................................... 1276
Genius Loci and Design Concept
Nada EL-KHOURY .......................................................................................................................... 1287
Experiential Elements of High-To-Low-Context Cultures
Kelly M. MURDOCH-KITT and Denielle EMANS............................................................................. 1301
Research Training in a DESign+MAnagement Network
Andrew WHITCOMB and Andreas BENKER ................................................................................... 1319
Humanitarian Design For Refugee Camps: Solutions in Crisis Situations
Tiiu R POLDMA and Claude YACOUB ............................................................................................. 1333
VOLUME 4
— CHAPTER 9. —
DESIGN THINKING AND ENGINEERING
Fostering Creativity
Meaghan DEE................................................................................................................................ 1349
Today’s Students, Tomorrow’s Practitioners
Chris HEAPE .................................................................................................................................. 1362
Technological and Project Competencies for Design Engineers Driven by Nearable and Wearable
Systems
Marta GONZÁLEZ, Jessica FERNÁNDEZ and Javier PEÑA............................................................... 1381
Co-Designing Avatars for Children with Cancer
Ruth MATEUS-BERR, Barbara BRUNMAIR, Helmut HLAVACS, Fares KAYALI, Jens KUCZWARA, Anita
LAWITSCHKA, Susanne LEHNER, Daniel MARTINEK, Michael NEBEL, Konrad PETERS, Andrea
REITHOFER, Rebecca WÖLFLE, Marisa SILBERNAGL, Manuel SPRUNG ......................................... 1397
Table of Contents
— CHAPTER 10. —
VISUAL LITERACIES AND DESIGN THINKING
Studio Teaching in the Low-Precedent Context of Instructional Design
Elizabeth BOLING, Colin M. GRAY and Kennon M. SMITH .............................................................1417
Exploration of Rhetorical Appeals, Operations and Figures in UI/UX Design
Omar SOSA-TZEC, Martin A. SIEGEL and Paul BROWN ..................................................................1432
Learning to Draw Through Digital Modelling
Stephen TEMPLE ............................................................................................................................1454
Developing Visual Literacy in Design Students
Ricardo LOPEZ-LEON......................................................................................................................1465
— CHAPTER 11. —
VISUALIZATION IN DESIGN EDUCATION
Visualization as Assessment in Design Studio Courses
Eduardo HAMUY, Bruno PERELLI and Paola DE LA SOTTA .............................................................1481
Paying Attention to the Design Process: Critically Examining Personal Design Practice
Janet McDONNELL and Cynthia ATMAN........................................................................................1498
Processing Through Drawing: a Case Study of Ideation
Julia K. DAY and Bryan D. ORTHEL .................................................................................................1518
Out of Sight, Out of Mind: Curriculum Representation in Design Education Today
Iain AITCHISON, Emma DEWBERRY and Nicole LOTZ.....................................................................1536
Teaching Business Concepts Using Visual Narrative
Annabel SMITH, Robert A. YOUNG and Fiona RAESIDE-ELLIOT .....................................................1552
Time-Based Visual Narratives for Design Education
Dalsu ÖZGEN KOÇYILDIRIM, Aykut COŞKUN and Yekta BAKIRLIOĞLU ...........................................1569
Education and Design: Integrator Project in Editorial Design
Jan Raphael Reuter BRAUN, Davi Frederico do Amaral DENARDI and Elton Luiz GONÇALVES ......1585
— CHAPTER 12. —
PHILOSOPHY OF DESIGN EDUCATION
Reflection-in-Action and Motivated Reasoning
Derek JONES ..................................................................................................................................1599
[Un]Learning x Design from the Ground, Up
Zachary KAISER and Kiersten NASH ...............................................................................................1616
Social Comparison Theory and the Design Classroom
Barbara E. MARTINSON and Sauman CHU ....................................................................................1628
Social Engagement in Online Design Pedagogies
Nicole LOTZ, Georgy HOLDEN and Derek JONES ...........................................................................1645
Intuition as a Valid Form of Design Decision Making
Ariel GUERSENZVAIG .....................................................................................................................1669
Dialogue and PhD Design Supervision
Andrew MORRISON, Laurene VAUGHAN, Henry MAINSAH and Cheryl E. BALL ............................1701
Author Index – 1715
This page is intentionally left blank.
Editorial
LearnxDesign2015=Design in Kindergarten Through
Higher Education
Welcome to the conference proceedings ‘LearnXDesign2015’ a comprehensive
engagement of topics across themed design pedagogy and research. The papers delivered
at the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, co-organized by
DRS, CUMULUS, and DESIGN-ED, are the focus of these volumes.
The richness and variety of themes and subjects at the conference and the sheer
number made it impossible for the delegates in attendance to take in the full range of
presentations. The excellence of the presentations deserves to be shared, especially for
those who have missed the opportunity to participate in all sessions. These volumes offer
a chance for everyone to read the papers that capture the varied nature of the forums and
presentations.
The conference was graciously hosted by the School of the Art Institute in Chicago.
Highlighted at the heart of the conference were varied presentations and workshops. To
prepare for the conference, we asked design researchers to submit their work for
consideration. Scholars proposed 289 paper abstract, 31 workshop and 2 symposia
submissions. The International Scientific Review Committee invited 243 paper abstract
submissions to proceed into the next stage to submit as full papers. After double blind full
paper review by the International Review Board, 106 full papers were accepted to be
included in the conference proceedings with an additional 23 workshops and 1 symposia
delivered at the conference.
The high quality of papers are due to the International Scientific Review Board
members whose expertise and time was essential to the success of the conference paper
review process. The board was co-chaired by Dr. Erik Bohemia of the Institute for Design
Innovation, Loughborough University London, and Dr. Ingvild Digranes of the Oslo and
Akershus University College of Applied Sciences. The significance of the papers from this
conference foreshadow the fate of the field and show how design education has the
potential to be an instrumental part of the larger marketplace of ideas.
Subject threads organized the schedule of presentations. The delegates were able to
follow a single thread, attending sequential sessions or could mix sessions to suit. The
papers covered topics for elementary, secondary, and higher education. The subject
threads addressed the local and global multidimensional relations and interconnections of
design education and design thinking with such diverse topics as nature, society,
engineering, economics, media, and ecological urbanism. Academic and vocational
curriculum development was presented in many sessions in reference to design as an
integrative tool through a multidisciplinary philosophy to education. The most discussed
aspect during the three days was that design should be used to improve life and the world.
i
ROBIN VANDE ZANDE
As was emphasized at the 2nd conference in Oslo in 2013, this conference continued
the focus of the teaching of design to elementary through higher education as an essential
contributor in support for a better tomorrow. Every day we need to apply knowledge from
a variety of sources to resolve problems, manage relationships, and establish a quality
life. The interdisciplinary model of making connections within fields of study creates
relevance and context, and assists students in understanding relationships among
concepts. The goal of this conference was to contribute, on both theoretical and practical
levels, to the analysis of the potential of multidimensional relationships and interactions of
Education and Design to enlighten a citizenry that will strive to constructively problem
solve to make a better life and world.
A prime motivation in our opening keynote session was to inspire a dialogue about
design and the world. With representatives from 34 countries participating, a major theme
of the conference debate was that the global community must change in a very
fundamental way if it is to become stable. Why are these issues of concern for design
educators worldwide? If we are to have a better world, the general populace has to build
it, and if we are to be successful, everyone must take responsibility. Design thinking
through the design process of problem solving is an approach to rethinking certain
assumptions by looking at our everyday world with a new perspective, challenging what is
possible, and reconsidering our relationship to things familiar. Design education is
addressing the welfare of people and the environment, reflecting a renewed appreciation
of and respect for nature. Sustainability is taught to show that a less consumptive lifestyle,
respect for the environment and the interdependence of life, creating safe objects for
long-term use, and concentrating on communities and economic systems will help improve
our world. There is attention being given to designing for improving the physical and
emotional quality of life for everyone, referred to as universal design. Socially responsible
design reflects the growing awareness of our finite resources and factors that are
damaging to the environment as well as the realization that designed objects should have
flexibility in order to be accessible to all. Design education brings all of this to the
consciousness of students in order to show them ways to be empowered to do something
constructive to help.
I want to thank our scientific review members for their diligent work in reviewing a
large number of paper submissions. Many of our reviewers read multiple papers and wrote
comments to help guide the authors in revisions for improvement. This was time intensive
and could never have been accomplished without a great deal of help. The reviewers’
names are listed before the Table of Contents.
Post- conference a few of these papers will be published in special issues of the
following academic journals: Design and Technology Education, TRACEY, FORMakademisk,
and Curriculum and Instruction. The role of journals as an arena for design education
research is essential for the advancement of knowledge production within the field.
A heartfelt thanks to Joe Schwartz, trustee of DESIGN-ED, for putting so many of the
conference pieces in place. Thanks are also due to leaders of the School of the Art
Institute: Professor of Architecture and Environmental Design, Linda Keane; Dean of
Continuing Studies, Rob Bondgen; assistants Brandon Labash and Zachary Thomas Sayers;,
and Professor of Art, Design, and Education, Drea Howenstein, for their tremendous
support in hosting this conference. Our gratitude also to SAIC students for their valuable
contributions.
ii
Editorial
We are also grateful to our supporters and sponsors: Autodesk, Stratasys, Morgan
Manufacturing, School of the Art Institute of Chicago, The Chicago Cruise Line, and The
Public Society branding firm, as well as other supporting partners. The trustees of DESIGNED are pleased to have partnered with DRS and CUMULUS to have collaboratively provided
this platform for a community of scholars and practitioners to join together in advancing
design education. We look forward to a future of working together to create new
conferences bi-annually.
Although we might be successful in providing the ‘flavor’ of the 2015 Conference in
these volumes, we know that much evades us. We cannot, for instance, capture those
enthusiastic conversations that followed presentations and spilled into the hallways and
receptions. We are unable to produce the ‘community’ spirit where a group of individuals
explored new ideas and cultivated collaboration during and after the event. We cannot
invoke those unpredictable moments of sharing stories and asking questions; the chance
to challenge and be challenged, and where learning together fueled motivation.
However, the foundation of the conference came from the papers that exist in the
pages of these conference proceedings. The papers provide a major avenue to
communicate research results and ideas to one another. The real success lies in the
opportunity afforded design educators and researchers from all over the world, whether in
attendance at the conference or not, to share topics of mutual interest, to learn from each
other, and to collaborate in order to better prepare our students to contribute in a positive
manner to this rapidly changing world.
Robin Vande Zande
Associate Professor of Art Education, Kent State University
Chair of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers
iii
This page is intentionally left blank.
Introduction
Introductions
A Perspective on the Learn X Design Conference from
the DRS Special Interest Group in Design Pedagogy
Michael Tovey
Leader DRS SIG in Design Pedagogy
The Design Research Society is a multi-disciplinary learned society for the design
research community worldwide. The DRS was founded in 1966 and facilitates an
international design research network in around 40 countries. It has three main aims. It
focuses on recognising design as a creative act, common to many disciplines. It has the
intention of understanding research and its relationship with education and practice. Then
there is the overall aim of advancing the theory and practice of design. The membership of
DRS is international.
The Society’s Special Interest Group in Design Pedagogy is one of nine in the society. It
aims to bring together design researchers, teachers and practitioners, and others
responsible for the delivery of design education, and to clarify and develop the role of
design research in providing the theoretical underpinning for design education. These aims
are not directed simply at one type of design education, but are intended to include all
ages. However as the current membership of DRS is predominantly from universities
inevitably there is some emphasis on design education at that level.
The first DRS/CUMULUS Symposium was held in Paris in 2011. Its overarching aim was
to explore how innovation in education is informed by and is informing design research.
The symposium focused on design education, innovation in general education through
design, and on innovation in business and engineering education through design
integration. It was successful and it marked the point at which the Design Pedagogy Special
Interest Group became could be said to be established as an effective force in design
research.
The second DRS/CUMULUS conference was held in Oslo in May 2013. The theme of the
conference was ‘Design Learning for Tomorrow – Design Education from Kindergarten to
PhD’ Its theme of design was large and ambitious. The conference was intended to be an
international springboard for sharing ideas and concepts about contemporary design
education research. It was open to different facets of contemporary approaches to such
research in any aspect and discipline of design education. With several hundred
participants it was a great success and has led to several journal publications.
This is the third DRS/CUMULUS conference. Entitled Learn x Design, and held in
Chicago in 2015, it has an ambitious range of topics from theoretical research to practical
application. The assumption is that at a career level, the intention in the study of design is
v
MICHAEL TOVEY
to create a well-crafted, aesthetic fit of form to function, materials, and tools. We can
interpret each designed product in terms of a narrative about the culture from which it
evolved, about the person who produced it, and the values and practices of both. Design
academics who have engaged in scholarship and research to develop theories and
principles about learning have the opportunity to present their work at the event. For
many the classroom can be a laboratory in which they test and validate new approaches
and thus extend policy and practice. The conference is international and it aspires to be a
springboard for sharing ideas and concepts about contemporary design education research
and the teaching of design. The range and quality of the papers provides evidence of the
vitality of research and scholarship in design pedagogy.
Other research societies have similar strands of research in design education. The
Design Society has an annual international conference in Engineering and Product Design
Education, and International Association of Societies of Design Research includes a strand
dedicated to design pedagogy research.
It is quite appropriate that design academics should engage in investigations which are
intended to extend our understanding and capability of the discipline. Design academics
do almost all of the design research which leads to academic publications. Design
practitioners get on with designing, and leave design research to the academic community.
One of the key questions addressed in the book Design Pedagogy1 is whether or not
there are links between design research and design teaching. The clear conclusion is that
there are such links, and maybe they could be closer. The strand running through the
chapters is that design research does support design teaching, and they show a number of
ways in which this is the case. This is a good reason for undertaking design research. If
there is a close link with design teaching, particularly if design research supports effective
design teaching, then that will gives design academics good reasons for doing such
research.
Although design research is wide ranging in the approaches employed, and design is a
holistic discipline which can overlap many areas, its research is in some ways limited. In a
science such as physics the research is fundamental and if its research stops then
effectively the discipline comes to a halt. Without physics research there is no physics. We
cannot claim that design is like that. For if academic design research were to stop then
design would continue, more or less regardless. Designers would continue designing
things, and probably the world would notice very little difference. It could be argued that
design research is not central to design practice.
Although in much design practice there is a stage which is labelled as ‘research’ it
usually consists of the process of information gathering to provide the starting point for
designing, to inform the evaluative framework, and the context for the design. And these
are crucial parts of the process and essential to its success. But this is not what we mean
by design research in an academic context. In a university design research is an activity
which is directed to exploring and understanding the nature of design, its processes and
methods. It has more rigorous academic ambitions than the data gathering part of the
design process and it is expected to conform to conventional standards of academic
scholarship.
1
Tovey, M (2015), ‘Design Pedagogy – Developments In Art and Design Education’, Gower, Farnham,
England, and Burlington, USA.
vi
Introduction
Universities and colleges which provide design courses have a long tradition of
recruiting designers from design practice. However the tendency now is to regard the
possession of conventional academic qualifications as a necessary pre-requisite for holding
a full time academic position. Good practical experience as a designer is desirable but a
PhD is often essential. In the context of the design discipline the clear implication is that to
create a body of work for a PhD in design then you must undertake design research.
It is notable that many of the key insights of design research have in fact come from
academic studies involving students. This was particularly true in the early days of such
research. An example is the identification of the solution led approach as a key ingredient
in the process2. However the problem in studies involving students is that they are only
novice designers, and so any conclusions are not as powerful as those based on
professional designers.
The area of design research where this conclusion does not apply is research into
design education. Self-evidently research based on design students has relevance to the
process of teaching design. To this extent design pedagogic research can be seen as
possessing particular authority. It functions crucially to enable us to understand design
students better, and thus to enable design education to be improved. Where the research
is into pedagogy which has a design practice focus then it also allows us to understand
more deeply what is needed in preparation for the professional practice of design.
Design education research has taken a number of directions, focusing on the designer,
the design context and the design interface, each of which provides a useful agenda for
developing such research1. Many see the end goal as that of achieving design programmes
which are directed towards equipping graduates for entry to the community of
professional practice. This in itself justifies the engagement of practitioners in the process.
Various teaching strategies can accommodate these approaches. The studio, tutorial,
library and crit. are the traditional components, but using them effectively depends on the
approach being informed by a deep understanding of the designerly way of knowing. The
design education research reported on in this recent compilation of activity of the Design
Pedagogy Special Interest Group of DRS shows some of the ways in which this can be
achieved. The papers of the Learn X Design conference show much more extensively what
is possible
2
Lawson, B (1980) ‘How Designers Think’, Architectural Press, London, England.
vii
This page is intentionally left blank.
Luisa Collina
President, Cumulus Internationational Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and
Media
Full Professor, Politecnico di Milano
The international association Cumulus was set up 25 years ago to promote knowledge
exchange and sharing among universities and colleges of design, art and the media. This is
both an aim to achieve by involving increasing numbers of students and teaching staff, and
means of raising overall standards of professional training, to the benefit of all. Over the
years, as it has grown and became more recognizable as an international interlocutor,
Cumulus has also assumed a role of orientation with regard to certain issues of general
interest. From the Kyoto Design Declaration (2008) onwards all members of the Cumulus
network have committed to promoting lifestyles, values, and educational models centring
on environmental sustainability and human-centred development. In particular, the
association members have pledged ‘to commit themselves to the ideals of sustainable
development’ and ‘to seek collaboration with educational and cultural institutions,
companies, governments and government agencies, design and other professional
associations and NGOs to promote the ideals of and share their knowledge about
sustainable development.’
Exchange, sharing and the promotion of sustainable development by spreading the
culture of design underpin the collaboration between Cumulus and the Design Research
Society that has given rise to the International Conferences for Design Education
Researchers, of which the conference this year is the third. These biennial encounters
carry on the idea of design as a cross-disciplinary activity that cuts across various
professional fields and right through the formative years from infancy to adulthood. From
an educational point of view, design does not address only future professional designers,
but can also accompany numerous courses of study at all levels.
Cumulus, as an association focused on education, and the Design Research Society, as a
research organisation, jointly promote the idea that design is a way of thinking, of
developing creativity, of helping to tackle and solve problems, and that its teaching
contributes to creating more aware and responsible citizens, producers and consumers.
However, research, experimentation, pilot cases, assessment and validation activities,
moments of reflection and sharing are required to achieve these aims. In such a
framework, the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers DESIGN-ED
‘LearnXDesign’ constitutes an extraordinary opportunity for growth in this direction. For
this, I would like to thank all those who, on behalf of the Design Research Society, have
made this event possible with their constant, daily commitment and great professionalism.
I am certain the results will be of exceptional interest.
ix
This page is intentionally left blank.
Volume 1.
— Chapter 1. —
Academic and Vocational
Curriculum Development
This page is intentionally left blank.
Prototyping Smart Devices: Teaching Interactive
Electronics and Programming In Industrial Design
Silvan LINN
San Francisco State University
silvan@sfsu.edu
Abstract: Many products today derive much of their user interaction from a
combination of microelectronics, software and network connectivity. Ongoing
industry trends suggest that ‘smart’ products will become even more widespread
across many different specialties in industrial design in the future. A designer
with experience in these fields can enhance their design process by developing
accurate, functional design prototypes that support better user testing.
However, design students may have little to no prior background in electronics,
making the introduction of such topics a challenge. Topics in electronics and
programming can be successfully introduced to design students by framing the
content around a familiar design process methodology. Inspiration can be found
in the tools and techniques adopted by the ‘Maker’ movement, which encourage
rapid development of functional prototypes through synthesis of knowledge and
repeated iteration – highly similar to the design process of conceptualization,
user testing and refinement. The paper discusses the aforementioned trends;
proposes a theoretical background and structure of a course in Smart Product
Design for industrial design students; presents two case studies of running the
class at San Francisco State University as a 5-week intensive program; and
constructs a framework for teaching similar courses at other higher education
institutions.
Keywords: Smart products; design process; industrial design education; maker
movement
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
SILVAN LINN
Introduction
The nature of industrial design is changing. Interactive electronic and software
elements are becoming increasingly prevalent across all categories of products, in many
cases forming the core of the user-product interaction. Industrial designers who
understand how to work with these technologies can use them to enhance their design
process. We created a course titled ‘Prototyping Smart Devices’ targeted at the specific
needs of industrial design students to help them learn to develop functional electronic
prototypes of their designs. The course was test-run twice in the summer session with a
total registration of 16 students. These students were surveyed about their experiences,
confirming that the course is generally successful and indicating new directions for further
improvement. Based on the results of our case studies, we propose a general framework
for teaching similar content in other university-level industrial design programs.
Importance of Functional Prototypes
As experts in the human-machine interface, industrial designers have always worked
with the juncture between technology and the human being. The design profession is one
major method through which the scientist’s research and the engineer’s technology are
made accessible, comfortable, and usable to the everyday person.
Advances in electronics, particularly the miniaturization and mass production of various
types of environmental sensors and improvements in battery technology, have created a
new category of products under the umbrella term of the ‘Internet of Things’. This concept
proposes an ongoing shift in the user experience of the Internet ‘from a network of
interconnected computers to a network of interconnected objects’ (Koreshoff, Leong, &
Robertson, 2013, p. 363). In other words, products that have traditionally had no or only
very simple electronic features (e.g.: dishwashers, light bulbs3) will begin to incorporate
new functionalities such as internet connectivity, environmental sensors, data processing,
and user feedback channels. It thus becomes important that practicing industrial designers
have an ability to develop these interactive electronic devices, or smart products, as fluidly
and seamlessly as any other product of their design process.
In order to be successful in this area, designers need to have an understanding of the
underlying concepts. Aprile and van der Helm (2011, p. 1) describe interactive products as
‘products that contain computer technology as a coupling layer between the controls (user
interface) and the mechanism triggering some desired function.’ In other words, the smart
product requires a set of electronic input and output systems, and uses programmed
computer logic to tie the two together.
A working knowledge of the methods used to develop electronic circuits and computer
programs would have several immediate benefits to designers. For instance, experience
constructing battery-powered devices would give insight into the design trade-offs
between battery life, physical size, and product performance. Designers with a deeper
technical understanding of a product under development may also be able to
communicate better with engineering teams, and an awareness of the state of the art in
3
Many current concepts are related to the ‘smart home’ and focus on internet control and
automation of home appliances. See for instance Metz (2012).
4
Prototyping Smart Devices
interactive electronics could improve innovation. More importantly, though, a designer
with the appropriate skills could construct a fully functional prototype of a smart product
in service of their design process. These prototypes, used directly by target users through
focus groups or other user testing methods, could help validate a design concept with
higher fidelity than ‘Wizard of Oz’ testing4 or paper interface prototyping methods.
Functional interactive prototypes could also allow data to be automatically gathered
during test cycles, then stored for later analysis to improve subsequent iterations 5. In the
past, building these prototypes involved a background in engineering, a great deal of
experience, and significant cost. Recently, though, developments in hobbyist products like
Arduino6 – a system of free software and inexpensive electronic hardware that allows
users to easily build and program interactive electronic projects – have made it possible for
people with little technical experience to create working electronic devices on their own
after a few dozen hours of learning and at a cost of under $100 USD.
Having established that industrial design students can benefit from learning these skills,
several questions arise. How does one teach a complex technical topic to students whose
may not have prior knowledge of this field? What aspects of the vast fields of
programming and electronics are the most relevant to industrial design? How can we
ensure that students quickly develop a useful skill-set that can directly enhance their
design process?
Theoretical Background
Design process
Industrial design requires a general understanding of a wide range of different fields. A
practicing designer may work on a toy design one day, a medical product the next, and
kitchen appliances the day after. Donald Norman discusses the resulting importance of
designers seeing themselves as generalists (Norman, 2011), holding a broad understanding
of a variety of fields related to not only their practice, but the specific product under
development. He suggests that one of the designer’s key strengths is their ability to
synthesize these disparate bodies of knowledge on a high level, creating unconventional
and creative solutions – but also admits that this broadness may result in designers having
a relatively poor understanding of the technical details:
The designer utilizes great representational skills along with a human-centered point of
view. No other discipline trains its practitioners with this particular combination of
skills. This unique point of view coupled with the specialized craft training in thinking
and drawing is what leads to the power of great design … still, designers are mostly
unschooled in the content areas in which they work. (Norman, 2011)
4 Wizard
of Oz testing: in which the functionality of a product in user testing is simulated by a ‘man
behind the curtain’ watching the user’s behaviour and triggering appropriate actions covertly or
overtly.
5 Naturally the proposed product’s functionality would be tested with an engineering-grade
prototype before production. The key benefit to giving designers the tools to prototype realistically is
that it can take place at a much earlier phase and far more frequently in the process.
6 Arduino is explained further in the Course Structure section that follows. See also www.arduino.cc
5
SILVAN LINN
While acknowledging the difficulty of the task, Norman suggests that designers would
benefit from a deeper understanding of the technical details 7 of the products they are
developing, if this can be achieved without compromising the freedom and innovation of
the design process – using technology in service of design, rather than the other way
around. This succinctly expresses a major part of our rationale for developing the course.
Arguably the most valuable single skill taught in industrial design programs is the
design process itself. The specific structure of the process varies according to the situation,
but generally always includes phases of problem-definition, conceptual development,
testing, and repeated iteration for refinement. Within this structure there is great freedom
for creative development. Hill (1998), discussing the value of teaching complex technical
concepts through an experiential design process8, notes the necessity of exploration: ‘The
confidence to explore, discover and take risks becomes critical when we understand that in
creation and invention, there are always states of order and disorder’ (p. 216), and ‘…these
processes are not linear, systematic or predictable with one right answer’ (p. 205). So,
regardless of the specific content of the proposed course, it is likely to benefit from being
structured according to the design process – both because design students already
understand it as a frame of reference, and because the very nature of the process is
valuable in technical education.
Maker movements
While the design process is formalized by professional designers, its key methodologies
are seen in numerous other creative endeavours. One particularly notable direction that
combines open-ended problem solving, experiential learning, and an emphasis on
knowledge synthesis is the ‘Maker’ movement: a community centred around a modern reinterpretation of do-it-yourself practice, with heavier emphasis on the integration of high
technology9 into the experience. It is likely that the techniques used by Makers would
could be used to help integrate high technology into a design curriculum.
The general Maker ethos encourages breadth of experience and exploration of many
different areas for inspiration – ‘people take a little bit from here and a little bit from
there, and the resulting mash up leads to some pretty exciting creations’ (Dougherty, 2012,
p. 12). Upon running into trouble, people are encouraged to take advantage of the
enormous online community of Makers for support – being a generalist and relying on the
expertise of specialists, as Norman might put it. The movement is highly informal and
decentralized, and Makers are encouraged to not worry about the end goals of the
7 As
a specialist in the user experience and former executive at Apple, Inc., Norman frequently
suggests topics in electronic, mechanical and computer engineering, but the general lesson applies to
many specific technical fields.
8 The value of learning through experimentation is well-established. Dewey wrote in 1938 of how
students build their understanding of a subject through comparison with their prior experiences
(Dewey, 2007). The design process is a specific applied example, where the designer creates
improvements to a product based on their evaluation of prior versions.
9 This can be direct integration, e.g. a sewing club starting to use computer-controlled embroidery
machines, or it can be indirect, e.g. maintenance and expansion of a sub-community through social
networking websites.
6
Prototyping Smart Devices
process, but simply make something. Dale Dougherty, founding editor of Make magazine,
describes one of his inspirations – early garage-bound Silicon Valley hackers:
…those makers in the early days of the computer industry were essentially playing with
technology. They didn’t know what they wanted computers to do and they didn’t have
particular goals in mind. They learned by making things and taking them apart and
putting them back together again, and by trying many different things…(Dougherty,
2012, p. 12)
A related development worth studying is the growth of ‘Makerspaces 10‘ – shared
community workshops filled with prototyping equipment and designed to support the
types of projects a Maker might undertake. While these have existed since at least the
mid-1990s both independently11 and in academic settings12, increased public awareness
can be attributed significantly to the prominence of the Maker movement. A Makerspace
can be seen as the movement’s counterpart to a formal electronics lab or machine shop;
by embracing the creative disorder of a studio environment, and attempting to bring many
individuals with disparate backgrounds together in the same place, an environment that
fosters exploration and inquisition is created.
Existing Curricula
The teaching of topics in electronics and computer programming to designers has been
examined from a variety of perspectives. Of course keenly interested design students may
choose to study these fields on their own, through elective courses, a degree minor, or
simply by self-teaching. Introductory courses within a computer science or electrical
engineering department, however, usually aim primarily to provide technically-minded
students with a strong theoretical foundation for further study, and so may not result in
immediately practical knowledge that the design student can apply in their process.
As such, a number of other strategies have been proposed and executed. Aprile and
van der Helm describe a course titled Interactive Technology Design, a part of the graduate
Interaction Design program at TU Delft (Aprile & van der Helm, 2011). This course takes
place over twenty weeks and emphasizes multiple phases of prototyping using various
tools like Arduino. It is targeted at graduate students of interaction design, not
undergraduate industrial designers, but provides a useful structure for the required
gradual build-up of technical knowledge.
Some courses targeted at designers emphasize one specific element of smart-product
design. Hu and Alers (2010) discuss AdMoVeo, a robotics platform intended to teach
industrial design students about computer programming. Their course teaches Processing
– a graphics-oriented programming language developed for designers and artists (Reas &
Fry, 2014) – but the authors recognized that the students would benefit from ‘[bringing]
their creations alive in the physical world’ (Hu & Alers, 2010, p. 412). To this end, the
authors developed a wheeled robot and taught students to write code controlling its
behaviour. While this does give students an introduction to the electronic complexity of a
smart product, it limits their ability to develop new products of their own.
10 See
also ‘hackerspace’ – historically a more common term.
E.g. Berlin’s c-base, http://www.c-base.de/
12 E.g. the Georgia Tech Invention Studio, http://inventionstudio.gatech.edu/
11
7
SILVAN LINN
Finally, it has also been demonstrated that many of the new computer programming or
electronic development tools designed primarily for non-technical users are suitable for
use in more advanced situations. For instance, Jamieson (2010) describes the successful
use of the Arduino platform in a course in embedded system design within in an
electrical/computer engineering department. This suggests that design students learning
with similar tools are unlikely to find their knowledge constrained should they choose to
continue their study beyond the course.
Challenges
Teaching industrial design students about smart product development is not without
its challenges. Arguably the greatest hurdles to overcome are in the theoretical
underpinnings of programming and electronics. Computer science and electrical
engineering courses usually rely on the students having a strong grounding in universitylevel mathematics and physics; design students may not have this background, and setting
such courses as prerequisites is not usually reasonable. This limits the depth to which some
topics may be covered, and has particularly strong implications for the student’s ability to
understand unusual errors (debugging).
Some experience with math and physics is essential. Fortunately, many design
programs encourage or require students to have experience with at least high-school-level
algebra and basic electrical physics. With proper selection of the software and hardware
tools used in the course, this is likely sufficient to gain a useful high-level understanding of
the principles at work.
A related challenge in the course design is attaining a balance between ease of access
and overall flexibility. Spending more time on fundamental concepts might allow the
student to develop more elegant solutions in the end, but focusing too much on low-level
material without immediate hands-on reinforcement risks compromising the freedom to
experiment and quickly iterate that is so critical to the design process and the Maker
ethos. So a balance must be struck at all levels and with all topics, never forgetting that the
ultimate goal is for the student to have a functional skillset at the end of the course.
Finally, a major potential problem could be simply giving the students enough time.
Practicing concepts through repeated experimentation works well, but the process is slow.
A hands-on course of this type is likely to be more effective if spread out over a longer
period of time.
Course Structure
The course we developed is titled Prototyping Smart Devices (PSD) and is part of the
Department of Design and Industry at San Francisco State University (DAI, SFSU). It is an
elective course intended for design students in their final year of study, but is open to any
design student at the junior level and above. In this section we discuss the hardware and
software tools used in the course, the laboratory infrastructure, teaching methodologies,
and course deliverables.
8
Prototyping Smart Devices
Learning Outcomes
The main learning outcome of the course is for students to learn the skills of electronic
product prototyping, and to demonstrate these skills through the construction of a
prototype device. The technical aspects of the course cover, generally:
electronic circuit design and logic
computer program structure, data flow, and control
basic use of Arduino (uploading code, features, etc.)
interfacing with environmental sensors and input devices
processing real-world data and reacting to changes
controlling electronic output devices, low and high power
researching and understanding electronic components
Ideally, by the end of the course, students should have a solid foundation in the
methods of working with most common prototyping components, and enough experience
to successfully seek out solutions to new technical questions and continue learning on
their own. They should be able to use electronic prototyping as just another tool in their
set of design process skills.
The design-driven aspects of the course emphasize the utility of the tools in service of
the design process. By the end of the course, students should understand how an
electronic prototype can be useful to their process, how to properly conceptualize and
break down an interaction for logical construction, how to integrate the electronic
prototype with more traditional techniques, and how to present it effectively in the
context of a design portfolio.
Tools
In nearly all cases, the electronic core of a smart product is a microcontroller – a small,
efficient, low-power computer ‘system-on-a-chip’ that can be programmed with custom
code and embedded into its target device for independent operation. Looking to existing
literature and the Maker community, we find that a wide variety of microcontroller
development systems13 might be suitable for study at the intended level. After evaluation,
the Arduino platform was determined to be the best for use in Prototyping Smart Devices.
Arduino consists of both a free software toolchain 14 and a set of standardized
microcontroller boards, the most common model (the UNO as of this writing) priced
around USD $30. Designed specifically to help people without a technical background get
started with microcontroller development, the Arduino has become an great success and a
frequently-referenced cornerstone of the Maker movement (Honey & Kanter, 2013;
Torrone, 2011), with well over 700,000 official boards produced and likely a large number
of unofficial ‘Arduino-compatible’ clones in circulation as well (Medea, 2013).
13
In addition to the range of different Arduino boards, other microcontroller options are given an
overview in the course, as they each have advantages and disadvantages in certain situations. Some
of the more prominent examples: BASIC Stamp, Parallax PICAXE, Raspberry Pi, BeagleBone Black, TI
Launchpad, discrete AVR.
14 Toolchain: the set of programs that need to be used in sequence to build a computer program.
With microcontrollers, this includes at least a code editor, a compiler, and an uploader; Arduino
integrates them all into a single interface.
9
SILVAN LINN
Arduino balances accessibility with enough flexibility to give students room to grow at
the end of the course, and enjoys ample support beyond the classroom. The first ‘hello
world’ program can be written in minutes, but the language students learn is C, one of the
most widely used worldwide. If learners become lost, an extensive online community
abounds with code examples and project tutorials, and active online discussion forums
provide solutions to troublesome questions and bugs.
On its own, the Arduino board is limited to blinking a single light-emitting diode; its
flexibility comes from connecting it to other electronic components. Students in PSD used
a kit of additional parts that was customized to the class, but generally similar to the
Arduino starter kits available from various suppliers15. Customizations emphasized tangible
inputs and outputs – plenty of LEDs, sound generators, motors and other physical
actuators, and sensors suited for measuring physical forces (force-sensitive resistors, bend
sensors) and environmental status (temperature, light, etc.) For their final project, all
students were also required to source, purchase and integrate at least one component not
included in the kit of parts; these ranged from small liquid-crystal displays to powerful
heating units.
It should be noted that sometimes students wish to incorporate a working graphical
computer interface in their projects. For these purposes PSD recommends Processing 16, an
open-source language that can be easily integrated with an Arduino project. While a
motivated student could learn both languages simultaneously, there are enough
potentially confusing differences between Processing and Arduino code that Processing is
not directly included in the curriculum.
The course is held in an electronics/CAD lab equipped with workbenches, soldering
stations, multimeters, oscilloscopes, and other electronic tools. The lab has computers
with Arduino software preinstalled, but students are encouraged to bring and use their
own laptops if possible. The Department of Design and Industry also has a well-appointed
rapid prototyping lab equipped with laser cutters, 3D printers and other rapid
manufacturing technology, and traditional wood and metal shops with the expected
equipment. Since PSD is an advanced elective course, most of the students have
experience working in these facilities and use them to construct any physical aspects of
their prototypes.
As would be expected, PSD relies heavily on digital learning technology, and all
examples of code, circuit diagrams, handouts, etc. are hosted on a class website. No
textbooks are specifically required for the course, though Arduino Cookbook (Margolis,
2011) and Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists (Reas &
Fry, 2014) are recommended for interested students.
Teaching Methodology
In the first three weeks, the class covers important topics in electronics and
programming. Both fields are discussed simultaneously as appropriate to the content. For
instance, in the first class students are introduced to the concept of a microcontroller and
a programming language, and the structure of an Arduino program is demonstrated
through a very simple (nine lines of code) example that makes a single LED blink on and
15
16
e.g. the official Arduino kit: http://arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoStarterKit
See http://www.processing.org or (Reas & Fry, 2014).
10
Prototyping Smart Devices
off. To build the LED circuit, students need to understand voltage, current, resistance and
polarity, so this is covered/reviewed at the same time 17. The students build this circuit as
an in-class exercise.
As a homework assignment, students are then asked to build another circuit that blinks
three LEDs instead of one. This does not require any new knowledge – just a logical
rearrangement of the circuit and code. Students upload their code to the class website and
bring the assembled circuit to the next meeting. There are a number of ways for even this
very simple assignment to be completed, so the next day there is some discussion of the
different methods people may have used prior to starting the next topic.
In keeping with the intention of the course to help designers build a ‘toolbox’ of useful
smart-product prototyping techniques, students are encouraged to document every line of
the program with internal comments, and keep the program as their first ‘tool.’ This
program would be useful if a project required a blinking indicator light or similar element.
Coverage of technical aspects of the course proceeds in this manner, with new topics
and small homework assignments being introduced on a regular basis, interspersed with
review sections. Each small exercise contributes something to the student’s toolbox. For
instance, a product under development might call for a mechanical valve to be actuated
when a sensor detects rainwater; the designer can easily combine an ‘actuate a motor’
code fragment with a ‘read from analog sensor’ element and assemble the first version of
the program in a matter of minutes. This is not ideal coding practice, and a program
assembled this way will likely show inefficiencies and have some bugs if tested thoroughly
– but as the goal is to make something that works well enough for testing and
demonstration, then quickly move on and iterate to another design, this is not believed to
be a significant drawback.
As students develop their skills and build toolsets, the exercises shift from simple
reinforcements of a concept to demonstrations of their ability to quickly synthesize their
knowledge. Students are always encouraged to include as many of their tools as possible in
a given demonstration – to reiterate the Maker ethos, showing the class ‘what can you do
with what you know?’ (Dougherty, 2012, p. 12). With each exercise, some students are
selected to demonstrate their construction for the class to enhance communal learning
and expose various alternative strategies of accomplishing the same goal.
After twelve classes (48 instructional hours), the course shifts to an open studio format.
This decision was made to give students enough of a foundation for experimentation and
further independent study, while still leaving the final two weeks mostly open for in-depth
development of final projects. Students are given free rein of the Design and Industry lab
facilities to finish developing their projects into functional prototypes. Some students may
choose to produce accurate physical models for their prototypes, while others leave their
design as a bare circuit with a mocked up installation; either is considered acceptable,
though the accurate appearance model results in a better portfolio piece and thus is
encouraged. While working in the open studio, the students are able to easily exchange
information and strategies, learning from each other’s experiences, and the instructors can
be more available to help address difficult problems.
17
The DAI industrial design program requires a 100-level physics course as part of the core
curriculum, so it is expected that students already have some familiarity with these concepts.
11
SILVAN LINN
Figure 1
A student project under development. This was a speed-controlled bicycle lighting system.
A magnetic sensor mounted on the frame would read the passing of a magnet on the rear
wheel, then the Arduino board would calculate a velocity and map it to a color for the
light. Here it is set to map between blue (low speed) and red (high). Note the graphic
circuit diagram underneath the custom circuit board being assembled (red, center).
Deliverables
One third of the final grade is based on the small exercises distributed throughout the
course – there are approximately 10 of these.
The remainder of the grade is for a single final project, developed concurrently with the
exercises. This is structured as an industrial design project and follows the established
design process: identify a need, study the user, conceptualize solutions, construct
prototypes, test prototypes and iterate as needed. The process as a whole is broken into a
several stages of deliverables.
I DENTIFY PROBLEM
Students generate a list of potential design problems that they feel might be
addressable through an interactive electronic product. For instance ‘alarm clocks wake up
both members of a couple – I want to develop a solution that only wakes up one at a time.’
Some students bring in design problems from other classes, while others identify new ones
through their own research or lived experience. Each student comes up with at least three
potential ideas which are discussed in a group setting. The instructor helps determine
which ideas are likely to be successful given the course timeframe and the proposal’s
complexity.
12
Prototyping Smart Devices
D EVELOP USE CYCLE
Students storyboard the planned use cycle/interaction of their product from the
perspective of the user. Students do not propose technical solutions at this time; the main
goal is to break the human-machine interaction down into conceptual components,
understanding what the desired experience is on a moment-by-moment basis.
I DENTIFY TECHNICAL ELEMENTS
This takes place about halfway through the course, when students have a general idea
of what tools and strategies are required for the most common types of interactivity. Each
step of the storyboard is framed according to what inputs the device is receiving, what
data processing might be going on, and what outputs are being produced. Students also
lay out a general list of required electronic parts.
D EVELOP TECHNICAL ELEMENTS
The students construct each required component of the interaction individually, using
code and circuits from their toolbox where possible. For example, a student might start
with the input system, broken down further into individual sensor elements, creating a
method of gathering data from them one at a time. When that is working reliably, they
would move on to develop and test the output functionality, getting individual motors and
LEDs behaving as expected on their own. The key is to maintain repeated small iterations
with testing at each phase: try something, see if it works, then either debug or move on to
the next element.
S YSTEM INTEGRATION
When all of the elements are working, students integrate them into a single program.
This phase usually involves a great deal of returning to the individual elements and finetuning – it is never a totally linear process. Repeated adjustments and refinements are
encouraged in the name of experiential learning, though in the interest of time students
are discouraged from adding new features at this point in the process – they are reminded
that there is always the potential for a later ‘version 1.1.’
F INAL PRESENTATION
On the final day of the class, students formally present their projects, and the entire
class provides critique and commentary. The main requirements are a demonstration of
the functional prototype, a 5-10 minute verbal presentation, and a digital documentation
booklet summarizing the entire design process in 5-8 pages. Students use the digital
booklet as a graphic aid in the presentation. The booklet is expected to be graphically wellformatted and attractively laid out so that it is suitable for inclusion in a portfolio of work;
all of the students in PSD already have experience producing this sort of deliverable.
13
SILVAN LINN
Figure 2
A student project. Titled ‘Weather Butterfly’, this is a wall-hanging piece designed to let
the student know in an elegant format what the weather would be like at different parts
of her bicycle commute. The product cycles through a pre-defined set of geographical
waypoints, looks up the current weather, and alters butterfly’s body color according to
the local temperature while flapping the wings at different rates according to the wind
speed.
Case Studies and Analysis
Prototyping Smart Devices has been run twice to date, both times as an elective in the
summer session. Due to restrictions of the summer schedule, PSD is structured as a fiveweek intensive program, running four hours a day, four days per week for a total of 80
instructional hours18. Class enrolment was in line with expectations for an advanced topics
seminar – six students in the first session, and ten in the second.
In order to help evaluate the course’s effectiveness, we used an online questionnaire to
survey students about their experience after the course’s conclusion. Respondents were
asked about their prior knowledge of electronics and programming; their relative comfort
level with the topics before and after taking the class; why they decided to take the class;
what aspects they found most valuable and most difficult; and whether they planned to (or
had already started) applying the techniques in their future design projects. Of the sixteen
that had been enrolled, ten chose to respond. This is a small sample, but respondents
elaborated on their answers in most cases and returned some rewardingly actionable
information.
When asked to rate their ‘level of comfort’ with the material – i.e., their personal
feeling of how capable they were in either electronics or programming – all students
18
A more usual schedule for a course of this type would be three hours per day, twice a week over
15 instructional weeks, for a total of 90 hours.
14
Prototyping Smart Devices
indicated an improvement after taking PSD. On a 1-5 scale, 1 being low and 5 being high,
students indicated an average of 2.1 points of improvement in their comfort level working
with electronic components, and 1.5 points with computer programming. Clearly ‘level of
comfort’ is a very subjective descriptor, and the fact that all students claimed at least one
point of improvement in both areas only suggests that they learned anything at all. A more
important analysis is the difference between the two areas: students generally felt more
improvement in their electronics knowledge than in their programming ability. This could
be due to a variety of different factors. Perhaps our industrial design students are
inherently more comfortable with hands-on activities like assembling circuits than the
abstract reasoning required in programming. Perhaps the university-level physics course
they are all required to take provided them with a good foundation in electronics, and a
mathematics course on the same level would be beneficial. Or perhaps the course is simply
not correctly balanced in its current form. Regardless of the reason, it suggests that future
iterations should reinforce programming topics more strongly.
When asked what part of the course was the most difficult, five of ten students
specifically cited aspects of programming (‘thinking like a programmer,’ ‘wrapping my head
around how code translated to actual action in the physical world’) as the most difficult,
two cited aspects of electronics, two found the volume of information to be problematic,
and one cited the abstractness of the concepts. This is roughly in line with the difference in
perceived improvement. While statements like ‘thinking like a programmer’ are vexing to
decode, the general consensus seemed to be that the intangibility of the topic was a major
part of the problem. In future versions of the course we plan to experiment with methods
of making the concepts more concrete.
Additionally, 40% of the students mentioned the timescale as a challenge to their
learning in some way, e.g. ‘we had a very limited time and a lot had to be covered.’ This
difficulty was anticipated from the beginning. Hopefully it can be addressed by running the
course in the normal 15-week academic session, giving students plenty of time to let the
information sink in.
The areas that respondents reported as the most valuable were encouraging, indicating
success at achieving many of the desired learning outcomes. Students found that they
were able to ‘[appreciate] programming in everyday things like the ticket machine at the
BART [metro] station’ – certainly a valuable insight for a student of industrial design. One
respondent said that ‘the atmosphere of the class let me fail and learn from my mistakes
instead of being anxious,’ and another felt that ‘the next day in class when everyone
showed what they did for the homework was really awesome due to the fact that
everyone came up with something different’. Achieving this friendly Makerspace-like
creative environment was an important early goal of the course. One student said that
seeing her project come to life for the first time gave her the sense that ‘something
mysterious and magical has occurred right under [her] nose.’ Another said that taking the
course ‘sparked a much greater interest in electronics which actually lead to my current
employment’ – a definite success.
Finally, a number of months after the course had ended, seven of the ten surveyed said
that they had continued developing their programming and electronics skills beyond the
course, going on to apply the techniques in their school design work or personal projects –
and all of the respondents said that they believed they would take advantage of the
15
SILVAN LINN
knowledge in their future careers, with one ‘probably’ and nine unequivocal
‘yes/definitely/absolutely.’
Framework
We found that the implementation of Prototyping Smart Devices was generally
successful. All institutions have particular program goals, resources and restrictions,
though, and what worked well at SFSU may be less suitable at a different institution. With
this in mind, we have isolated what we believe are the four most important requirements
of teaching programming and electronics to design students, and propose a four-part
general framework for successfully including smart product prototyping in any industrial
design curriculum.
R EINFORCE THE DESIGN PROCESS AT ALL TIMES
Ultimately, a strong foundation in the use of the design process is one of the most
important outcomes of a design school education. All of the courses a student takes, core
and elective, should reinforce this model, ensuring that the content is presented in a
manner that is easily synthesized into a student’s process. When teaching programming
and electronics the emphasis should be on iteration and repeated refinement through
small changes, and regular collaborative reviews and discussions should be held to
promote interchange of ideas.
E MPHASIZE MODULARITY AND FLEXIBILITY
The design process should be rapid, free and creative. If the designer needs to rebuild
everything from the ground up every time he or she makes a new iteration of the design,
the process will suffer. Instructors should emphasize the importance of reusing code and
developing a ‘toolbox’ of useful programs and code fragments that can be quickly
assembled into a prototype. This organization helps make prototyping quicker and more
flexible, even before students have memorized enough information to create new
programs from scratch.
F OCUS ON THE USER EXPERIENCE
Smart prototypes in design are a means of developing a better product, not an end to
themselves. All interaction should be storyboarded and the focus should always be on
achieving enough functionality to demonstrate, test or study some aspect of the product
interaction. As skills are developed, it can be tempting to continue adding new features as
the ideas come up – but these are better saved for version 1.1, or ideally only when user
testing indicates that they are needed.
G IVE PLENTY OF TIME FOR PLAY
The experiential design process is effective, easily applied, and often exciting, but it
takes time. We found that five weeks is not enough time to have students truly become
facile with the content, irrespective of the actual instructional hours. Other researchers
attempting to teach programming to design students on a similar timescale have found
similar results (Park, 2013). The longer that students can be allowed to explore and
experiment, the better the outcome.
16
Prototyping Smart Devices
Concluding Remarks
Industrial design students can benefit from using flexible electronics and programming
tools that facilitate the development of functional prototypes. This gives them insight into
the development of smart products as well as a better understanding of the technologies
that are used in the industry. As one method of addressing this need, we have presented
the development of Prototyping Smart Devices, an experimental elective course offered in
the Design and Industry program at San Francisco State University. Based on the
theoretical background of the design process and the rapidly growing Maker movement,
our course is tailored specifically to industrial design students, emphasizing the
development of a skillset that would allow them to create working prototypes of proposed
interactive electronic products. The course was structured as a hybrid lab/studio class,
taking lessons from the successful creative experimentation seen in Makerspaces, and
using the Arduino platform as the primary tool. We prototyped the course twice in the
summer session, surveyed the enrolled students, and collected useful data about the
effectiveness of such a program for students of industrial design. Finally, based on both
theoretical development and the actual experimental outcomes of the course, we have
proposed a general framework for creating and running courses with similar goals in other
university-level product or industrial design programs.
Acknowledgements: Thanks to Dr. Hsiao-Yun Chu, and to the students of
Prototyping Smart Devices whose work is displayed in this paper.
References
Aprile, W. A., & van der Helm, A. (2011). Interactive technology design at the Delft
University of Technology - a course about how to design interactive products. In DS 69:
Proceedings of E&PDE 2011, the 13th International Conference on Engineering and
Product Design Education, London, UK, 08.-09.09. 2011.
Dewey, J. (2007). Experience And Education. Simon and Schuster.
Dougherty, D. (2012). The maker movement. Innovations, 7(3), 11–14.
Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life contexts: An alternative for design in
technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(3),
203–220.
Honey, M., & Kanter, D. E. (2013). Design, Make, Play: Growing the Next Generation of
STEM Innovators. Routledge.
Hu, J., & Alers, S. (2010). AdMoVeo: Created For Teaching Creative Programming. In
Workshop Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education
(ICCE 2010) (pp. 361–365).
Jamieson, P. (2010). Arduino for teaching embedded systems. are computer scientists and
engineering educators missing the boat? Proceedings of the 2011 International
Conference on Frontiers in Education: Computer Science and Computer Engineering,
289–294.
Koreshoff, T. L., Leong, T. W., & Robertson, T. (2013). Approaching a Human-centred
Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction
17
SILVAN LINN
Conference: Augmentation, Application, Innovation, Collaboration (pp. 363–366). New
York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2541016.2541093
Margolis, M. (2011). Arduino Cookbook (Second Edition). Sebastopol, Calif: O’Reilly Media.
Medea. (2013, April 5). Arduino FAQ – With David Cuartielles | MEDEA. Retrieved from
http://medea.mah.se/2013/04/arduino-faq/
Metz, R. (2012, October 16). Is Your Dishwasher Really Yearning for the Internet? Retrieved
February 23, 2015, from http://www.technologyreview.com/news/429588/is-yourdishwasher-really-yearning-for-the-internet/
Norman, D. (2011, June 21). The Design Dilemma: Dismay vs. Delight. Retrieved February
17, 2015, from http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/the_design_dilemma_.html
Park, J. (2013). Programming Sketches: a bricolage approach to teaching computer
programming in design education. Proceedings of DRS // CUMULUS 2013, 1, 143–154.
Reas, C., & Fry, B. (2014). Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and
Artists (second edition). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Torrone, P. (2011, February 10). Why the Arduino Won and Why It’s Here to Stay.
Retrieved from http://makezine.com/2011/02/10/why-the-arduino-won-and-why-itshere-to-stay/
18
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Kelly GROSS
School of the Art Institute of Chicago, Northern Illinois University
kellygross@photobykg.com
Abstract: Empathy and diverse viewpoints are essential for designing a material
world that includes all people, regardless of disability. Concepts such as universal
design and design for disability have been largely instigated by designers with
disabilities. Designers of varying ability are a vital part of the design community,
because they may recognize problems that the ableige may not, due to the
different ways in which we interact with our environment. Therefore, it is vital
that design educators encourage participation of students with disabilities and
address issues of disability as part of the curriculum. How can design education
become more inclusive and relevant to all students? Design education is an interdisciplinary arts field incorporating skills in written language, mathematics, and
engineering. What are the unique challenges that design educators face in
working with students with dis/abilities? This paper examines the possibilities
that occur by including persons with differing abilities within the field of design
and issues of disability as part of design education curriculum.
Keywords: Universal Design, Dis/ability, Design Education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
KELLY GROSS
Beyond Universal Design
For centuries much of the disabled population has been hidden from mainstream
society in poor-houses, jails, and institutionalization. In 1975, PL 94-142, The Education for
All Handicapped Children Act, was passed, guaranteeing the availability of ‘free and
appropriate public education’ for all students with disabilities (Rosenberg, Westling &
McLeskey, 2005, p. 33). This legislative change granted access to public education for
millions of children who had previously been excluded and paved the way for many
children to remain in their communities, rather than be institutionalized. The Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990) further solidified the place of persons with disability in
United States society by barring discrimination based on disability, requiring employers to
provide reasonable accommodations, and implementing accessibility guidelines for public
spaces. As a result more Americans with disabilities are educated and participate in society
than ever before. According to U.S. Census data, one in five Americans or 19% of the
population has a disability. Approximately 8 million people have difficulty seeing, 7.6
million have difficulty hearing, and 30.6 million have difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
Americans with disabilities make up a significant portion of the population, yet often
struggle to fully participate in society (Brault, 2012).
However, employment remains a problematic area for persons with disabilities. Only
32 percent of working-age people with disabilities were employed on average from 20102012, compared to over 72 percent of people without disabilities (U.S. Dept. of Labor,
2012). Students with disabilities are less likely to complete postsecondary education and
pursue academic majors in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
(National Science Foundation, 2002, 2006; SRI International, n.d.) than their nondisabled
peers (Blaser, Burgstahler, & Braitmayar, 2012). Many fields related to STEM are design
fields including: architecture, graphic design, industrial design, landscape architecture, and
web design. The issue of representation of persons with disability in the field of design is
significant, because the lack of breadth of viewpoints and life experience of professionals
can continue to perpetuate design that caters to the ableige (dominant able-bodied class).
One goal of the disability rights movement has been to improve the quality of life for
persons with disability through the transformation of social and physical environments.
Instead of focusing on ‘fixing’ persons with disabilities, scholars have argued that we
should rethink our viewpoint, interaction, and environments to meet the needs of all
people (Andrus, 2006; Blandy, 1991; Pullin, 2009). Kemp (2002) argued that the oppression
of disabled persons through a physical world that has been designed for individuals with
certain able-bodied capabilities can be solved through the application of universal design.
Universal design, design for all, and inclusive design are terms that describe a philosophy
of design that is accessible to all people without the need for adaption. The term universal
design describes the concept of designing all products and the built environment to be
aesthetic and usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of their age,
ability, or status in life. This approach moves beyond accommodations as described in the
ADA (1990) by seeking to blend issues of aesthetics into the consideration of design,
making products and spaces that are universally appealing. Ronald Mace defined universal
design as ‘the concept of designing all products and the built environment to be aesthetic
and usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone, regardless of their age, ability, or
status in life’ (1997, n.p.).
20
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Companies that have embraced universal design practice for products appeal not only to
persons of differing ability, but also to the general population and have found immense
success in the marketplace (Pullin, 2009). The OXO Good Grips products were originally
designed to meet the needs of individuals with arthritis and were developed based on the
concept of universal design. For OXO, this means ‘designing products for young and old,
male and female, left-and right-handed and many with special needs’ that are beneficial to
end users while also a sensible business model’ (2015). Apple products such as the ipad
that appeal to a variety of users due to ease of use and ability to make visual and auditory
accommodations are also designed using universal design principles. According to Apple
(2015) ‘every device not only has accessible features — but accessible principles — built
right in.’ Through the creation of products and spaces that incorporate universal design
philosophies, designers can enable all persons to participate fully in society and challenge
views and assumptions on what it means to be disabled.
While universal design principles can greatly reduce the barriers in our physical and social
world, it does not always solve issues that are unique to certain populations. Design for
disability, as described by Pullin (2009), must also be considered. Design for disability
addresses the specific needs of individuals with a disability and can encompass universal
design principles to blend issues of aesthetic and function. However, not everyone needs a
wheelchair, prosthesis, or hearing aid and therefore design for disability is not created for
all, but rather specific populations. Pullin points out many products for persons with
disabilities, such as wheelchairs or hearing aids, are created by engineers, medical
technicians, and computer scientists. Why are professionals in the field of design not also
developing solutions for persons with disability? Though universal design is an established
part of the lexicon and projects addressing issues of universal design are often
incorporated, design education needs to directly address design for disability as part of
curriculum and pedagogy. Design educators also need to recognize the importance of
encouraging more students with disabilities to participate in the design profession.
The focus of this paper is to argue for an increased emphasis in thinking about disability as
part of design education. Throughout this paper, the importance of empathy and diverse
viewpoints will be highlighted. In order to inform curriculum and pedagogical approaches,
the first part of this paper examines the intersection of current practice in the field of
design and issues of disability. Several product design examples will be presented to
illustrate the difference between universal design and design for disability. Additionally,
designers with disabilities will be discussed in order to highlight the importance of multiple
viewpoints. The second part of the paper examines the implications for design education.
According to Hermon and Prentice (2003), ‘a fundamental feature of art and design
education is the promotion and encouragement of alternative and highly personal ways of
responding to experience’ (p. 270). Design educators need to determine how to help
students with disabilities successfully pursue study in fields of design in order to create
greater empathy and diversity within the field. Suggestions for educators cover the topics
of a shift in thinking about designing for persons with disabilities, identifying potential
problem areas for students with disabilities in design education, and providing
accommodations for students with disabilities.
21
KELLY GROSS
Current Practice in the Field of Design
Design for Disability
In design meets disability, Pullin (2009) discusses current products that are designed to
meet the needs of a diverse population. According to Pullin, the ‘priority for design for
disability has traditionally been to enable, while also attracting as little attention as
possible’ (p. 15). This can be seen in the nature of many prosthesis such as hearing aids
that use miniaturization and naturalized coloring to create a sense of discretion or
normalcy. By making the product as discreet as possible, the designers are placing value on
the form (or lack thereof) over the function of the product, and ignoring principles of
universal design. Additionally, many products such as wheelchairs are designed without
regard to age or culture (Pullin). Would a child use a wheelchair in the same ways as an
adult? Universal design principles, when applied appropriately, can help to change our
understanding of differing abilities, but may not be applicable for specific needs related to
disability. Unlike universal design, that takes into consideration a wide spectrum of
abilities; design for disability aims to solve a particular problem for persons with disability.
Design for disability requires a level of empathy and awareness of problems that the
ableige may not naturally possess or recognize. The following are two examples of design
for disability that illustrate the benefits of empathy and varying viewpoints in the design
process.
Popova (2009) described the work of designer Twan Verdonck, who created the
bozoels (see references for link). The bozoels are a series of animal-like toys designed for
persons with mental impairments and Alzheimer’s disease and incorporate stimulation
through one or more of the four senses: touch, smell, hearing, and/or sight. Furthermore
the production of each unique boezel is completed by individuals with mental impairments
in a day care centre in the Netherlands. Many elderly people and people with mental
impairments live somewhat isolated lives in group homes or away from family. In his work,
Verdonck exhibits a high level of empathy by recognizing the need for interaction and
stimuli that this population does not receive on a daily basis. Verdonck (2015) states ‘My
project is a metaphor and example for how we could deal with social care, industry,
design, and art’. Examples of the boezel have been purchased for inclusion in the
permanent collection of the Museum of Modern Art.
The flex-foot cheetah prosthesis (also known as the blade runner) was designed by a
medical engineer, Van Phillips, who had lost his leg below the knee and wanted a new
better prosthesis. Unlike other prostheses that aim to mimic ‘normal’ or natural
appearance, the carbon prosthesis was designed with function as the priority. The well
known athlete, Oscar Pistorius, who uses this device, was initially banned from
international running events, as early studies suggested the blades provided an unfair
advantage (CNN, 2014). Later studies contradicted these findings, and the ruling was
eventually overturned, allowing Pistorius to compete in the 2012 Olympic Games (‘London
2012 Paralympic’, 2012). Today the flex-foot cheetah is used by amputee athletes around
the world. The traditional balance between form and function remains a constant
challenge for designers. The flex-foot cheetah is an example of design that valued function,
yet led to undeniable beautiful and intriguing form. Additionally, it is important to
acknowledge that the need for a better functioning prosthesis was not recognized by an
22
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
able-bodied designer or engineer, but rather an amputee who could physically experience
the limitations of current designs.
As the field of design and society as a whole have become more aware of the needs of
diverse individuals, approaches to design have changed to become more inclusive and
empathetic. The continued implementation of universal design principles seen in product
and architectural designs are reflections of the shifting social perspectives and legislation
that relate to persons with disability. Both the boezels and the flex-foot cheetah are
examples of design for disability. Yet, some products, such as the boezel or OXO Good
Grips, that were initially designed for specific populations have been found to be
universally appealing and can be said to embrace the philosophy of universal design as
well. These products were designed using an empathetic approach that started with a user
with different abilities in mind. In large part these concepts of universal design and design
for disability have been created and advocated by designers, artists, and architects with
disabilities. The inclusion of persons with disabilities in the design field is vital to
broadening our understanding of how people of varying abilities interact with our material
world.
Designers with Disabilities
One mantra of the disability rights movement has been ‘Nothing about us, without us’
(Kemp, 2002). Postmodern practices are based upon the premise that there is no ‘absolute
truth’ as defined by modernism, rationalism, and behaviorism, instead such practices
recognize forms of knowledge characterized by multiple perspectives and cultural diversity
(Popovich, 2006). A postmodern perspective recognizes that ‘Knowledge about the needs
of people with disabilities comes much more reliably from people with disabilities
themselves’ (Kemp, p. 3). While, Pullin (2009) recognizes that a greater diversity of
designers is needed to address disability, he also claims that design for individuals with
disabilities need not come from persons with disabilities. However, designers with
disability are critical to the field, because they may recognize the opportunity for new and
better designs due to their differing abilities. In the case of flex-foot cheetah prosthesis, it
was an amputee that recognized the limitations of current products and designed a more
efficient, beautiful product that led to amputees being able to be competitive on an
inclusive world stage. There have been countless designers, architects, artists, and activists
that have advocated for disability rights and inclusion through their work.
Ronald Mace was an architect, who used a wheelchair due to a debilitating case of
polio as a child (Ostroff, Limont, & Hunter, 2002). When Mace was a child, doctors urged
his family to institutionalize him, but his family chose to support him through his education
despite the many obstacles he faced (Ostroff, Limont, & Hunter). As someone who used a
wheelchair, Mace could not live in a college dormitory or access the architectural studios
on campus. Instead he lived with his mother in a rented mobile home that was retrofitted
to fit his needs. After becoming a licensed architect, Mace went on to found the Barrier
Free Environments (BFE) company, advise the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development on creating accessible mobile homes, and create the term ‘universal design.’
Many of the changes in architectural code and requirements put in place by the ADA were
a result of Mace’s advocacy and publications in the field of architecture (Ostroff, Limont, &
Hunter). Mace was awarded the distinguished service award by President Clinton and the
American Institute of Architects awarded him their two highest awards noting ‘He has used
23
KELLY GROSS
his gifts to insist that no one is free unless we accord each other with dignity and celebrate
as one our common humanity’ (Ostroff, Limon, & Hunter, p. 20). No doubt, the personal
experience of being disabled, by the lack of access to social and educational spaces,
influenced Mace to imagine a new way for all people to interact with spaces.
Carmen Papalia is a blind social practice artist whose work has addressed blind access
to museums. Papalia (2013) described the ways in which museum visitors can expect to
engage with art in a museum. ‘You can look at art, read the wall text next to it, and learn
something about it’ (para 6). But how accessible is this? Instead, Papalia suggests that
museums need to redesign the ways in which visitors access art by incorporating principles
of universal design and a sense of play. Suggestions by Papalia to adapt the museum
environment include lowering paintings so they are inches from the ground, promoting
crouching and crawling, enlarging wall texts so people can more easily read them,
coordinating tours led by guide dogs; and making objects touchable. These suggestions
would create a museum environment that promotes equal access and experience.
Mace and Papalia’s activism is one of direct confrontation of the social normative as
created by the ableige. When persons with disabilities participate in the design process,
the results are products, spaces, and solutions that are more inclusive and insightful for
persons of differing needs. The field of design must recognize the important contributions
of professionals with disabilities and examine how to encourage more persons of varying
abilities to enter the field. The challenge for the field of design education lies in twofold.
First design educators need to find better ways to incorporate issues of disability, universal
design, and design for disability to make all designers aware of these issues and develop
empathetic approaches. Secondly, design educators must encourage and enable the
participation of persons of varying disabilities in design fields. In order to truly impact both
of these areas, there needs to be an increase in training regarding design education and
disability, so that more persons of varying abilities enter design majors.
Design for Disability in K-16 Education
Unlike many other countries, the United States’ K-12 system rarely incorporates or
explicitly teaches design education as part of the curricula (Lozner, 2013). The recent
National Art Education Association Conference in New Orleans highlighted the growing
awareness of addressing design education as part of art education. Some high schools
offer courses in fashion design and increasingly media arts. Few, if any programs exist in
the United States to train pre-service teachers in design education (although Pratt and
Northern Illinois University offer degrees in art and design education). Therefore, many K12 art teachers, who incorporate design thinking as part of their curricula or teach a design
based course, often have little formal training in design education. K-12 educators who
lead STEAM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) and/or robotics
programs often have no training in arts and design education, coming from science
backgrounds. Although both art educators and science educators are trained in working
with students with special needs, their training is most likely based in accommodating and
modifying curriculum content in the visual arts or science areas. Additionally, while
practitioners in the field of design are trained in issues of ergonomics, accessibility, and
universal design, many K-12 educators who end up teaching design related courses have
little experience with these topics. The lack of specified training in design education is
24
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
particularly problematic when considering issues of disability, because educators may not
be prepared to accommodate students with disabilities in design based courses or
incorporate issues of disability and access as part of the curriculum content.
In higher education, a different problem emerges. Most faculty who teach design courses
at the university level hold a Masters in Arts or Masters in Fine Arts Degrees. While design
education faculty are highly knowledgeable about subject specific content, they often have
little training in education. Whereas K-12 educators in the United States are required to
take courses to familiarize themselves with various disabilities and learn how to
accommodate students in their specified content area, university faculty may have no
training in how to appropriately accommodate or modify pedagogy and curriculum for
students with disabilities. The second part of this paper provides information on how K-12
and higher educators can effectively work with students with disabilities in the classroom
and ways in which disability issues can be incorporated in design curriculum.
Troubleshooting Problems and Providing Accommodations in
the Design Curriculum
Pullin (2009) poses the question in regards to designing for disability ‘Might valuable
new directions emerge only by adopting quite different approaches?’ (p. 41). Boys (2014)
challenges the design field to see disability as a ‘generative, creative, and radical approach’
to design education. Persons with physical disabilities can bring a fundamentally different
perspective to design due to the challenged they face in the material landscape
(McDonagh & Thomas, 2010). While all designers can address issues of disability, and more
can be done to educate design students about these issues, the issue of underrepresentation of persons with disabilities in the workforce remains problematic. Research
by Blaser, Burgstahler, and Braitmaya (2012) suggests students with disabilities are eager
to learn about academic and career options in design fields, but need more knowledge
about potential accommodations and a greater understanding of how designers with
disabilities are successful and impactful in their work. Students with differing abilities need
to be provided with the appropriate support, so that they can enter design fields and add
new perspectives when solving problems.
One way in which teachers attempt to address issues of universal design in the
classroom for students with special needs is through the use of accommodations and
modifications. Accommodations are the changes in practice that provide a ‘differential
boost’ but continue to hold students to the same standard as their peer group (Harrison et
al., 2013). Examples of accommodations could include providing a calculator for students
to perform mathematical calculations or allowing a student with physical limitations to
design a model through computer software and have it 3D printed. Modifications are
changes to practice that alter, lower, or reduce expectations to compensate for disability.
This usually involves changing the complexity of a project through differences in
conceptual expectations, skill expectations, or both. Best practices in special education
encourage the use of accommodations above modifications whenever appropriate.
Modifying curriculum often leads to changes in expectations, alternative testing, and can
limit future opportunities for students. Resources such as Gerber and Guay (2006) that
address accommodations and modifications in the art room can be applied in design
education. For example students with vision issues may have difficulty seeing images
25
KELLY GROSS
projected from far away and may benefit from having copies of art images and directions
at their work area (Geber & Guay).
Some of the general areas that design educators should consider as potentially
problematic are not all that different from other subjects. For students with physical
differences, educators need to evaluate the physical demands and limitations of the
classroom. For a student in a wheelchair: are the desks made to roll under; is the material
at an accessible height? For a student with a hearing problem: is there a significant amount
of background noise, how might lectures be amplified? These sorts of issues can usually be
easily accommodated through small changes in the physical environment and making a
classroom more universally accessible for all students. However, the lack of training in
design education means that many educators may be unaware of appropriate
accommodations in regards to design curriculum and pedagogy.
Design education and fields of design often incorporate core-subject area skills beyond
those necessary in some visual arts classes. Design fields such as architecture, product
design, and fashion require strong mathematical skills including measurement, geometry,
proportion, fractions, and mathematically calculations. Other fields such as landscape
architecture, architecture, and industrial design require extensive knowledge and
application of science areas such as natural sciences, physics, engineering, and many more.
Finally, many careers in design require advanced technical skills on computers including
the knowledge and ability to manipulate graphic software. Art educators who are working
on design projects may be unfamiliar with appropriate accommodations for areas in
mathematics, science, or computers. STEAM educators working with students disabilities
may be unfamiliar with appropriate accommodations in regards to fine and gross motor
skill accommodations. The following are some suggestions for working with students with
disabilities in the field of design.
Students who have learning disabilities may struggle with tasks related to mathematics
and may require extra support and accommodations as determined by IEPs (Individual
Education Plans). Common accommodations for students with learning disabilities in
regards to mathematics include providing breaks, breaking material into small chunks,
shorter tasks, the use of calculators, and providing tables of math facts or conversion
charts. Students with cognitive disabilities may have trouble transferring and applying
information from other subject areas, requiring extra modelling and reinforcement.
Students with cognitive disabilities or autism spectrum disorder often have difficulty with
abstract concepts and need concrete examples, specific instructions, and extra assistance
to develop conceptual thinking. For students who have difficulties with fine motor skills:
grips for pencils and paintbrushes, modified scissors, and computer graphic programs can
greatly increase participation and improve craftsmanship. However, every student is
different and ideally design educators can work closely with a student’s teacher of record
(the teacher responsible for an IEP) or counsellor to implement appropriate
accommodations.
Design is a very visual and tactile subject area. Students are engaged in real-life
application of problems. This differs greatly from a field that is mainly theoretical (such as
mathematics) or language based (such as law). Students with disabilities may find success
in the design classroom because of the visual, tactile, and concrete nature of the design
process. Additionally the studio environment can be an ideal place for some students with
disabilities to learn. This is due to the collaborative and small nature of most studios.
26
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Students who have difficulty with attention issues may find environment of a studio, to be
more structured and supportive than a large lecture class. Additionally, students with
auditory processing difficulties and learning disabilities related to written language may
find the highly visual nature of the studio environment a means of accommodation.
Therefore, students should be given every opportunity to succeed and not limited by our
assumptions of their capabilities.
One of the foundations of special education services is the assumption that students
with special needs have deficits, and educators have often focused on what students
cannot do. Daniels wrote that ‘primary defects such as sensory, organic, or neurological
impairments have an impact on the development of perceptual and higher cognitive
functions’ (2009, p. 58). This focus on what skills student lack, or how they are different, is
the basis for the deficit paradigm. The deficit paradigm tries to remediate impairments in a
way that is removed from real-life contexts (Armstrong, 2009). Oliver (1996) suggested
that people with disability experience disability as a social restriction. Others have
suggested that disability is a focus on the environmental and social barriers which can
exclude people with perceived impairments or deficits from mainstreamed society (Barnes,
1998). Poplin (2008) suggests that if we instead placed more emphasis on strength and
abilities it would lead to increased self-esteem for persons labeled as disabled. One
approach that focuses on ability is Amarti Sen’s capability approach. Sen (1993) defined
capability as ‘a person’s ability to do valuable acts or reach valuable states of being; [it]
represents the alternative combinations of things a person is able to do or be’ (p. 30). By
choosing to look beyond someone’s perceived disability, rather than recognizing their
differing abilities, we acknowledge the breadth and depth of human experience. Design
educators need to examine and build upon the unique strengths, perspectives, and
knowledge of students and designers with disabilities. Through creating diverse and
inclusive educational practices we can positively support persons of differing abilities to
enter the field of design.
Design for Disability and Social Justice
In order for designers to create accessible products and spaces, design education needs
to work to increase empathy in all design students through the implementation of
curricula and pedagogy that acknowledge and confront issues of disability. By
incorporating issues of disability as part of the design curriculum, design educators
challenge the social normative and encourage shifts in thinking who and what we design
for. Research by Bigelow (2012) found that students do not implicitly consider universal
design principles when designing products, even when these products are to be used by a
diverse user group. Instead, Bigelow suggested that educators need to incorporate
universal design and issues of varying ability in the curriculum, ideally with the
involvement of disability professionals and individuals with disabilities. By doing so, design
educators are helping to develop empathy in design students, which is key to creating
successful products (McDonagh & Thomas, 2010). Design educators should consider
posing problems that address differing needs and abilities and challenge students to make
this part of their everyday thinking in the design process.
The fashion industry is becoming more aware of a diverse consumer base. Recently,
Jamie Brewer, an actress with Down Syndrome walked in a New York Fashion Show (2014).
Additionally, there is an increasing recognition in the fashion and advertising industries of
27
KELLY GROSS
plus size models. How as design educators do we encourage fashion design students to
think about inclusive/universal design? Ideas for fashion programs to consider addressing
are the creation of clothing for persons in wheelchairs, Little people, and people who are
missing a limb. Do fashion designers consider issues such as the ability to easily dress in
certain styles regardless of fine motor control? A universal approach to design could make
dressing in clothing easier for not only those with disabilities, but also young children and
the elderly, who struggle with fine motor skills. A design for disability approach could
explore garments designed to reveal their colour and pattern through texture instead of
vision for those with visual impairments.
One example of an approach that has successfully addressed issues of accessibility in K12 design classes is the use of 3-D printers to create solutions for persons with varying
physical differences. In a New Jersey high school, an advanced design student noticed that
a fellow classmate was having trouble opening her locker because of her prosthesis; so she
designed and created a modified handle, making the locker accessible (Edwards, 2014).
The design process included the participation and input of the students with a prosthesis in
the development of prototypes, testing, redesign, and final printing of handle using the
school’s 3-D printers (Edwards). A similar class project for eighth graders involved the
redesign of a mouth grip and attached pencil that was used by a student with limited
physical control in their school (Suffrin, 2014). Able-bodied students may be unaware of
the assumptions and difficulties that students of differing abilities face. If we fail to address
these issues, design educators continue to perpetuate socially prevailing attitudes about
dis/ability. Additionally, when able-bodied students are asked to design and create
accommodations for students who have differing abilities, they can develop both empathy
and awareness of difficulties and challenges faced by their classmates.
McDonagh and Thomas (2010) led a project with undergraduate industrial design
majors and fellow university students with physical disabilities to redesign products used in
daily living (hygene, cooking, communicating, etc) to make them more accessible. In this
project, the design students and students with disabilities worked together to co-create
knowledge from which the design students developed products. Through this project,
students were forced to go outside their personal comfort zones and work with a
population that is not normally considered by the design community (McDonagh &
Thomas). The researchers concluded that one of the keys in the developing empathy in
design is through qualitative research models that include a collection of visual, textual,
and verbal data while also involving the user of differing ability in the design process.
These projects highlight the importance of not just designing for a person with a
disability, but with a person with a disability. No longer should the user passively wait for
the designer to solve the problem, but rather persons with disabilities should participate in
the research and creation of design solutions. Through this qualitative process, student
designers develop greater empathy and education becomes more socially inclusive.
McDonagh and Thomas (2010) argue that the goal should be for designers to ‘reduce (if
not demolish) social barriers that are excluding people with disabilities from the creative
process, and create methods and opportunities for design by people with disabilities’ (pp.
194-195).
28
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Conclusion
The philosophy of universal design has transformed the ways in which we think about
our spaces, products, and people. Rather than perceiving someone with a disability as
unable to participate, we now perceive our material world as limiting people from full
participation. Successful examples of universal design often comes as a result of when
designers start with design for disability and exhibit empathy in understanding how people
interact with our products and spaces.
There is no doubt that many designers with disabilities have helped changed societal
attitudes regarding access and inclusion. Designers with disabilities recognize problems or
find solutions that the ableige may not, and should be considered an essential part of the
field. Mace (1997), created the concept of universal design which has become a ubiquitous
approach in everything from architecture to curriculum design in schools. Without Van
Phillips, the flex foot cheetah product would not have existed, and amputee runners would
be much less competitive on the world stage. Design educators must recognize that in
order for design to be forward thinking, generative, and inclusive, students with disabilities
must be encouraged to enter the design profession. In order for these changes to happen
it must start at the K-12 level. Through the inclusion of students with disabilities and
curriculum that addresses issues of disability, students will develop greater empathy for
disability issues. In higher education, design educators need to actively recruit and
accommodate students with disabilities.
Moving forward, all design educators need to consider the importance of addressing
issues of varying abilities. Information about universal design and design for disability,
examples of products and spaces that incorporate these concepts, and designers who
identify as disabled should be incorporated into the curriculum. Furthermore, design
students should be given opportunities to explore and apply these concepts through
projects with engaging qualitative research incorporating persons of varying abilities.
Through these approaches design educators can increase awareness and empathy in
future professionals in regards to the needs of a diverse population. By educating future
designers on issues of universal design and encouraging students of varying abilities to
enter design professions, design educators can affect social and physical change to
promote universal access for all people.
References
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 328 (1990).
Andrus, L. (2006). Chapter 11 in Gerber, B. and Guay, R. (Ed.) Reaching and teaching
students with special needs through art. New York, NY: National Art Education
Association.
Apple. (2015). A wide range of features for a wide range of needs. Retrieved from:
https://www.apple.com/accessibility/ios/
Armstrong, C. L. (1994) Designing assessment in art. Reston, Va.: National Art Education
Association.
Bigelow, K. E. (2012). Designing for success: Developing engineers who consider universal
design principles. Journal of Postsecondary Education And Disability, 25(3), 211-225.
29
KELLY GROSS
Blandy, D. (1994). Assuming responsibility: Disability rights and the preparation of art
educators. Studies In Art Education, 35(3), 179-187.
Blaser, B., Burgstahler, S., & Braitmayer, K. (2012). ‘AccessDesign’: A two-day workshop for
students with disabilities exploring design careers. Journal of Postsecondary Education
And Disability, 25(2), 197-202.
Boys, J. (2014). Doing disability differently. The Architectural Review, 236(1411), 30-31,4.
Brault, M. (2012). American with disabilities: 2010 household economic studies. U.S.
Census Bureau. Retrieved from: http://census.gov.
Edwards, T. (2014). NJ students design 3d printed handle to enable a disabled classmate to
open her locker. 3D Design. Retrieved from: http://3dprint.com/33514/school-locker3d-printing-hack/
Eisenhauer, J. (2007). Just Looking and Staring Back: Challenging Ableism through Disability
Performance Art. Studies In Art Education: A Journal Of Issues And Research In Art
Education, 49(1), 7-22.
Gerber, B. & Guay, R. (2006). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through
art. New York, NY: National Art Education Association.
Harrison, J. R., Bunford, N., Evans, S. W., & Owens, J. S. (2013). Educational
accommodations for students with behavioral challenges: A systematic review of the
literature. Review Of Educational Research, 83(4), 551-597.
Hermon, A., & Prentice, R. (2003). Positively different: Art and design in special education.
International Journal of Art and Design Education, 22(3), 268-280.
Hunter, A. D. & Johns, B. H. (2007). Students with emotional and/or behavior disorders. In
B. Gerber & D. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through
art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Kemp, J. (2002). Foreward. In E. Ostroff, M. Limont, & D. Hunter (Eds.), Building a world fit
for people designers with disabilities at work (pp. 2-3). Boston, MA: Adaptive
Environments Center.
London 2012 Paralympic games, Oscar Pistorius’ blades – an annotated graphic. (2012,
August). Engineering and Technology Magazine. Retrieved from:
https://engtechmag.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/london-2012-paralympic-gamesoscar-pistorius-blades-an-annotated-graphic/
Mace, R. (1997). About. Retrieved from:
http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_us/usronmace.htm
Oscar Pistorius Fast Facts (2014, October). CNN. Retrieved from:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/06/world/africa/oscar-pistorius-fast-facts/
Ostroff, E., Limont, M., & Hunter, D. (Eds.). (2002). Building a world fit for people designers
with disabilities at work. Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments Center.
OXO. (2015). Our roots. Retrieved from: https://www.oxo.com/OurRoots.aspx
Papalia, C. (2013). A new model for access in the museum. Disability Studies Quarterly.
33(3). Retrieved from: http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3757/3280
Popovich, K. (2006). Designing and implementing ‘exemplary content, curriculum, and
assessment in art education’. Art Education, 59(6), 33-39
Pullin, G. (2006). Design meets disability. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
U.S. Dept of Labor. (2012). Nearly 1 in 5 people have a disability in the U.S. Census Bureau
Reports. Retrieved from:
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/miscellaneous/cb12-134.html
30
Empathy, Diversity, and Disability in Design Education
Rosenberg, M., Westling, D., McLeskey, J. (2005). Special education for today’s teachers.
Boston, MA: Pearson.
Suffrin, J. (2014). Eighth-Graders create device for disabled student using 3D design
software and 3D printing. THE Journal: Transforming education through technology.
Verdonck, T. (2015). The boezels. Retrieved from:
http://www.twanverdonck.com/twanverdonckdesign/pigodivo%20elementen/pigodivo
/index3.htm
31
Designing the Discipline: the Role of the Curriculum
in Shaping Students’ Conceptions of Graphic Design
James CORAZZO
Sheffield Hallam University
j.corazzo@shu.ac.uk
Abstract: The graphic design curriculum in UK higher education is becoming an
increasingly complex and contested space. Calls to reconsider the curriculum in
response to a changing context for practice in the post-industrial age are
occurring simultaneously with an increasing emphasis on academic education
leading to work. This paper will examine how the recontextualisation of
disciplinary knowledge practices in the curriculum is a place of contestation
between academic and vocational dimensions. The implications of this
contestation is considered in three ways. Firstly, as means to examine the role of
graphic design in higher education, secondly, to consider the ways contestation
is reproduced in students’ conceptions of the discipline and thirdly, to explore the
role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions. A phenomenographic
analysis of interviews conducted with students revealed five qualitatively
different conceptions of graphic design ranging from; the application of skills; to
a means to create change. Limited conceptions of graphic design may reduce a
student’s ability to access the full range of possibilities the curriculum offers and
this is considered in relation to the notion of ‘powerful knowledge’. The paper
suggests an explicit mapping of the contestation between academic and
vocational dimensions is required.
Keywords: Curriculum, Engagement, Graphic Design, Phenomenography
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
Introduction
The goal of this paper is to examine the recontextualisation of disciplinary knowledge
practices in the graphic design curriculum. It will show this is a space of contestation
between graphic design’s academic and vocational dimensions. And it will explore the
implications of this contestation on students’ conceptions of graphic design. The paper
begins by outlining a series of significant calls to rethink the graphic design curriculum
from academics, the creative industries and the consequences of the changing structure of
UK higher education. Using Basil Bernstein’s theoretical framework of the pedagogic
device, it will consider graphic design as a professional knowledge curriculum in higher
education and how this impacts on the reproduction of knowledge in the curriculum. In
the second part, the paper will report on a series of interviews conducted with graphic
design students. A phenomenographic approach is used to explore students’ conceptions
of graphic design. It will examine the ways the curricula contestation outlined in part 1
may be reproduced in students’ conceptions of the discipline and this will be considered in
light of Bernstein’s notion of powerful knowledge. The implications of this study are that
an explicit mapping of the contestation between the academic and vocational dimensions
of the discipline is required if all students are to be given access to the pedagogic rights
that underline Bernstein’s notion of powerful knowledge.
The Graphic Design Curriculum and the Changing Context of
Graphic Design Practice
Over the past 10 years, calls to rethink graphic design curricula have become noticeably
louder (for examples see: Davis 2008 & 2012, Grefe 2007, AIGA 2008, Frascara 2008,
Winkler 2009, Icograda 2011, Friedman 2012, Frascara and Guillermina 2012). Although
these calls range widely in their prescriptions, they all share the idea there has been a
profound change in the context for graphic design practice and educators need to respond
to this. As Davis (2012) argues, the standard models of graphic design defined as ‘segments
of practice’ – branding, advertising, editorial – have become progressively irrelevant in the
post-industrial age. Increasingly, complex problems can no longer be simplified by
designers, only managed by interdisciplinary teams of experts (Davis 2012). Likewise the
artifacts of practice – packaging, book design, motion – are also changing and in the
process recasting the designers role from maker and crafter of physical artifacts to
developer of ‘tools and systems through which others create their own experiences’ (Davis
2012:114). These changes demand ‘analytic and synthetic planning skills that can’t be
developed through the practice of contemporary design professions alone.’ (Friedman
2012:150). Instead, designers need to learn about ‘the interlocking complexities of human
and social behavior’ through the study of ‘behavioral sciences, technology, and business’
(Norman 2010). Emphasis is also being placed on the social function of design
communication. This ‘decorporation’ as it’s been called, stresses the need for designers to
focus on ‘humanness, cultural sensitivity, empathy, intuition’ to develop alternative
perspectives on solving design communication problems (Grefe 2007). Frascara &
Guillermina (2012) go further, and to some extent challenge the place of intuition, when
they argue for a greater focus on ‘user-centered, evidence-based and results-oriented‘
approaches to graphic design (2012: 40). Winkler (2009) argues the essential function of a
33
JAMES CORAZZO
designer is to enable citizens of a knowledge society to be ‘empowered’ by useful
information when making critical decisions.
Each of these arguments coalesce to establish a changing practice context that is,
nothing short of transformational. However, it is not well served by the prevailing 20 th
century craft-based model of design education with a focus on issues of form and mass
production (Davis 2012). A notion summarized by Friedman:
The difference between design education today and design education over the past
century is that designers must now strategize the tools they shape … [w]here design
once relied on craft guild traditions functioning in slow evolutionary patterns based on
common sense, trial-and-error and experience, we now use models, simulations,
decision theory and systems thinking in the post-industrial age.
(Friedman 2012: 148)
The Graphic Design Curriculum and the Creative Industry
A noticeably different perspective on the issue of curriculum change is presented in he
Design Blueprint Report (2011) commissioned by the Design Council and presented to the
UK Government as a vision for UK design education in the 21st century:
Many design courses started life in polytechnics and graduated into the university
domain with the wider transformation in the Seventies. We are not suggesting the loss
of university design courses. Indeed the teaching of design in an academic environment
has been invaluable for its development, with beneficial effects on the wider institution
within which it sits and this should be protected. However the loss of any vocational
pathway is lamentable, especially as design is, at heart, an applied discipline.
(Pryce & Whitaker 2011:12)
The extract implies design education in higher education is endangering what is held
sacred in graphic design, namely professional practice. By undertaking extraneous
theorizing it has become removed from ‘actual’ practice. Furthermore, this extract
reinforces the assumption that the primary mandate and definitive source of legitimacy for
graphic design, as a discipline in higher education, is professional practice. This assumption
fuels the creative industries continued dissatisfaction with design education and it appears
frequently in the design press with titles like ‘Six Reasons Design Education is Failing the
Creative Industry’ (www.creativebloq.com 2014). Invariably, such articles feature a range
of professional practitioners offering ‘solutions’ to the ‘problems’ of design education: is
design education failing its students? How big is the gulf between education and industry?
and are graduates equipped to hit the real world running?
The Graphic Design Curriculum and changes to the higher
education sector
The graphic design curriculum is also having to adapt as a result of significant changes
to the UK Higher Education sector. These changes have shifted the financial burden from
the state to the individual and resulted in significantly higher fees for students studying
‘non-priority subjects’. Consequently, the perception higher education is an ‘investment’,
intended to produce favourable graduate employment outcomes for the individual is
intensified (Tomlinson 2012)
34
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
These funding changes have led to an increasingly marketised higher education sector
with a greater focus on performance indicators and league tables. Employment outcomes,
measured in the DLHE survey (Destination of Leavers in Higher Education), have become
part of the ‘Key Information Sets’ each degree course is now required to publish to help
potential students make ‘informed choices’ about where to study (KIS includes pass rates,
results from satisfaction surveys, employment figures and contact hours). As a direct
consequence universities are increasingly demonstrating the effectiveness of their ‘offer’
with a strong focus on graduate employment outcomes and employability.
Of course graphic design education in the UK has always had a relationship with
professional practice, indeed it would be churlish not to concede that students often
choose to do degree in graphic design with the intent to practice professionally. However,
the graphic design curriculum is being asked to serve many masters: a (disgruntled) graphic
design profession, the fee paying student (or investor), the institution (by meeting
appropriate indicators of employment and satisfaction success), the market (in the form of
published league tables) and to consider calls (from design academics and practitioners) to
substantially rethink an outmoded model of design education to accommodate a changing
context for practice. The latter itself a contested field of proposals including: design for
social good, interdisciplinarity, advanced research skills, knowledge and application of
scientific, business, social and human approaches and the appropriation of critical art
practices with a focus on authoritorial and inquiry based practice.
For any discipline, what constitutes legitimate disciplinary knowledge practices and
how they should be recontextualised and delivered in a curriculum is a ‘site of struggle
between academics, institutions, disciplinary and professional bodies and the employment
field, as well as government agencies’ (Ashwin 2012:96). We will now explore the origins of
this struggle in graphic design from a structural perspective. To do this we will be using the
work of Basil Bernstein whose key interest was the sociology of specialised knowledge.
Simultaneously facing two ways – the discipline of
graphic design
Bernstein’s ‘pedagogic device’ was developed as a theoretical framework and a set of
conceptual tools to analyse how disciplinary knowledge practices were produced and
transformed into the curriculum. The pedagogic device connects how knowledge is
structured, organised, transmitted and acquired and how this shapes ways of being,
becoming and thinking for students and academics (Ashwin 2012).
One of Bernstein’s useful insights was on the different ways disciplinary knowledge
practices are recontextualised in the curriculum. We will focus on the two kinds useful to
this paper: singulars and regions. For Bernstein, a singular is: ‘a discourse which has
appropriated a space to give itself a unique name. So for example physics, chemistry,
sociology, psychology…’ (Bernstein 2000:9). Singulars have developed ‘a specialised
discrete discourse with its own intellectual field of text, practices, rules of entry,
examinations and licenses to practice’ (Bernstein 2000: 52). What is perhaps crucial to
remark about a singular is the fields of knowledge production (where new knowledge is
35
JAMES CORAZZO
generated) is often the University. Singulars are ‘insulated’ from the discourse of other
disciplines and face inwards and are in contrast to what Bernstein calls regions.
Regions recontextualise singulars in relation to one another, where ‘singulars are
intrinsic to the production of knowledge in the intellectual field. Regions are the interface
between the field of the production of knowledge and any field of practice’ Bernstein
(2000:9). This observation is central to understanding the contested curriculum in graphic
design. Like other professional knowledge curriculums, the discipline of graphic design
simultaneously faces two ways: towards fields of practice (professional practice) and
towards the field of production of knowledge (which we could consider the site of
research, theory, history and academia) (Young 2012). Regions, or professional knowledge
curriculums, always:
… express a tension between the demands of disciplines that are constantly searching
for new, more general, knowledge and the demands of fields of practice, which
constantly face new, often more complex, practical problems.
Young and Muller (2014:15)
Bernstein’s framework makes visible a key challenge for educators of professional
knowledge curriculums – negotiating the space between the academic dimension
(theoretical knowledge) and the vocational dimension (practical knowledge). This,
according to Bernstein, presents two particular challenges. Firstly:
regions become increasingly dependent on the requirements of the external fields of
practice to which they are linked and, that, especially in the case of ‘contemporary’
regions like business studies, tourism, or journalism, commercial considerations are
likely to become increasingly dominant not only in shaping the content, but also in
determining the pace and directions of change. (Young and Beck 2005: 189)
Secondly, regions also impact on the production of identities. Identities produced by
regions ‘are more likely to face outwards to fields of practice’ (Bernstein 2000: 55). Both of
these challenges are evident in key studies of how students learn graphic design. Logan’s
(2006) study established that discourse and metaphor were fundamental to learning
graphic design. This was inculcated through the student’s immersion in a studio culture
and discourse informed by professional practice:
[p]edagogical and professional discourses and practices thus worked together to
constitute the knowledge repertoire in graphic design and to confirm shared views
about the nature of graphic design knowing …. [t]hese features were sufficiently
strongly marked to suggest that educational and professional respondents could be
conceived of as co-partners in the specialized knowledge community of graphic design,
inhabiting overlapping ‘circles’ of competence. (Logan 2006: 341)
Important though these observations were, the study only offered a single definition of
practice that led directly (for those students able to develop the appropriate ‘knowledge
repertoire’) to professional practice. In Logan’s study the form of graphic design evoked in
the curriculum is linked precisely to ‘the requirements of the external fields of practice’. A
form of graphic design education Winkler takes to task:
36
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
There is a closed cycle of design education that replicates the most common design
practice—and feeds into practice that seeks awards based on incremental change
supported by professional organization and trade journals—that feeds back to
education forms for imitation (Winkler 2009:254)
Bernstein‘s concern for the production of specialised disciplinary identities in higher
education were that they should give access to three ‘pedagogic rights’. The first right is
individual enhancement ‘the right to the means of critical understanding and to new
possibilities’ (2000:xx). This right gives way to the confidence to act. The second is the right
to social inclusion and to be able to operate with ‘culturally, socially, individually,
intellectually’ with a right to belong. The third is the right to participation ‘in procedures
whereby order is constructed, maintained and changed.’ (2000:xxi). If we follow this, then
our concern as educators is with providing students ‘equitable access to powerful
curriculum knowledge… capable of taking them beyond their experiences’ (Rata and
Barrett 2014:3) and to enable students to ‘adopt or reject the values of the discipline,
judge or challenge quality and create new knowledge’ (Giloi 2014:235). The kind of
‘powerful knowledge’ that Winkler (2009), Davies (2012), Friedman (2012) and Frascara
and Guillermina (2012) are advocating in the graphic design curriculum goes beyond
‘design discourses that (although embedded in a formal learning situation) are derived
from practice’ (Logan 2012:10). Such discourses do not fully encompass the intellectual
and conceptual growth required to understand graphic design’s social, economic and
cultural contexts (Winkler 2009).
Students’ conceptions of graphic design: a
phenomenographic approach.
The focus of this paper now turns to the specialised disciplinary identities developed on
an undergraduate graphic design programme. It begins with an outline of the methodology
used:
Methodology
This study uses a phenomenographic approach to examine graphic design students’
conceptions of the discipline. The central concern of phenomenography is to make sense
of how people handle situations or phenomena by understanding and describing how they
experience them. This approach assumes people experience a given phenomena in a
‘limited number of qualitatively different ways’ (Marton and Booth 1997:112). The
qualitatively different ways are known as the ‘variation’ of experience. It is the variation
that makes phenomenography useful for educational research because identifying
variation in how students experience phenomena (education) can lead to important
change:
these capabilities can, as a rule, be hierarchally ordered. Some capabilities can, from a
point of view adopted in each case, be seen as more advanced, more complex, or more
powerful than other capabilities. Differences between them are educationally critical
differences, and changes between them we consider to be the most important kind of
learning. (Marton and Booth 1997: 111)
37
JAMES CORAZZO
Interviews were conducted with eight students from an undergraduate graphic design
programme in a UK University. In keeping with the phenomenographic method students
were approached purposively to maximise variation (Akerlind 2003). Of the eight students,
there were two first years, three second year and three were final year students. Each
interview lasted for 45–60 minutes and were recorded and transcribed. They concentrated
on gathering students’ accounts of how they approached a single (Self-selected) design
project. The interviews focused on the processes they deployed, the role of tutors and how
they made sense of these activities in relation to their conceptions of graphic design. By
focusing on the concrete activity of a project, the interviews sought to uncover the
students’ intentions and the meanings various activities held for them.
Data analysis
Phenomenographic analysis seeks to develop a hierarchal and empirically situated
series of categories of description. A category of description is a way to describe how
something (a given phenomena) is experienced or conceptualised. In keeping with most
phenomenographic approaches, categories are hierarchally and logically constructed. For
example, a category of description at level 4 will also contain an awareness of categories at
levels 1, 2 and 3. So a conception that graphic design is about communicating ideas, may
also contain an awareness that graphic design requires the application of skills and
techniques. However, a category of description at level 3 will not contain an awareness of
higher levels (4 and 5).
It should also be noted that the categories of description have been constituted
between the researcher and the data. A different researcher may find a different set of
conceptions from the same data (Marton and Booth 1997).
Finally, categories have been derived from pooling the data as a whole therefore, no
category is derived from a single transcript. In the results section that follows participant
quotes are used to offer an illustration of each category, but more often than not, these
quotes will only offer a partial, rather than complete view.
Results
Phenomenographic analysis led to five qualitatively different conceptions of the
discipline of graphic design:
1. Graphic design is the application of a range of skills and techniques in the production
of ‘graphic artefacts’.
2. Graphic design is creatively and personally responding to a problem/brief in the
production of ‘graphic artefacts’
3. Graphic Design is producing outcomes in response to the needs of others
(client/audience)
4. Graphic Design is the communication of concepts on behalf of others (or sometimes
self)
5. Graphic design offers the possibility to change, challenge, propose and question
through the design of interactions.
I will now go on to discuss the category of descriptions in more detail:
38
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
1. Graphic Design is the application of a range of skills and techniques in the production
of ‘graphic’ artefacts.
Student’s adopting these conceptions emphasised the acquisition of graphic design
skills and techniques. They focused on skills that would result in the production of typical
graphic artefacts such as ‘logos’ and ‘identities’, for example, gaining knowledge of
specialist software and technical processes such as grids. The purpose of education
therefore, was to prepare them for being a graphic designer, and the curriculum was
understood by frequent reference to what they believed a professional graphic designer
does: use software, apply skills and produce graphic artefacts. The self in relation to the
discipline was constituted in a transactional way – they studied graphic design in order to
gain skills and techniques that would enable them to make graphic artefacts.
we did this vox pop thing where we went around the Uni and asked people [about
graphic design] and they just said something like 'Oh it's design but with graphics' or
'It's drawings' or 'a colouring in subject' and I like it because it's not just a colouring in
subject but there's also the technology side of it where people use like Illustrator and
Photoshop which I love. So I came into the course thinking I can learn loads on
Illustrator, it's like I'm good at that kind of digital side of things and that's what I enjoy
so I just wanted to learn more about it (Year 1 student)
So to me that was the, that was definitely the graphic side that I haven't really touched
upon, because we did the layout and having every page the same and getting the, yes
just the layout base, working on an actual grid, going down to the grid, that to me was
new and I think that that's graphic designing. (Year 1 student)
2. Graphic design is about creatively and personally responding to a problem/brief in
the production of ‘graphic artefacts’
Student’s adopting these conceptions focused on describing graphic design as working
to a brief or within a set of restrictions. Accounts of professional practice were used to
justify this position: ‘you can’t just do what you want’. Distinctions were made with fine art
‘where you do what you want without purpose’. There was the sense that responding to a
brief or problem imbued the artefact and the activity of graphic design with purpose unlike
fine art that was ‘just’ about personal expression. However, there was still room for them
to put their own ‘twist’ or ‘style on it’ and produce, through the application of creativity
and personal insight, a graphic artefact.
Whereas in Graphics you're set a brief so you follow a structure and you have, say the
outcome is to publicise for a book or like, there's a purpose to it and you're given an
instruction and then you follow it. To me that's better because if it was as open as Fine
Art I wouldn't know where to start and it's already, say they give you this brief on, to do
the book publicity for this book, like I'd, that's still in itself really open and you could do
anything within that, so I think having that starting point for me is really important
compared to Fine Art say. (Year 1)
3. Graphic Design is producing outcomes in response to the needs of others
(client/audience)
Student’s adopting this conception of graphic design focused on designing messages
for specific audiences. They recognized the need to research and interpret the needs of
39
JAMES CORAZZO
clients and audiences. They discussed approaches that gave them some insight into these
needs. Creativity, skills and techniques were deployed to meet the needs. Accounts in this
category invoked fine art in order to explain how a graphic designer responds to a problem
within a set of limitations (as described in the second category) but it also included a
relational dimension: the act of graphic design is understood as something that is done
with the needs of others in mind.
Well kind of if you think in terms of Fine Art, quite often it's just the artist's voice,
whereas as a graphic designer has to consider the tone of the voice of the client and
the tone of voice of, say even if they're doing like an editorial illustration or something
they have to consider the tone of the voice of the newspaper or, they're basically
visually communicating something that maybe their client isn't able to so they have to
grasp something that, and they have to communicate and convey something to an
audience that the client is intending to, if that makes sense. (Year 3 student)
To be honest there's always, I feel, like a fine line between Art and then Graphic Design
and understanding that difference is still something I'm trying to figure out myself.
There's very, there's quite a few similarities but right now I'd say it's more for the
purpose, more, very orientated around a brief, around specifications, around an
audience and what they want. (Year 2 student)
4. Graphic Design is about the communication of concepts on behalf of others (or
sometimes self)
Students adopting this conception of graphic design focused on its communicative role.
This was foregrounded in favour of the visual and frequent reference was made to ‘not just
making things look good’. In these accounts communication included synthesising and
distilling information into forms that would make it accessible to specific audiences.
Communication can be variously undertaken on behalf of a client, to meet needs but also
for the self in the communicating of an idea or a body of work. In these accounts, the
reference to professional practice is reduced and graphic design’s broader place in the
world is considered.
it's just sort of visualising ideas but I think it's about simplifying things so a broader
audience can get something out of a message or a meaning. That's what it is to me. So
it's removing complication really just for the betterment of people who need to use the
product. (Year 2 student)
Well, like I say, for me it's just simplification and accessibility and just using it for good. I
can't stand people that do stuff because it looks pretty, I don't see a point in that, it's
like we do visual communication, there's Fine Art and things like that for that. There's a
lot of power to Graphic Design and that's sort of what it is for me, it's to help people to
communicate but do it in a simply and accessible way. (Year 2 student)
5. Graphic design offers the possibility to change, challenge, propose and question
through the design of interactions.
Student’s adopting this conception of graphic design focused on the discipline’s
capacity to initiate change, question norms and think otherwise. Graphic design is
described as a process to investigate and question that leads to opportunities for
interaction. In these accounts the transformational capacity of the discipline is
40
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
foregrounded and the self is positioned in relation to the world as an ‘agent of change’
through graphic design.
I would say that it [impact of this project] has made me think more about graphic
designers as a thinker rather than a doer, so thinking about the idea rather than the
outcome and the fact that we're not limited to what we can do. We can change
anything, so you could actually change the bus if you wanted to, you could change the
way people interact with almost anything just through design, which I don't think many
people know. (Year 2 student)
Having outlined the five qualitatively different and hierarchally arranged categories of
description that emerged from the phenomenographic analysis I will summarise the
variation in students’ conceptions of graphic design. At the lower end the focus on
technical application marked it out from all others categories. In the second category of
description the focus was on the notion of creatively responding to a brief. The third
category of description conceives graphic design around needs and the fourth category of
description is differentiated by the focus on how the communicative function of graphic
design could meet the needs of others or the self. The highest category of description
focused on designs capacity for change through interaction. What was also evident
between each category of description was the way students’ positioned themselves in
relation to the discipline. In the first and second categories the student is positioned in a
transactional way and projects enable the acquisition of ‘graphic design’ skills. In the third
and fourth categories of description the student is positioned in a relational way and
projects enable them to respond to and consider the needs of others. In the fifth category
of description the student is positioned in a transformational way and the project enables
them to engage with the world as an agent of transformation.
Discussion
The discussion will now address two questions at the heart of this paper. Firstly, what
are the implications of the variation in students’ conceptions of graphic design? Secondly,
what can be inferred about the role of the curriculum in shaping this variation? However, it
should be noted although the course on which the students were studying had recently
changed its curriculum significantly, the empirical component of the study does not
analyse the curriculum content and therefore we cannot draw any direct causality. It
should also be noted the hierarchal variation in conceptions are not directly indicative of
the level of study. In other words, students in year 3 didn't automatically correspond with
conceptions in the highest category.
As we saw earlier, Bernstein’s pedagogic device enables a macro level examination of
how disciplinary knowledge practices are recontextualised in the curriculum and it also
enables us to explore how disciplinary knowledge practices are situated at the micro level
of teaching and learning interactions (Ashwin 2012).
In Bernstein’s pedagogic device the students knowledge code generates principles for
distinguishing between contexts (recognition rules) and principles for the creation of
legitimate texts (realisation rules). In other words, these rules govern a student’s ability to
distinguish between the different contexts of graphic design practice and to make
41
JAMES CORAZZO
appropriate and legitimate forms of practice (text) as a result. To illustrate this further, I
will draw on two different accounts of a project discussed during the interviews.
The project asked students to set their own research agenda and develop a selfinitiated brief. For one participant, this project enabled them to realize ‘we can change
anything… you could change the way people interact with almost anything just through
design’. Here their orientation to knowledge (code), built on the conception of graphic
design as transformational, resulted in recognition rules that enabled them to distinguish
and successfully operate in the context of a self-initiated brief. However, another
participant struggled to reconcile the demands of an ‘inauthentic’ project: ‘I've been
taught how to do it myself on the module but then it's not, I've learnt that that's not how it
is in reality, in practice.’ In this case the recognition rules were governed by an orientation
to knowledge built on a conception of graphic design defined by professional practice. This
echoes Bernstein’s speculation that regions could lead to the production of identities that
face outwards. It also supports Reid and Davies findings that ‘students forward projection
into the world of professional work, the perception of the profession, has an important
interaction with the ways in which they go about learning.’ (2003:6)
The categories of description that emerged from the interviews would indicate that a
student’s capability of recognising the differing contexts of practice would diminish in the
lower categories of description. Furthermore, if we return to the discussion on powerful
knowledge and the pedagogic rights associated with this (Bernstein 2000) only the highest
category of description: the possibility to change, challenge, propose and question through
the design of interactions appears to enable access ‘to the means of critical understanding
and to new possibilities … [to participate] … in procedures whereby order is constructed,
maintained and changed.’ (Bernstein 2000:xxi). If such a range in variation in conceptions
of graphic design exists across a cohort then access to pedagogic rights for all may be
questionable.
What does this tell us about the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design? The specialised disciplinary identities (glimpsed through the
phenomenographic study) are, according to Bernstein, projected in two ways: firstly,
through the classification of disciplinary knowledge practices and secondly, through the
framing of the curriculum. For Bernstein, classification regulates what counts as legitimate
knowledge and it can range from strong to weak. Generally, in regions, classification is
weak. This means the struggle for what disciplinary knowledge practices are
recontextualised in the curriculum is likely to be greater and open to constant change. As
we have already established, the borders between academic and professional practice are
not strongly maintained and this was evident in Logan’s 2006 study where the singular
definition of practice appeared to be dictated by the profession. The weak classification of
graphic design also suggests that where academic and vocational dimensions of practice
are recontextualised in the curriculum the contestation is likely to be implicit.
For Bernstein framing regulates how a discipline is taught and how students are given
access. Like classification, framing can be weak or strong. With Graphic design the framing
should be considered weak. I want to suggest that framing remains weak, in part, because
professional practice (projected through trade magazines and countless blogs) as well as
the existence of graphic artefacts in the world is constantly projecting versions of what
graphic design is that in turn, interacts with how students learn graphic design and the
development of specialised disciplinary identities.
42
Designing the Discipline: the role of the curriculum in shaping students’ conceptions
of graphic design
Conclusion
The variation in students’ conceptions of the discipline of graphic design, from the
application of skills; to a means to create change, points to a larger challenge for design
educators who, we have seen, have to negotiate multiple and conflicting demands on the
curriculum.
The challenge for educators is to pay attention to the recontextualisation of disciplinary
knowledge practices into the curriculum in two specific ways. Firstly, it requires a
commitment to operate and make explicit the gap, made visible by Bernstein, between the
academic and vocational dimensions of the discipline. This is the pedagogic framing of
disciplinary knowledge practices to enable students to develop the orientations to
knowledge that will permit them to distinguish different contexts of practice. It may
require stronger pedagogic framing and entail a different set of pedagogic strategies.
Secondly, caution should be applied where students’ conceptions of graphic design are
in the lower category. A curriculum that may appear significantly distinct from their
perceptions of professional practice and designed to expose them to increasingly complex
aspects of the discipline could become, in the eyes of students, increasingly abstract and
irrelevant.
To encourage all students to be asking critical questions of the modes and values of the
very profession they are entering, particularly as the mandate for graphic design in higher
education arises largely from professional practice, represents a significant challenge. Yet
to simultaneously undertake and critique professional practice by recognising graphic
design in a broader context might act as a bridgehead to a form of practice that expands
the conceptual and intellectual methodologies of graphic design practice. Future
specialized disciplinary identities for graphic design should not be those projected only by
professional practice, rather it is the success with which the curriculum can give access to a
range of identities that matters.
References
AIGA (2008) ‘Designer of 2015 trends’ [Online] Available from
aiga.org/content.cfm/designer-of-2015-trends [Accessed 15 January 2015]
Åkerlind, G. (2003) ‘Growing and Developing as a University Teacher: Variation in
Meaning’, Studies in Higher Education, 28:4, pp.375–390,
Ashwin, P. (2012) Analysing Teaching-Learning Interactions in Higher Education:
Accounting for Structure and Agency, London: Continuum
Beck, J and Young, M. (2005) ‘The assault on the professions and the restructuring of
academic and professional identities: a Bernsteinian analysis’ in British Journal of
Sociology of Education 26:2 pp.183-197
Bennett, A., Kennedy, R., Vulpinari, O. (2011) (eds.) ‘Icograda: Design Manifesto’ [Online]
Available from www.ico-d.org/resources/design-education-manifesto [Accessed 1
February 2015]
Bernstein, B. (2000) Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. London: Rowman &
Littlefields.
43
JAMES CORAZZO
Cadle, B. (2011) ‘Are we there yet? Graphic Design’s Next Destination’ proceedings of Sixth
International Design Education Forum of Southern Africa
Creativebloq (2014) ‘Six Reasons Why Design Education is Failing’ [Online] Available from
www.creativebloq.com/graphic-design/6-reasons-design-education-failing-creativeindustry-111413422 [Accessed 1 February 2015]
Davis, M. 2008. Toto, I get the feeling that we‘re not in Kansas anymore... Address to AIGA
Boston. 4 April 2008.
Davis, M. (2012) ‘Leveraging Graduate Education for a More Relevant Future’ in Visible
Language Vol. 46 (1) pp.110—121
Frascara, J. Guillermina, N. (2012) ‘What’s Missing in Design Education Today?’ in Visible
Language Vol. 46 (1) pp.36—53
Friedman, K. (2012) ‘Models of Design: Envisioning a Future Design Education’ in Visible
Language Vol. 46 (1) pp.132—151
Giloi, S. (2014) ‘Design Assessment: a Socially Responsible Practice or Subjective
Judgement?’ proceedings of ‘Design with the other 90%’: Cumulus Johannesburg
Conference, Greenside Design Center and the University of Johannesburg.
Grefé, R. (2007) ‘2015: A design odyssey’. [Online] Available from
www.designtaxi.com/article.php?article_id=351 [Accessed 15 January 2015]
Logan, C. (2006) ‘Circles of practice: educational and professional graphic design’ in The
Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 18 (6) pp.331—343
Logan, C. (2012) ‘Verbalizing the Visual: Researching and Interpreting Design Contexts’ in
Altitude: An e-journal of emerging humanities work, Volume 10, pp.1–15
Marton, F. & Booth, S. (1997) Learning and Awareness, Mahwah, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mclean, M., Abbas, A. & Ashwin, P. (2013) ‘A Bernsteinian View of Learning and Teaching
Undergraduate Sociology-based Social Science’ in Enhancing Learning in the Social
Sciences. 5, 2, pp. 32–44
Norman, D. (2010). ‘Why Design Education Must Change’ [Online] Available from
www.core77.com/blog/columns/why_design_education_must_change_17993.asp
[Accessed 15 January 2015]
Pryce, V. & Baroness Whitaker. (2011). Restarting Britain: Design Education and Growth.
London: Design Commission. Available at www.policyconnect.org. [2 March 2013]
Reid, Anna and Davies, Allan (2003) ‘Teachers’ and students’ conceptions of the
professional world.’ CLTAD, University of the Arts London.
Tomlinson, M. (2012) ‘Graduate Employability: A Review of Conceptual and Empirical
Themes’ in Higher Education Policy, 25, pp.407–431
Winkler, D (2009) ‘Failure? Is it time to slay the design-dragon?’ in Visible Language Vol. 43
(2) pp. 253—273
Young, M. and Muller, J. (2014) (eds.) Knowledge, Expertise and the Professions, London:
Routledge
44
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Brooke CHORNYAK
Virginia Commonwealth University
bchornyak@vcu.edu
Abstract: This paper presents a case study of a junior level design studio where
food is an entry into systems thinking. In the design classroom, food systems are
a familiar and inclusive concept that provides a set of conditions that require
students to integrate social, economic and environmental phenomena into
comprehensive solutions. Consequently, the study of food as a design problem
can extend beyond a basic identification of nutrition and personal preferences of
taste and flavor into inquiries on accessibility, environmental sustainability, and
political power. Graphic design has traditionally defined and understood the
term ‘systems’ as visual communication structures. However, today’s complex
problems need designers to employ a more comprehensive and shared
understanding of systems thinking for multidisciplinary work environments. At
the semester's end, students gained an understanding of the local, national and
global food system they are a part of through research methods such as concept
mapping, field research, ethnographic studies, and written critical evaluations to
name a few. Working with complex problems for the students reinforces the
necessity for design practitioners to be skilled in systems thinking, and further
substantiates the need for a multi-disciplinary collaborative approach that is
research oriented.
Keywords: systems thinking, food, graphic design, education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
BROOKE CHORNYAK
Learning Within Complex Systems
This paper presents a case study on a Graphic Design studio class, which learns to
comprehend and design within complex systems through the topic of food. For students to
understand a complex system they study and learn how relationships between parts give
rise to the collective behaviors of a system, and how the system interacts and forms
relationships with its environment (Bar-Yam, 2002, p.2). Design educators are in powerful
positions to provide learning environments that privilege problem solving that involves
complex systems over simplistic ones. Modern problems, for example, a healthy and
sustainable food system, involve economic, political and environmental factors that are
more complex rather than complicated (Brown, Harris, & Russell, 2010). The complexities
are a result of each problem’s unique circumstances, the innumerable possible solutions,
changing individual values, and mindsets. In the classroom these conditions that require
systems thinking can help prepare students to address our current and emerging global
challenges.
Sustenance is not only a common need for survival but also a complex issue for many
individuals (Maslow, 1943). When considering the human food system one has to
acknowledge social equity, human and environmental health, economic disparity and
cultural sustainability. These interconnected systems have numerous successes as well as
current and advancing failures. For instance, between now and 2050, the earth's
population will have increased to the point that more food will need to be produced in the
next 40 years than in the previous 10,000 years combined (World Economic and Social
Survey 2011). This increased demand must be met in the face of increasingly unstable
energy supplies and climate patterns. Nevertheless, only increasing the planets food
production won’t solve other issues such as our current diet and health problems. The
Center for Disease Control and Prevention reported more than one-third of adults and
almost 17% of youth were obese in 2009–2010. Results of obesity lead to increased
medical care and costs, obesity-related conditions include heart disease, stroke, type 2
diabetes and certain types of cancer (Ogden, Carroll, Kit, & Flegal, 2012). Other puzzling
and contradictory concerns involve food waste and food security. Surprisingly, in the
United States today 40% of the food produced goes uneaten (Gunders, 2012). However, an
estimated 50 million Americans do not have access to enough food (Coleman-Jensen,
Christian, & Singh, 2014). These problems are a few of the many unique and
interconnected complications the design students in this food systems class are challenged
to consider.
Historically, the Graphic Design discipline has traditionally defined and understood the
term ‘systems’ as visual communication structures for example, brand identities with a
range of visually consistent components (Davis, 2012, pg.216). Emphasis is placed on
creating objects, and systems thinking is used only as formal vocabulary establishing a
recognizable visual identity across a range of platforms, websites, printed matter, and
signage. However, the design discipline is evolving with the introduction of new
technology, social and business needs affecting the desired outcomes of products and
services. Considering how recently ‘new technologies shift our attention from the
arrangement of content to the facilitation of behaviors and mediation of experiences in
the environment itself’ (Davis, 2012, p.217). This occurrence is a radical shift, one that
alters how the discipline approaches how and what we do. The development of useful and
46
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
desirable design work, which facilitates behaviors and the mediation of experiences in the
environment, involves designers investigating and acknowledging the social, economic and
environmental phenomena their work might impact. What is beneficial and evident about
food as a topic is that numerous other systems effect or are in symbiotic relationships with
it.
The projects given in this class exposed the students to systems thinking and a
scaffolded learning experience (Hogan & Pressley, 1997). This means that each project or
problem given re-organized similar content dealing with our food system according to
different points of entry. The students were immersed in complex problem solving from
the beginning of the class and encouraged to discern the nature of things through
comparisons under varied conditions or parameters. For example, students entered the
food system through having to create concept maps. Then again they looked at the food
system as it interacts with small and large-scale points of distribution, such as the grocery
store, corner store and the community farmers’ market. Finally, they designed for their
areas local food system working with a farm and such issues as environmental and human
health systems, community building and cooking. What this approach encourages is an
understanding of the scales at which design functions, as well as the use of appropriate
methods for each problem.
Teaching systems thinking takes a comprehensible method to prepare design students
for emerging avenues of interdisciplinary practice and research that we as educators have
yet to imagine. This method trains and sharpens the designer’s system mind, a capacity to
see things in terms of how they relate to each other. A key aspect of design thinking,
studied by researchers such as Nigel Cross, Donald Schon and Bryan Lawson, appears to be
common across practitioners in their ability to take a broad 'systems approach' to the
problem, rather than accepting narrow problem criteria. An industrial designer, for
example, thinks about a car in terms of all its parts working together to make it go. In
contrast, most Engineers do not think in systems terms, they are concerned about
designing a good piece-part, like a clutch. A systems minds thinks not only about the
vehicle and its components, but also the roadways, fuel stations, environmental impacts,
and the travel experience (Cross, 2011).
Phase One: Visualizing Our Food System With
Concept Mapping
Students began the study by conducting significant research to define ‘a food system’,
from origin to the dinner table. This constrained task was designed to introduce the group
to an abstract problem, however one that had concrete outcomes. Groups of five
individuals were created to divide and focus their research. Class time was spent sharing
knowledge they gathered individually with the group and the rest of the class as a means
to create a democratic classroom. Democratic classrooms establish heuristic skills and
acknowledge the collective wisdom of the classroom. The professor takes on the role of
facilitator or guide during the process.
The class was given a short lecture and reading on concept mapping according to
Novak and Gowin’s work on the subject (1984). Then their research investigations were
synthesized and made into group concept maps over a two-week period. These maps were
periodically refined throughout the semester as their knowledge grew and became
47
BROOKE CHORNYAK
Figure 1
Students making preliminary maps
reference points for future projects. For collaborative research, visualizations are
powerful tools that capture and illuminate the intricacies of the creative process. Creating
visual representations or mapping research also makes this work tangible, and accessible
as a sharable tool for working together. Maps can be studied and interpreted, to locate
points of intervention for their work: where they could alter or improve the system as they
envisioned it. Students can also use these tools to recognize gaps in their individual or
group knowledge and begin to form critical opinions about the topic (Novak, Gowin, &
Kahle, 1984).
Figure 2
An example of a first digital iteration of the students’ food system map
48
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Figure 3
An example of a refined iteration of the students’ food system map
Phase Two: Using Human Centered Design Methods
to Empathize with Others
The second project required the students to craft solutions supporting the sale and
consumption of local foods to consumers they identified through initial inquiries. The
project parameters constrained the design problem by selecting the location, a list of
possible audiences and a one-day workshop on design methods for understanding their
chosen group. The group was first required to start with the following questions; what are
the successes and challenges of the farmers’ market and how might design enhance or
solve these issues? How might the farmers’ markets be turned into a hub for learning and
connecting with your community? Next students were tasked with identifying an audience
from the following list, children, adults with young children, young adults, low-income
individuals, athletes, young professionals, seniors and new immigrants. Once an audience
was identified, ethnographic research was carried out that included crafting surveys,
behavioral mapping, thick descriptions, and video recordings and diaries (Geertz, 1973).
The students were taught the ethnographic research methods commonly used in design in
a one-day workshop prior to starting the project. This type of information gathering helped
generate solutions for outcomes that did not necessarily involve formal design objects, but
49
BROOKE CHORNYAK
rather flexible tool kits, educational events, and space planning. Requiring the class to take
on an audience outside their own age group also helps teach the importance of research. It
was through this work that the students were able to see the specific issues their audience
was facing rather than making assumptions as to the needs and desires of these
individuals. For the final product the research informed the design of a system of two
objects.
Solutions generated ranged in outcomes, from teaching games for children to multi
lingual wayfinding and signs for new Korean immigrants. The student who chose to engage
children in the farmers’ market experience observed the lack of interaction between the
vendors and children. She crafted a smartphone educational app designed to teach
children about where food comes from and how to locate the certified child fun zones at
sponsored booths. Promotion for the app came from vendors who wished to be involved.
These vendors had the option of utilizing different forms of signage like banners,
tablecloths, and signs to advertise their own booth as a kid approved zone and
simultaneously showcase the app. In creating this app the student had to consider the
child, his or her parents as well as the vendors. She capitalized on using the smart phone, a
technology already prevalent in the lives of young children and parents.
Another student identified the need for more promotion and democratization of the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program at the market. She chose to redesign the
Richmond area farmers’ markets wooden currency, Farm Cash. This currency is exchanged
by charging individuals debit, credit and SNAP EBT cards. To distinguish the SNAP program
Farm Cash from the debit card version the student devised wooden tokens with small
ridges carved in the ends. The ridges are subtle so that SNAP users will not be
uncomfortable or embarrassed using government assistance. Distinguishing The SNAP
participants was necessary because they get twice the buying power per dollar and only
food and seeds can be purchased. A different student also chose to work with SNAP
participants, and the ‘Farm to Family’ Bus, a mobile Richmond, VA area famer’s market.
She found that finding a way to communicate and educate SNAP participants was a
difficult endeavor because of time constraints. Many of the individuals the student
interviewed had two jobs and little time to shop for food at a farmers’ market as well as
the assumption that farmers’ markets were more expensive than the local grocery store.
To reach lower-income families she proposed to create digital flyers to be mailed via the
SNAP organization. This was designed to first educate and initiate an interest in the ‘Farm
to Family’ bus. The flyers contained information on using SNAP cards on the bus, healthy
quick recipes and seasonal offerings. Also within her system she included a website and
application to track the Farm to Family bus for quick and easy access. This allowed families
to easily track the mobile market and food drop-off times. The primary focus of her work
was conveying the message that the bus offered more flexibility than imagined and all
families had entry into this market, even SNAP members.
50
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
Figure 4
Wooden tokens titled Farm Cash for the famers’ market currency. For the SNAP program
participants the wooden tokens had small ridges carved in the ends.
Learning objectives for the farmers’ market project were what Wiggins and McTighe
cite as six facets of understanding, arranged hierarchically in terms of student
accomplishment (1998). First students identify what they don’t know, this is accomplished
through defining a researchable question. Secondly they develop empathy about the
problem and this is realized through ethnographic research and dialogue with others.
Thirdly, the student’s form a perspective on the issue, asking what information did I find
and how does that shape my work? Then they apply their research and perspective into
tangible outcomes, interpreting what was made and the desired outcomes to explain it to
others. The students made presentations of their research and it’s outcomes to the chair
of the graphic design department.
51
BROOKE CHORNYAK
Phase Three: Self-Directed Design Research for a
Small-Scale Farm
For the semester’s final assignment students were asked to demonstrate the ability to
frame and design for a self-selected food problem within yet another context. In that
process, they had to independently acknowledge diverse stakeholders as well as defend
the inclusion and exclusion of various factors from the problems’ parameters without the
pre-selected constraints from the professor. Victory, a local community sponsored
agriculture farm was in transition with new owners who sought to enrich their
involvement in the community. Alistair Harris, the owner, renamed the business Origins
Farm and was the primary contact for the class project. The farm is small, family-run and
located in Hanover, Virginia. Artisanal produce is grown on their six acres of land, handharvested, tended to daily by Alistair and a small team. The produce is sold at several of
the Richmond area farmers’ markets, restaurants and small organic grocery stores. Each
season, more than 50 different vegetables are grown. Alistair asked the class to generate
work around the following problems. In what ways can design translate the importance of
small farms and their connections to communities? How can design educate individuals
about the ‘system of health’ involved in supporting a small farm? How can design assist in
creating a community focused on growing and sharing foods?
Students formed groups of three and were asked to use the tools and methods learned
from previous projects to conduct research, synthesize their findings into actionable tasks
and finally make a proposal to Origins Farm. Two 3-hour tours and volunteer sessions were
arranged with Alistair and the students. In the first session the students were able to gain a
sense for the work involved in farming and the produced grown. In the second session the
students had time for one-on-one questioning and discussions with Alistair before
finalizing their proposals.
When the students reframed the given question, they often chose to examine issues
they as young adults could identify with. One group chose to develop a greater presence of
Origins Farm on the VCU campus, thus connecting the farm to the VCU community of
students. They conducted surveys and in-person interviews with a wide population of the
VCU faculty, staff and students. They found convenience, accessibility and price to be
limiting concern for students not on the school meal plans. Through this research tool they
were able to identify key conditions of the student body, such as convenience, cost and
customization of the farms potential products they wanted to sell on the VCU campus.
Their solution proposed was a once-weekly salad cart made with Origins Farm’s produce.
However, Origins Farm didn’t have the equipment or means to start a food service
business. The students outlined a budget for setting up a commercial kitchen and permits
necessary for producing salads but found it placed their budget above the intended
amount. A proposal was put forward to find a potential collaborative partnership with a
local catering company, to produce the weekly salads. This partnership would allow both
companies to profit and provided them with a convenient and quick, local food product. In
addition the other work proposed by the group included marketing and relationship
building events to target students with an initiative to eat healthy, quickly and budget
friendly. During the first month of opening the salad cart, young basil plants grown by the
farmers would be given along with instructions for growth and use. This act might
encourage individuals to consider their own food production system. Within this project
52
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
the group indicated their ability to frame their issue within two different yet connected
systems and arrive at a collaborative proposal.
Figure 5
The class learning about farming and food growth at Origins Farm, Hanover, VA.
Figure 6
The once-weekly salad cart made with Origins Farm’s produce and promotional materials.
53
BROOKE CHORNYAK
This next group constructed work around the following inquiry, how can design
educate individuals about the ‘system of health’ involved in supporting a small farm? They
began their work interviewing other students and found that many of this population had
a strong desire to have an interactive learning experience growing their own food. They
capitalized on that wish and proposed a hypothetical cross-disciplinary class called Learn to
Grow. This class would teach sustainable organic farming and problem solving to students.
In the inaugural semester students would have to organize a mini-farm on campus, and
work along side Origins Farm to learn, cultivate and distribute the outcomes of the farm.
Throughout the creation of the class, the group repeatedly had to manage many systems
including town and campus policy on land use when they wanted to reserve a plot of green
space owned by the city. Other systems involved were, production needs involving soil,
water, sunlight to name a few. They also were required to write proposals for the class to
be included in the VCU School of the Arts interdisciplinary curriculum, and schedule faculty
from the Biology, Arts and Design colleges’ involvement. In the planning stage of the
project, care and maintenance during the summer session were also considered.
Figure 7
A promotional poster advertising the call for volunteers at Origins Farm.
Not all students chose to address their peer group. The students were given Origin
Farm’s mission statement as well as business goals. The farm expressed a desire to reach a
broader income base in their CSA program. These student groups created a proposal to
subvert the current economic system built on exchanging goods for cash and create a
bartering system. Their idea extended the CSA membership where people could earn
54
Teaching Systems Thinking Through Food
credits for produce through work. They organized an online volunteer sign up that allowed
workers to earn their credits. They proposed designing a smart phone application that kept
track of points earned and spend. Attracting this new audience for the CSA was done
through both online and print materials such as large posters, stickers, stencil graphics,
bumper stickers, and magnets.
Though most proposals were not implemented some of the more simple interventions
were. A group of students created a project that helped college students to consider how
their food choices were impacting not only their healthy but also the local food system.
Most college students don’t have much money, time and are relatively new to shopping
for food and cooking. The class created a quick solution, which involved a once-a-week
farmers’ market in Richmond that takes place adjacent to the VCU campus and in a
neighbourhood where many students live. They proposed to Origins to offer a $10 box
complete with a simple recipe and all the ingredients necessary. The veggie box was
advertised school wide via social media and the campus paper. Origin’s farm implemented
this box to not only students but also staff and faculty at VCU and has had much success
with sales.
Conclusion
For students, food systems are a familiar and inclusive concept. Food provides a set of
conditions that requires students to consider far beyond the basic identification of
nutrition and personal preferences on taste and flavour. The content forces them to
examine and acknowledge phenomena such as accessibility, environmental sustainability,
and political power. All individuals have a unique relationship with food and no matter
what your relationship is the act of buying, cooking, eating and enjoying food is universal.
Each student came to the class with their own customs and knowledge to share with the
group, thus engendering familiarity and trust (Tye, 2010). What this research has
demonstrated is that food is a facilitator of conversation. As a topic food naturally invites
us to join in on the conversation because we all have individual experiences, knowledge,
likes and dislikes. Students found that much of this class involved collaboration or
conducting research with strangers, yet many were willing to share their own food
experiences, knowledge and preferences.
To help successfully stage these inquiries in the classroom the students were given a
scaffolded learning experience, where each project re-organized similar content according
to different points of entry. Consequently, they were able to build their knowledge of food,
design research methods and systems thinking with each project. These junior level
students had little to no exposure to the design research process. Nevertheless, the course
was approached through a carefully scaffolded structure that builds to independence in
process and method selection. At the semester's end, students gained an understanding of
both the local, national and global food system, many other systems, as well as basic
design research methods. Working with complex problems reinforces the necessity for
design practitioners skilled in a systems thinking method, and further substantiates the
need for a multi-disciplinary collaborative approach.
55
BROOKE CHORNYAK
References
Bar-Yam, Yaneer. (2002). General Features of Complex Systems. Encyclopedia of Life
Support Systems Oxford, UK: EOLSS UNESCO Publishers
Brown, V. A., Harris, J. A., Russell, J. Y. (2010). Tackling wicked problems: Through the
transdisciplinary imagination. V. A. Brown, J. A. Harris, & J. Y. Russell (Eds.). New York,
NY: Earthscan.
Coleman-Jensen, A., Christian, G., Singh, A. (2014). Household food security in the United
States in 2013. Economic Research Report no. ERR-173 (pp.41). USDA.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work. New York,
NY: Berg.
Davis, M. (2012). Graphic design theory. London, England: Thames & Hudson.
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In The
interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc.
Gunders, D. (2012). Wasted: How America is losing up to 40 percent of its food from farm
to fork to landfill. NRDC Issue Paper. National Resources Defense Council.
Harris, P., Lyon, D., McLaughlin, S. (2005). The meaning of food. Guilford, CT: The Globe
Pequot Press.
Hogan, K., Pressley, M. (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and
issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Larkin, M. (2002). Using scaffolded instruction to optimize learning. Retrieved from
http://www.vtaide.com/png/ERIC/Scaffolding.htm.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370–396.
Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm
Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., Kahle, J. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Kit, B. K., Flegal, K. M. (2012). Prevalence of obesity in the
United States, 2009–2010. NCHS Data Brief, 82. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for
Health Statistics.
Tye, D. (2010). Baking as biography: Life stories in recipes. Montreal: McGill - Queen’s
University Press.
Wiggins, G. P., McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
World economic and social survey 2011: The great green technological transformation.
(2011) New York: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
56
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From
Replication to Spontaneity
Carolina ROJAS
University of Los Andes
c.rojas209@uniandes.edu.co
Abstract: This article presents pedagogical exercises and guidelines for the work
of illustration that are based on important referents and extensive practical
experimentation. The trajectories of the creative and visual universes evidence
how certain dynamic processes allow for inquiry into diverse ideological and
tactical fields, which expands the possibilities for generating ideas. After
reviewing referents in related fields, such as arts and design; deepening strategic
mechanisms based on the replication, appropriation, and decontextualization of
images; and translating these images into illustrative and visual language, some
teaching methods were established. These methods comprise the concrete bases
on which to enable students to find their own paths for learning and contribute
to the overall ability of a work to illustrate and generate, in reflexive, automatic,
and spontaneous ways, the possibility of multiple representations with precise
objectives for communication or visual recreation. In the end, this study provides
a valuable set of tools for teaching and learning the art of illustration.
Keywords: appropriation; arts and design; illustration; pedagogy
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
CAROLINA ROJAS
Introduction
In considering the importance of illustration and the complexity of creative processes,
extensive academic research was performed about work in this field, a task that explored
and tested methodologies to establish ideal guidelines that include the didactic tools with
the most impact on such processes. The exercise of creating visual representations for
different media has attracted increased attention over time; this exercise, which has
partially standardized due to its exploration in different environments, is constantly
evolving.
Illustration is the creation of images or visual pieces with the explicit intent to
communicate; although drawing is its structural foundation, the difference between the
two disciplines is clear. According to Terence Dalley, there are specific parameters that
define each of the disciplines: Illustration and drawing can never be completely separated;
illustration is based on traditional artistic techniques. Generally, illustration is considered
an art within a commercial context (Dalley, 1982).
Thus, illustration is defined by specific functional guidelines. The diverse types of
illustrated printed media all provide opportunities to document, recreate, and visualize
ideas. Currently, the possible applications of illustration are multiplying and may serve
editorial, literary, publicity, and scientific functions in worlds that include the cinema,
fiction, and animation. Hence, research on teaching and practicing illustration aims to
explore and identify the tools necessary to enhance learning and strengthen the
development and advancement of communicative expression.
The aim of this article, after inquiring into diverse ideological and strategic fields, is to
share some significant aspects of this investigation by referencing determinants in areas
such as arts and design, and the processes of illustration. The latter were experimented in
a step-by-step fashion, from the initial drawing phase to the final result of the
compositions, to determine a logical, comprehensive sequence in the process of
development.
Then, the content of this paper outlines the revised processes, ideas, and methods that
are needed for the creative practices. It includes the basic starting points, specifying the
learning process and elaborating upon fail-proof methods, to effectively develop each
stage. For drawing, the starting point for illustration, it was important to take into account
and experiment with different practices to develop precision methods to overcome the
challenges and difficulties of this task. It expands on the remake, which is defined as a new
version of a work (Figure 1), the appropriation, and the decontextualization of images to
find totally unforeseen expressions, and translates images using systematic compositions
for their precise configuration.
Each conceptual aspect in this paper elaborates upon outside sources whose purpose is
to elucidate the processes that serve as practical guidelines. Didactic essays, current
trends, and other factors, which, together with academic vision and experience, will
validate the explored exercises and propose ways to see, convey ideas, and link theory
with practice.
This paper emphasizes the development processes and academic exercises that are
pertinent to the construction of images. It also reviews pedagogical experience,
highlighting the applicability of different practices covering a broad range of parameters,
including the linking of analogue and digital tools to give strong results that contribute to
58
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
the visual world and to generate ideas that can be incorporated into projects at any point
in the creative process. Finally, it provides significant conclusions about pedagogical
initiatives, their projection into the academic field, and the media of contemporary
expression.
Figure 1
Source: Cano, L. (2012). Morning Coke [Class exercise - Remake]. Bogotá, Colombia:
Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
Methodology: Starting concepts
When learning to illustrate, students delve into drawing and communicating. The initial
step is to understand the essence of drawing and its power beyond simple representation,
that drawing is a tool with which to visualize what is to be communicated, represent what
is seen or experienced. This is achieved as a consequence of mental rigor. According to the
structure proposed by Betty Edwards (1999) in her book, The New Drawing on the Right
Side of the Brain, on how to learn to draw, certain steps can be taken to fully reach the
Gestalt shape, or the complete form. After reflecting on her methods, I was interested in
expanding on them and experimenting with students in an illustration class. To fully this
art, a coherent order, similar to the one Edwards uses in the descriptions of her exercises,
has to be established. First, this sequence was determined. Then, the methods of learning
how to draw were identified and studied. Because drawing is the backbone of illustration,
the first requirement is learning to observe. Subsequently, exercises that used copying and
referents as starting points were given—copy, trace, and appropriate; suggest a new point
of view; and recontextualize (Figure 2). Thus, students learned to perceive not faces,
bodies, or landscapes but lines, shapes and forms. Copying is a common practice in
learning, and appropriating images to recreate them must be fully acknowledged as
historically valid.
59
CAROLINA ROJAS
Figure 2
Source: Jiménez, D. (2013). Slasher [Class exercise – Digital Illustration]. Bogotá,
Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
Figure 3
Source: Collazos, A. (2012). Jerry Tea Only [Class exercise – Digital Illustration]. Bogotá,
Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
60
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
It was also important to analyze the concepts applicable to these methodologies. For
this reason, theoretical concepts were studied, which was done by providing information
about the contextual backgrounds and experiences of artists, designers and illustrators.
Once students acquired experience in mimetic and reference compositions, the first
illustrative discourses arose, based on decontextualization and methods for image
updating (Figure 3).
At this point, students faced major challenges in directly communication messages
through illustration and reviewing the different forms of expression in their direct, partial,
or mute relationships with texts and words. Finally, students attempted automatic
drawing, which is free and imaginative, before they moved on to illustrating.
The construction of images from a remake — appropriation,
and decontextualization
The concept of remake (defined as a new version or reissue) is a common expression in
certain artistic media. It is conceived as a new way of approaching creativity that is
characterized by reinterpreting and reinventing images that already exist, and adopting
known scenarios to give them new contexts. Remakes seek to give new meanings, or
reinvent, pre-existing images by making reference to them when their original meanings
are too intangible. Thus, remakes are not expected to be entirely original. We are all
situated in a historical context that informs what exists today. We ourselves are processes
and compilations, and we have a rich history of creations from which to choose to see,
reuse, and rethink to create different messages.
Recognizing an image as an original or a copy depends on the context in which it is
approached. According to Boris Groys (2008), a copy is never a copy, but rather, an original
in a new context. When making a duplication, or more precisely, a repetition, within an
academic environment, the sense of the original image changes completely — it becomes
motivation for enthusiastic learning, which makes copying a valid contemporary exercise.
Copying images is often used in teaching due to its effectiveness in allowing students to
refine the process of drawing and illustration.
There have always been conflicts regarding the concept of originality. According
philosopher Walter Benjamin, works of art have always been susceptible to reproduction:
‘What was created by men can be imitated by men. Students have made copies as an
artistic exercise, teachers make them to make works widespread, and finally third parties
copy them eager to make profit’ (Benjamin, 1973, p. 18). To translate an existing image,
however, is perhaps the most intimate way to relate and understand its formal
construction, as different artists have done it throughout art history. When making a copy,
one is creating a unique image because not every trace is copied, a personal style is
infused, and the new work is necessarily approached from a different perspective.
Illustrators conceive and design. They are responsible for the ‘mental thing [cosa
mentale]’ (Spies, 2009, p.15) and have complete control over the image’s conception. They
select their models personally, which is but one of the first decisions made during the
creative process. Illustrators start from a reference point and then take a unique approach
towards the handling of technique and materials; thus, the original characteristics of their
referents are lost as an image is appropriated and developed. This is particularly evident
when an original image is compared to the resulting illustrations. Images first have to be
de-constituted to be reconstructed; in his essay The Glass Message, Werner Spies
61
CAROLINA ROJAS
introduces the term ‘selection criteria’ (2009) and the idea of a personality who makes a
decision, a personnalité du choix (2009). This personality accepts or rejects what is
included in an image by filtering, imposing a new character, and making it personal. It is
through vigilant observation and strictness that a personality chooses his or her intended
results. Thus, according to Spies, the reproduction and selection in the development of
each image is aligned with the personal points of view and criteria of each illustrator
(Figure 4).
Figure 4
Source: Sierra, L. (2012). Remake [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
Decontextual updates
Decontextualization redefines an image, i.e., changes its nature, reconverts its
meaning, and represents new narratives. When creating an image, the intention is to
clearly transmit its components, objects, characters, or scenarios in ways that allow for
interpretation of this new definition. The process of decontextualization through
illustration is nurtured by referring to works that contribute similar perspectives; these
perspectives actively shift within creative and visual environments, for ‘under each picture
there is always another one’ (Crimp, 2009, p. 78). According to Ana María Guasch (2001),
images can be conceived from other images, and it is valid to take these contributions and
traditions as a starting point to create other stories, inventions, or fictions by integrating
personally reflective and imaginative points of view.
Some examples of the validity of this concept include Marcel Duchamp,
photomontages, Dadaism, and turning ready-made ordinary objects into works of art by
decontextualizing and recontextualizing them: Duchamp’s ready-made has acquired a
62
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
considerable scope, after being portrayed for several years as a sympathetic nonsense: the
deliberated choice of the artist modifies the first aim of the object; it assigns a totally
unexpected expressive vocation (Cabanne, 1967, p.4). Duchamp did this by adorning the
Mona Lisa with a moustache, an act that allowed for the piece to be appropriated and
signed. He also introduced phrases that, according to him, had no logical sense in relation
to the object. He attempted to decontextualize them; however, he realized that everything
acquires meaning; that the brain is capable to making sense of strange relationships, and
in ways that are unique to the individual viewer. There is always a way to link things one to
another, even if it means changing the symbolic value of an object or, in this case, the
components of a created image.
By the mid-twentieth century, pioneering artists who achieved significant notoriety
through transcendental pop art, such as Andy Warhol, Robert Rauschenberg, Claes
Oldenburg, Jime Dine, Tom Wesselman, and Roy Lichtenstein, represented, mixed, and
reinterpreted mundane objects and images of everyday life with bold and shocking
juxtapositions that reflected elements of cultural interactions. Each of these artists defined
their own voice — Warhol's early drawings had very defined lines, for example.
Lichtenstein, on the other hand, produced a less-recognized series of black and white
drawings during the mid-sixties; these revealed the development of his original pieces
when he first started appropriating commercial illustrations and comic strips to
experiment with styles that simulated commercial reproduction techniques. Both types of
drawing represent essential and original contributions to pop art and drawing history.
Likewise, pop surrealism, also known as Lowbrow art, adopted similar parameters.
Robert Williams (2009), one of its predecessors, defines Lowbrow as conceptual realism, a
movement that goes beyond pop art because it depends almost entirely on the
appropriation or copy of something popular. Thus, it is very specific. It was an underground
visual art movement that arose in California in the late seventies that made great
contributions due to its aesthetic, which is loaded with references to popular art, comics,
punk, kitsch, vintage illustration, among others. It mainly reuses images to communicate
clear concepts.
Another concept to consider is appropriation, which translates as taking possession of
something. In an artistic sense, it is about copying images or appropriating them in an
intentional way — with the clear purpose of producing new images. It is not plagiarism
because the origins of the referenced works are recognized. As a matter of fact, the copied
images need to be recognized and reflected upon during the act of appropriation act itself
(Figure 5).
63
CAROLINA ROJAS
Figure 5
Source: Miani, A. (2012). I Love Grandma [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department
of Design, University of Los Andes.
As established by critic Carlos A. Hernandez (2009), appropriation implies adaptation,
active reception, and transformation based on its own code. Rather than being a discourse
in and of itself, adaptation and a personal seal are inherent in the selection of the referent,
its transformation from one medium to another, and the formal conception and execution
of the technique.
This became a preferred strategy for a series of artists during the early eighties, as
exemplified by Pictures, an exhibition that took place in New York in 1977. This exhibition
interpreted recognizable images; a process of ‘rematerialization’ was proposed. Troy
Brauntuch, Jack Goldstein, Sherrie Levine, Robert Longo, and Philip Smith were some of
the artists who participated in the exhibition. According to Ana María Guasch (2001), for
most of these artists, the power of conviction is not in the plot but in the image: they
‘copied’ works from other authors, but recorded them with their own imprint, denying any
form of plagiarism. This directly relates to similar processes and inquiries in illustration.
Appropriation was a response to minimalism and conceptualism. It proposed a return
to the pictorial image and claimed a place as a reaction to modernism; however, the
pictorial image was no longer about representing reality but recontextualizing it. Images
were generated through the reproduction of other images. This movement had a different
aesthetic and initiated the development of methods are still used today in creative fields
to develop ideas and discourses. The philosopher Roland Barthes described it as a practical
method of criticizing the ideology behind consumer culture and also noted the originality
of appropriated images. Sherrie Levine (2009), a founding artist of this movement,
proposed that only a previous gesture can be imitated, never the original; that whoever
64
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
creates images draws on an immense encyclopedia of possibilities. She points out that
‘every image is leased and mortgaged. We know that a picture is but a space in which a
variety of images, none of them original, blend and clash’ (Levine, 1982, p. 81).
Artist Robert Longo, during the era of mass media, desired to influence the
contemporary period, embrace the aesthetic codes that are present in everyday life, and
assess their sociological implications. His art combined traditional drawing with content
that often shocked or disturbed the spectator; it assumed an appropriationist philosophy
that represented artistic images based on previous ones. In his series Men in the Cities
(1979), Longo incorporated his works into the visual milieu of the time, which was the
rebirth of realism and figurative art that was no longer focused on the real but on the
avatars and gods of the imagination, often inspired by references from film and television.
The goal of this paper is not to analyze this movement but to reflect upon how it had the
strong potential to be adopted into other media, in particular, illustration work, which
validated the artistic process of image creators.
Appropriation is a common to many fields, education has also been influenced by this
point of view. Many educators have found it valid to apply this practice to develop
teaching methodologies. It is valid because historically, many geniuses, artists, and
scientists have learned by observing and copying reality. According to the Colombian
educator and artist Esteban Peña (2006), drawing covers or adaptations creates new
arguments, which makes it an effective technique.
Currently, decontextualization is an essential part of audiovidual media creation
processes, According to Michalis Pichler in Statements on Appropriation (2009), intellectual
property is the oil of the twenty-first century; i.e., it is the raw material. Artists such as Paul
MacCarthy, Fabian Ciraolo, and Rodolfo Loaiza create images depicting historical, nostalgic,
and iconic figures of the illusory world in the present; this extremely visual work blends the
past with the present and gives such figures new meaning. MacCarthy, for example,
portrays the icons of the illusory world of the entertainment industry by using images of
pornography, violence, and horror. Ciraolo adds contemporary details to iconic figures to
the present, placing them outside of their contexts. Loaiza refers to the loss of fantastic
characters by exploring characters that in childhood are seen as icons filled with utopian
values and are now confronted by a world of frenzy and eccentricity. Thus, multiple
referents can be found among artists, designers, and illustrators whose creation methods
are based on decontextualization. In this contemporary method of creation, an effective
instruction method for students, one that is based on the use of images and concepts that
carry implicit contextual layers, helps them to resolve the creative process.
According to Éric Troncy in his essay ‘Hard Drive’ (2009), the concept of an image may
acquire an impressive quality when it is not only an image but represents an inexistent
reality: hic et nunc. This type of image captures a precise yet ephemeral instant of an event
that did not really happen. Each image is formed by a compilation of referential
representations that when placed together, construct another reality. Likewise, scenarios
may be recreated using the collective imagination by photographing models in specific
poses that can be drawn later.
When using referential images, changing the context, and transposing and varying the
means deny the copy status. In appropriation, the referential image is expanded upon,
which gives originality to a work that has emerged from a set of images. That is why the
creation of contemporary images is, according to Boris Groys (2009), an individual decision
65
CAROLINA ROJAS
to include or exclude the objects and representations that circulate anonymously in our
world and to give them new context.
Photorealism: Drawing fragmentation for image construction
Important artistic genres to take into consideration are photorealism and hyperrealism.
The evolution of photorealism can be seen during the sixties and seventies, when the
creation of images was based on photographs to gather visual information and to accurate
translate the reference (Figure 6). This movement grew from pop art in which artists
faithfully transferred actual images of popular culture or scenes from everyday life.
Figure 6
Source: Prieto, J.D. (2012). Untitled [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
Hyperrealism bases its aesthetic principles on photorealism. It is also described as a
figurative photorealistic rendering. Perhaps the difference between these two styles is that
photorealism resembles a photograph and hyperrealism is intended to look like reality
itself, which is not necessarily based on a photograph but creates a visual illusion; it is less
literal than photorealism.
Richard Estes, one of the pioneers of photorealism, painted in the trompe-l'œil style,
from the French ‘to trick the eye’, a style of pictorial figuration in which the elements
created an illusion the spectator would believe was real. It is a technique that comes from
66
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
ancient Greece, was used by Roman muralists, and since the Renaissance, has been used
by many artists. With photography, the possibility of total realism in illustration was
enhanced, which can be seen in the stylistic differences between illustrators who imitate
photographs and strive to achieve the highest level of reality, and the ones who drifts
away from realism and add imaginary details.
It is pertinent to mention the work of Chuck Close (though its purpose and function is
not illustrative) due to his creation methodologies for conceptual and minimal art,
especially in his systematic technical restrictions that require analysis from those learning
to draw and illustrate. According Close (1979), the imposition of a series of technical
limitations provides a positive change in a work and ensures accuracy in drawing. This
artist not only uses a grid, which has been done previously by other great masters to
transfer the details of a photograph to a painting that would later be covered by pigments,
but to reveal an essential part of his work and purpose of the process.
The hyperrealist Denis Peterson impresses with his paintings that look like
photographs. They are accurately worked on a grid by filling frame by frame with pigments
to replicate a photograph and go beyond the visual possibilities. Bert Monroy, photorealist
painter, wondered why such artists do not simply take a photograph, which is a pertinent
question when creating illustrations and drawings that look like photographs. Monroy
replies that first, he is not a photographer, and, second, to him, what is important is the
process, not the result, ‘it is not the destination that is important — it is the journey’
(Monroy, 2013). The challenge of recreating reality is his true motivation.
The drawings in the exhibition After(h)ours (2011), from the Spanish artist Juan
Francisco Casas, show not only thematic and conceptual interest but are also meticulously
technical, even though the work is in contrast to academic orthodoxy in that it uses tools
such as Bic pens and markers. Casas offers a sense of how any image, no matter how
mundane, can manage to become important thanks to a technical production process that
consecrates the work through dedication, perfection, and time investment.
Processes and development
The essential aspects of the process of creation have been identified and integrated to
develop exercises that, along with academic instruction and technical practice, were
synthesized in battery of extensive lessons that were done with students. The processes
developed for the construction of images explored the possibilities for and alternatives to
analog and digital layout and applied communicative concepts and techniques. These main
points will be elaborated upon in the subsequent paragraphs.
1. R EMAKING AND APPROPRIATING IMAGES
The first exercises focused on translating photographic language into illustrative
language, starting from the selection of the images to be appropriated and including all the
decisions made in its reinvention. This practice allowed students to identify the image’s
composition, filter these aspects, and impose new character to make it their own.
The selection of referents directly reflects the present time. When images are mixed,
separated, and redefined, the nature of the contemporary world is revealed through the
iconography of an era. The world of visual information is vast and seeks to narrate the
present. Digital media has enabled much greater access to pre-existing images.
67
CAROLINA ROJAS
Illustration works closely with design; they are both creative ways in which to integrate
thought and communication. A drawing can be a first approach to an idea: it is visualized
and manifested as a visual language. In drawing, illusions or delusions of reality are
created. To translate photographic language into an illustrative language necessarily
involves the steps pertaining to the drawing process. It is fundamental to have effective
bases on which to develop a drawing, as explained by drawing professor Humberto Junca:
mimetic, classic, that one that tries to reproduce with 'fidelity' a given referent. That
drawing that is like a tracing of a preceding image (2006, p. 56). The idea is to understand
how to draw in a way that repeats and translates the same forms of an original
photograph.
Many consider the act of tracing or copying an image as cheating or plagiarism.
However, plagiarism is appropriating someone else’s image and presenting it as your own.
Copying enables students to learn to construct the structure of another image by repeating
and tracing to forge a new image, which is a constructive, critical, and valuable experience.
In his talk with students, Portuguese illustrator André da Loba (2013) assured them that
it would be a waste not to use the legacies from other creators and that re-creation of
images is not always plagiarism but it has to be determined carefully.
Thus, tracing is a pedagogical tool, and such an exercise was presented to students
after studying similar methods described in Edwards (1999). According to Edwards, to
learn how to draw, we must learn to see, or in order words change the way we perceive
things. That is why we speak of translating and analyzing tone, stain, and form — such
discussion generates an understanding of construction through rigorous and structured
observation. Tracing is an effective method to through which to learn perspective and
assimilate the steps in building an image. If someone traces and repeats this procedure
several times, they will then be able trace the image by memory without the need for
mechanistic aids, which leads to the skill of automatic drawing.
To achieve a precise and impressive result, technique, materials, and tools are
important. Precision drawing has proven to be versatile enough to provide a fluid line
without interruptions in the transition between analogue and digital. The teaching process
was based on pure technique to fully explore its expressive stylistic potential.
Using a rapidograph or a technical pen allows for creating illustrations with a fine and
unique dotted style, while the use of a line is more dramatic and detailed (Figure 7). This
exercise perfects a method for determining which results are fundamental — drawings
with immediate contour and fluency are put off in favor of subtlety and detail.
Consequently, a good use of line can lead to experimenting with new complexities by
extending and expanding the possibilities of the stroke. Each of these methods has two
main techniques to develop an illustration: cross hatching and stippling.
Students manifested the challenges of translating an image to paper differently. At the
beginning they had some difficulty, especially in translating complex aspects of the image,
such as faces and hair; and managing light, shadow, sharp contrasts, and proportion. This
is common and is related to learners’ abilities, technical skills, and experience. However,
the method of tracing an image was appropriate because of its wide scope and
effectiveness; when taught with the necessary dedication and concentration, students
strengthen their skills to achieve the expected results. Thus, when integrated into teaching
guidelines, these processes translate into effective illustrative results. With these methods,
students exclude the original character of the reference and appropriate the image,
68
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
deconstruct it, and generate their own versions. This is precisely what these techniques
aim to do when insisting that images be redrawn with constancy, thoroughness, and
accuracy.
Figure 7 Source: Rincón, E. (2013). Untitled [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of Design,
University of Los Andes.
2. T HE GRID SYSTEM
The segmented composition of images was also contemplated, starting from the small
sections that make up a whole. By using a grid technique, students achieved a critical
perspective because they were led to explore beyond what they thought they saw and to
identify details that would not be noticeable when looking at the image as a whole.
According to the description given by Joseph Muller-Brockman in Grid Systems (1982),
this procedure is used to widen, move, or reduce a photograph or drawing and consists of
tracing a grid over the image that is going to be reproduced. Later, the same grid is set-up
on a different piece of paper but made larger or smaller; images are then moved frame by
frame. This tactic seeks to teach how to see so that one might draw. If you don't know how
to observe, translating what is perceived into a pictorial language is very difficult. Through
this intelligible and analyzable process, the level of detail in the shapes, volumes, and
tones can be heightened (Figure 8).
69
CAROLINA ROJAS
Figure 8
Source: Rincón, E. (2013). What you lookin´at punk? [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia:
Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
At first, this methodology may seem extensive and complex, but its results are
surprising when constructing an image through its negative and positive spaces, where
lights and shadows are conceived as the stain and the whole, respectively. This study
implemented a similar procedure to the one developed by Colombian artist Daniel
Salamanca, who attended to one of the exercise sessions. In his work Creator Genealogy
(2012), Salamanca did interesting work by filling out little squares on millimeter graph
paper. From these, an image can be generated that is similar to the structure of a digital
image composed of pixels. His work travels from the analog to digital in its graphic
reproduction. The act of drawing itself forces each student to observe what they wish to
illustrate, to separate and join all the pieces back together in their minds, and to memorize
their methods so that they’re able to draw it again. In the words of Bergen, when teaching
drawing, it is commonplace to say that the key lies in the process of viewing and that one
line and area of color are not really important because they register what it seen but
because they allow us to keep seeing (Bergen, 2011).
Considering the importance of structural drawing to illustration, it is essential to refine
this technique for best results. The perception of negative space, as opposed to positive
forms, must be fully understood. For this, the exercises were intended to show negative
spaces by observing a referential photographic image and its translation into an
illustration. Once the positive shapes and negative spaces were identified, the students
proceeded to work on contour by using a grid. By exploring these mechanisms, they were
able to determine the precise location of referential key points for defining contours and
shapes. Once the structural sketches were ready, they proceeded to carefully work on the
70
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
images’ detail and definition by moving frame by frame to define tone, light, and shadow
and fill in the blank spaces to complete the image.
They used pencils and graphite to do these exercises due to their monochromatic
properties and special features that allow for resolution of such images. The students
mastered two essential techniques — first, the expression of form by lines and second, the
shading and amplification of lines to achieve a photorealistic effect. Although all students
followed the same steps, each of their strokes seemed to be absolutely authentic and
reflective of their personalities. Such unique features become the fingerprints of their own
signatures.
3. D ECONTEXTUALIZATION
This type of exercises sought to provide students with the tools to enable them to
generate new ideas. The goal was to redefine images. For a composition to contribute
coherent and explicit designs, it is fundamental to objectively determine the ideas,
concepts, environments, and creative components within the medium and techniques of
the didactic approach. These new images sought to convey messages, ideas, changes,
reinventions, or sensations in different situations. Their construction clearly implies
transferring image elements, objects, characters, or scenarios to elucidate this new value
(Figure 9).
Figure 9
Source: Cáceres, J. (2013). Woody Allen [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
71
CAROLINA ROJAS
According to art critic Eric Troncy, this realistic pictorial style obviously leaves an open
door to narrative possibilities that confirm the aesthetic and cultural context that is being
postulated (2009). This exercise thus focused on communicating ideas solely through
image with no text, meaning they had to be strong and clear enough to have coherent
interpretations. Image development is a process that must strike a dynamic balance
between the external social world and the inner personal universe (Smulders, 2009).
Illustrations achieved by well-thought out strokes, contours, volumes, and spaces reflect a
fascinating interaction.
Photorealism and realistic figurative aesthetics help to decontextualize collective
imaginary icons due to enabling their recognition. The decision to make iconic characters
contemporary may clearly be to create irony, criticize, or offer messages that reel in the
reader, which makes this approach effective and necessary to include when teaching
methods of illustration. As academic critic Linda Hutcheon claims in her text The Politics of
Postmodernism, ‘present representations come from past ones and what ideological
consequences derive from both continuity and difference’ (Hutcheon, 1993, p. 1).
Decontextualization practices require that students reflect upon and define multiple
variables. All elements must be minutely inspected to generate an intended message in
the decontextualized and appropriated image. Another challenge is to achieve one’s goals
by properly assembling the components on which the main idea is based and unifying the
multiple concepts.
This exercise encouraged students to tune into all elements of the configuration
process and to relate these elements with the appropriate means. A very ‘pure’ drawing is
used in this exercise. The illustrative work is done digitally in this stage. The digital drawing
process is very similar to traditional drawing and painting, which requires paint, pencils,
brushes, and a working surface — there are parallel elements in the specialized software
(Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop) for such activities. Digital work enables endless
experimentation and it allows for reproductions without altering image quality, which are
both helpful in illustration. The results are also rewarding because they allow compositions
to be completed with significant potential, fluidity, and detail; digital illustration enables a
combination of line work, the handling of pure color, the essence of a simple minimalist
illustration without effects, and drawings in which bursts of color never come near a
baroque or hyper-realistic style but remain contained in such a way that creates complete
visual harmony.
There is a story behind every illustration; therefore, its discourse must be very clear
and logical on paper. The most important thing is to allow the viewer to complete the
imaginary world hidden in each picture. Even though traditionally, the art of illustration
has been defined as the interpretation or embellishment of textual information through
visual representation, depending on its context and genre, in many cases, images must
completely replace words rather than represent them. The illustration itself
communicates, and this what this practice explores to broaden the students perspectives
(Figure 10).
72
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
Figure 10 Source: Marquez, V. (2013). Bee Yourself [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department
of Design, University of Los Andes.
Teaching experience
The items listed above support the development of methodologies that introduce,
define, and apply the processes of learning to draw, compose, and communicate. These
elements were based on the replication, appropriation, and decontextualization of images,
practices that combine accuracy with the option of starting from existing references to
understand photorealistic and semi-realistic illustration, and which enable correct
interpretation of visual language.
The reproduction of an image by tracing, copying, and observing is part of the process
of learning how to see. Repeated tracing enables the knowledge of structure to be
mechanized. Drawing itself requires that students observe what they want to illustrate,
dissect its pieces, and join those pieces together to create their pictorial translations. They
must memorize a process that can be used in the future to record observations and redraw
and represent ideas. The exercise started with real images from which to re-signify clearly
recognizable formal elements such as the human figure, animals, and objects.
Transforming images deepens decontextualization. The referents not only need to be
observed but appropriated to understand which stories to tell because their content
generates creative ways in which to convey the intended messages. Illustration without
text was explored; these images had to be recognizable and well represented to
communicate effectively.
The application of these concepts and learning methods allowed students to
experience ideas in more automatic, free, and spontaneous ways because they had already
been instructed on the structure, drawing, representing recognizable forms, and
translating simple messages through images. Once grounded in these basic processes, the
goal was to venture into practices of greater depth with exercises that focused on creating
effective illustrations with a communicative intention (critic, satiric, subtle, or insightful),
or representations that configure characters and scenarios to generate clear stories that
have simple yet impressive messages. Therefore, this research covered exercises that are
crucial to illustrating across genres.
73
CAROLINA ROJAS
Final processes and results
Trying new ideas and exploring different ways of communicating messages, stories, and
emotions is one of the biggest challenges in illustration, as is giving proper attention to
applied design for specific editorial or animated projects. It is therefore essential that
those responsible for the creation of imagery be competitive and innovative enough for
the current market; they must gain knowledge and achieve the necessary maturity for
analysis and conceptualization, combined with the proper handling of techniques,
materials, and media.
In this regard, the following practice deepened the visual possibilities for transforming
words and ideas into imaginary and explored different connections between text and
images by developing spontaneous illustrations with enough creativity and content to
attract the viewer. Language provides plenty of material with which to think about and
build short illustrated stories that interconnect in simple, meaningful ways (Figure 11).
Figure 11 Source: Baquero, C. (2013). My name is Paul Jones and I drink Rum [Class exercise].
Bogotá, Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
According to Umberto Eco, a single word can mean many things (1988). In using this
definition in a didactic approach, it is possible to move from the word to the idea and the
imagination of that idea, i.e., to interact with words or phrases that reflect a double
meaning or have multiple meanings. This practice develops in students the ability to make
associations, which requires significant analysis of constructive material with a potential of
graphic representation.
Usually, this method of creating compositions uses collective codes and common
symbolic elements; it develops interesting imaginaries starting from the meanings of
74
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
words and the relationships of shapes that can be generated between elements such as
objects and animals; it reflects everyday actions and changes their meanings. Highly
popular images may be examined and these may include elements and symbols that
represent a specific time, codes registered from literature, cinema, music, or current icons.
Many designers, artists, and illustrators have helped to develop this genre of illustration,
including Andrés Colmenares, Will Bryant, Justin White, Jaco Haasbroek, Aurélie Henquin,
and Lim Heng Swee, aka ‘ilovedoodle’. Their images express strong style that is fresh,
simple, spontaneous, fun, and cartoonish. Many of these works have had so much
commercial success that their creations appear in products of different recognized brands.
The students explored representations of semi-realistic drawings (cartoons), which are
closely related satire, caricature, and humor, making them more realistic. The objective of
this exercise was to provide the tools with which to reflect a fantastic and entertaining
universe; these tools were obtained by visual associations and shown to be able to support
numerous illustrative possibilities. Most of this types of work has a commercial approach
in which its development is not only seen on paper or on screen but it is so flexible and
dynamic that it can be applied to different requirements of commercial industries.
The experimental process was perfected and concluded with a compendium of
exercises that examined the illustrations and construction practices of more complex
scenarios that contribute to the visual world. Most developed characters begin from reality
but become more interesting and useful with subsequent experimentation.
Images can change the narrative power of words (Salisbury & Styles, 2012); thus, we
explored a scenario that elaborated upon the development of imaginary characters by
focusing on the design and creation of characters with extraordinary stories. In this
process, the full developmental cycle began from a sketch from which to generate
drawings step by step, using different analog and digital methods. The construction of the
image was done though mimetic drawing by tracing; using a grid; reproduction using
referents, appropriation, and transformation; or simply by imaginative automatic drawing
until the final image was reached.
It was relevant to look at examples of fantastical universes throughout history to see
how they had been translated into texts and imagery environments. Bestiary
representations were studied (illustrations were collected form fables or fiction about
imaginary or real wild creatures) due to the interest these amazing rarities generate. Our
attention was drawn to the monsters, hybrids, and rarities interpreted by Umberto Eco in
his book On Ugliness (2007). The ‘freak’ concept was also contemplated, as seen in the
movie Freaks, directed by Tod Browning (1932). This concept refers to beings with physical
differences or similarities to strange creatures, an idea familiar to fantasy, science fiction,
animation, video games, and comics. These concepts extend the daily collective
imagination and are represented through different visual formats such as literature, art,
cinema, and illustration. Some examples include the Universal Animalarium of Professor
Revillod by Javier Sáez (2003), the wonderful illustrated book Where the Wild Things Are by
Maurice Sendak (1963), and the commercial animated movie Monsters, Inc. (2001) by
Pixar.
All research material provided valuable elements that encouraged students to create
their own characters and stories. According to Portuguese illustrator André da Loba (2013),
illustrators tell tales with stories of their own or with stories adopted from elsewhere;
there is always something to tell. In this exercise, students managed to build simple, jovial,
75
CAROLINA ROJAS
fearful, funny, and sophisticated stories. Even when they started from the same central
axis, they ended with vastly different conceptualization. Each student imprints a ‘voice’ on
a specific theme to transform it in accordance with his or her references, experiences,
tastes, and even worldview. These aspects give birth to the insightful creation of these
curious characters and their stories (Figure 12).
Figure 12 Source: Velásquez, J.D. (2013). The Scholastic Phenomenon Child [Class exercise]. Bogotá,
Colombia: Department of Design, University of Los Andes.
Students showcased their compositions in illustrated books that showed the story and
origin of each character that was developed. Short stories were also built around the
leading character. Some students combined words and images to convey the overall
meaning of the book, while others specialized in telling what happens with the character in
images only. According to Martin Salisbury and Morag Styles (2012), the boundaries
between words and images are more and more indistinct as words are recognized as
pictorial elements and the end result is a visual absolute.
During this exercise, students combined imagination and technical versatility. They
were taught not only to focus on illustration but also on telling stories through their
drawing skills and with the aid of specific channels (analog and digital); they were able to
create worlds using different scenarios that were enriched with color and full of subtlety
and narrative content. This set of initiatives and exercises allowed students to understand
the full extent of illustration practice in its different phases, to develop a sense of
observation and analysis, to make decisions and accurately combine methodologies, to
explore various media and materials for building graphical representations, and to
contributing their own creativity with absolute motivation and resourcefulness.
76
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
Conclusions
At first glance, illustrating may seem easy. But upon further inspection, its practice is
truly complex. The field of illustration is vast and versatile; illustrators must have extensive
knowledge and unlimited resources available to develop their work to its full potential.
Some difficulties may stand in the way of their creative desires and completion of their
processes. Therefore, it is important for students to identify the different variables
involved in the process so that they may plan and work most effectively. It is a
fundamental skill to organize the different components, to discipline the mind, and to
direct all of one’s attention and concentration toward the creative objective. Having
proper guidelines undoubtedly helps illustrators to make the best use of their resources
and follow through on inspiration. The key is to encourage students to practice and
explore in reflexive and conscious ways.
With the support of multiple theoretical, conceptual, and visual referents in the fields
that relate directly to illustration (arts and design), it was possible to interpret the essence
of illustrations, understand concepts such as referencing and appropriating, and create
coherent materializations. Combined, these provide a solid base from which to exercise
more complex combinations of text and images and to begin the task of illustrating and
communicating properly. It was also clear that image appropriation and
decontextualization worked as a starting point from which to generate new creative
representations. The experiences of what we have done, what we have seen, and who we
are generate a mixture of referents that are important to our creative processes.
The pedagogical tools discussed in this paper taught students to draw, compose, and
polish visual pieces that were charged with content with clear and noticeable
communicative intent. These methods became a concrete base from which students could
safely and enthusiastically generate proposals in different scenarios within the broad field
of illustration.
The methodological approaches, conceptualizations, and strategic mechanisms
explored in the course of this investigation provided the tools necessary for designing the
exercises that were then experimentally tested on students. When the guidelines of these
practices were followed, students were able to achieve professional-level images (Figure
13).
Figure 13 Source: Miani, A. (2013). Franky [Class exercise]. Bogotá, Colombia: Department of
Design, University of Los Andes.
77
CAROLINA ROJAS
The skills that were explored are fundamental in learning to appropriate all means and
make the most of them in way that optimizes and sharpens interpretation, allows ideas to
materialize according to explicit purposes, deals with challenges effectively, and
consolidates versatile proposals of graphic representation. The theoretical framework,
referents, reflections, and inspirational components studied provided knowledge and
guidelines that greatly impacted the academic curriculum — open-ended knowledge,
experience, and possibilities were presented, which increased the students’ opportunities
to explore and consolidate multiple concepts with sense and objectivity.
This research on the work of illustration clarified the phases and variables that are
necessary to take into account to understand the processes of image construction, graphic
representation, and interpretation. Through the exercises outlined in this article, students
developed theoretical and practical approaches to graphical solutions for different means
of contemporary expression through analog, digital, and mixed-media tools. They created,
modified or composed, and experimented with illustration in multifaceted styles in ways
that were conceptual, creative, and innovative. Thus, the process of research and
experimentation provided valuable elements that demonstrate that to achieve one’s own
voice in the field of illustration, apprentices must first go through specific technical and
experimental learning processes. When these elements are integrated, coherent
guidelines for the processes of illustration could be imparted to students so they can
illustrate in different ways.
This teaching of illustration aimed to impart a proper understanding of the possibilities
inherent in visual expression. It did so through an exploration of categorical tools for
teaching and learning. As a result of this research, a compendium of exercises was
developed as a resource for future classes of illustration. This research also resulted in an
illustrative editorial collection that teaches each technical, conceptual, or thematic
approach. Some student illustrators whose work was the result of these teaching
techniques later participated in open calls, competitions, and exhibitions, a major
achievement not only in terms of methodological development but also in increasing the
motivation, commitment, and performance of the students who participated in this
illustrative academic experiment.
Finally, this paper contributes to the knowledge and practice of teaching illustration.
These processes take into account the main keys to arousing interest for the different
forms of creation at different levels. In general, these guidelines facilitate the development
of work by practical didactic methods that increase student motivation and reflection.
Acknowledgements: This article is the result of a research project developed
through interactive practices with students from the Illustration course of the
Design Department of Universidad de los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia, 2012–14.
This study also produced an experimental illustrative publication, a series of
six books that describe the full magnitude of the research process. Each title
makes reference to conceptual or technical approaches as well as thematic
content.
78
Pedagogical Approaches to Illustration: From Replication to Spontaneity
References
Benjamin, W. (1973). La obra de arte en la época de su reproductibilidad técnica [The work
of art in the age of mechanical reproduction]. Madrid: Taurus.
Bergen, J. (2011). Sobre el dibujo [Bergen on drawing]. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, SL.
Monroy, B. (n.d.). Digital photo‐realistic artist. Retrieved from
http://www.bertmonroy.com/
Cabanne, P. (1967). Conversaciones con Marcel Duchamp [Dialogues with Marcel
Duchamp]. Barcelona: Anagrama.
Crimp, D. (2009). Pictures 1979. In D. Evans (Ed.), Appropriation: Documents of
contemporary art (p.78). London: Whitechapel Gallery.
Dalley, T. (1982). Guía completa de Ilustración y Diseño [Complete guide to illustration &
design techniques & materials]. Madrid: H. Blume Ediciones.
Eco, U. (1988). Signo [Sign] (2nd ed.). Barcelona: Labor.
Eco, U. (2007). Historia de la fealdad [On ugliness]. Barcelona: Random House Mondadori,
S.A.
Edwards, B. (1999). Nuevo Aprender a Dibujar con el lado derecho del cerebro. [Drawing
on the right side of the brain]. España: Ediciones Urano S.A.
Groys, B. (2008). The topology of contemporary art. In O. Enwezor, N. Condee & T. Smith
(Eds.), Antinomies of art and culture modernity, postmodernity, contemporaneity (pp.
71-82). Durham: Duke University Press.
Guasch, A. (n.d.). El arte último del siglo XX del posminimalismo a lo multicultural.
Retrieved from https://hscauna.wordpress.com/material/
Hernández, C. (2009). La apropiación en las artes plásticas actuales. Retrieved from
http://www.scribd.com/doc/51685457/La‐apropiacion‐en‐las‐artesplasticas-actuales
Hutcheon, L. (1993, July). La política de la parodia postmoderna. Criterios. Retrieved from
http://www.criterios.es/pdf/hutcheonpolitica.pdf
Junca, H. (2006). Puntos de vista impuros. Viendo al calco y al error con otros ojo. Revista
Ojo, volume (4), 56–59.
Kern, H. (1979). Chuck close: The artificiality of reality and the reality of art. In Chuck Close.
Munchen: Kunstraum Munchen.
Levine, S. (1982). Statement 1982. In D. Evans (Ed.), Appropriation: Documents of
contemporary art (p.81). London: Whitechapel Gallery.
Muller‐ Brockmann, J. (1982). Sistemas de retícula. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
Peña, E. (2006). La copia como medio de expresión. Revista Ojo, volume (4), 60–63.
Salisbury, M. and Styles, M. (2012). El arte de ilustrar libros infantiles. Barcelona: Blume.
Spice, W. (2005). Die Gläserne Botschaft [The glass message]. In Robert Longo (pp. 12–23).
Italy: Gruppo Editoriale Zanardi.
Troncy, E. (2009). Hard drive. In Robert Longo (pp. 24–29). Italy: Gruppo Editoriale Zanardi.
79
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Alison SHREEVE* and David GILLETT
Buckinghamshire New University
*alison.shreeve@bucks.ac.uk
Abstract: Industry in the UK identified a need for higher qualification for kitchen
designers, many developing their design skills on the job having been cabinet
makers and fitters for example. A Foundation Degree, a UK work-related higher
education qualification, was developed by academics and industry
representatives. A blended learning approach using a mix of face to face and
distance learning offered those in work an opportunity to achieve an industryrelevant qualification. As blended learning was a new departure for the school
we wished to study how the ideas for the course, which were based on the
premise of creating a community of practice were played out as the course
unfolded. This research is a work in progress which uses an ethnographic, mixed
methods approach to explore the experiences of students on the course and
those of the academics who set out to design and implement a blended learning
course. It uses multiple participant views to evaluate the ongoing experiences of
learning and teaching on the programme with a view to enhancement and
sharing knowledge about blended learning approaches more widely. The
research reported on here is primarily based on the students’ experience of the
first six months of the course.
Keywords: communities of practice, blended learning, higher education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Introduction
This research evaluates a work in progress, the design and implementation of a
Foundation Degree course in Kitchen Design in a UK University. The course is the outcome
of two years of planning and discussions between the university and key figures in the
kitchens industry keen to provide a framework for professional qualifications and
recognition for what is an important part of the UK economy.
The final decisions about the course resulted in a blended learning programme
designed to enable students to work and study. This was a major departure for the
academic school because there were no existing programmes in blended learning or
distance learning mode within the art and design area at the time and the ethos of the
school is based on experiential learning with a very practical approach to product design in
a range of disciplines. However, kitchen design, when placed within the full time
undergraduate system which we originally tried, only attracted one applicant. We
assumed that this subject was probably viewed as too narrow and young people were
possibly unaware of the number and breadth of jobs available to designers in the industry.
The one applicant came from a family run kitchen business.
We decided that the tight industry context would be more appropriate to a Foundation
Degree, a two year UK qualification designed to be closely linked into working contexts.
We proceeded to re-design the course for those already interested and committed to
careers in the kitchens industry. The course was constructed within an overarching
philosophy to create a community of practice (CoP) on the course, despite the challenges
inherent in setting out to do this as Wenger (1998) identifies; it requires mutual
engagement organised around a purpose which brings people together. As Duguid (2005)
states, a CoP is established over time and it is essentially the practice which creates the
CoP rather than the more warm and cuddly notion of community which holds it together.
However, we wanted students to feel as if they belonged to the course and to
communicate with each other and the course team, even though they were studying at a
distance. We also wanted this course to engage with wider debates and interface with the
kitchen industry as part of the learning process, engaging with other professionals in
kitchen design. In this we were perhaps aligning, as tutors, with the community of practice
dimension identified by Drew (2004, 2015) as one of the dimensions of approaches to
learning evidenced by design tutors.
There were several factors built into the course which we hoped would lead to such a
community of practice around kitchen design even though the students would be learning
at a distance for much of the time.
Course Structure
This was planned with three intensive face-to-face study periods of two and a half days
each academic year. These sessions are situated in the university’s conference centre set
in the heart of leafy countryside in parkland and buildings which date back to the 12th
century. We planned long days of activities and talking which would be a total immersion
in things ‘kitchen’. The first of these residential blocks introduced the students to each
other and to a range of people connected to the course development and some of our
industry supporters. From breakfast to bedtime there were groups and sub-groups
engaged in discussion and debate. Whilst setting up the lecture room for the first session
the authors were aware of a growing group of students in the adjacent coffee area and
81
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
outside who were already actively engaged in conversation. Later in the weekend they had
group activities designed to foster further interpersonal development. At the time of
writing this article there have been two residential weekends. These have been used to
brief students and to share critique of work done in the first semester. In between
residentials the students use a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) to communicate with
their tutors and each other. The second deliberate decision made to encourage a
community to develop was the use of social media sites.
Social Media
Other courses in the school had successfully introduced closed Facebook sites to share
conversations around module topics and subjects. We decided to use a similar tool
because we assumed most people are familiar with it and use it regularly and we wanted
to encourage debate which was more of a conversation than the VLE which was directly
related to assessed work. We decided to keep it closed, but tutors and key industry
supporters were also given access.
Before the course began the course leader investigated other, more visual sites.
Students were logged onto Pinterest on the first day of the course and used this
enthusiastically to exchange images of kitchen and design related things that interested
them. Postings were usually accompanied by very brief captions which summarised why
they had been selected.
Industry Supporters
The curriculum was designed in conjunction with representatives from industry,
including training groups, managing directors of fittings companies, appliances and
independent smaller design companies. Their support was also critical in engaging the first
cohort of students. Scholarships were provided from five companies to enable students to
study and to support the cohort generally. Offers to present to students have resulted in a
selection of activities from specialist industry suppliers who have either designed online
engagements or have attended the residential sessions. An industry software package is
being provided free of charge to students on the course. Facilities and showrooms have
also been offered for visits and learning activities. These deliberately help to break down
the barriers between a course which is ‘academic’ and the professional working
environment. The course team also recruited a well-known kitchen designer to act as a
tutor and ensure that there was an opinion grounded in professional authority to
complement different discipline specialisms within the course team.
The supporters continue to grow and to offer opportunities for the students, including
a competition category within a trade show and promotion in the industry press.
Evaluation Research
Having set up the programme and seen it running for one semester the course leader
and head of school wanted to see how well their ideas were working and how the
participants, course team and key supporters experienced the new course. A small
research project was designed which went through the University’s ethical clearance
process in order to bring a level of rigour into the process.
Given the intention to create a community of practice in kitchen design learning and an
interrelationship with the industry itself we asked:
82
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Have the learning and teaching approaches enabled a community of practice
dimension to develop within the student cohort?
To what extent is there any overlap with professional practice communities in kitchen
design?
Methodology
As we were interested in the experience of participants, from the students, to the
teaching team and the course development team, we adopted a mixed methods
qualitative approach to elicit feelings and observations from participants. Underlying the
research questions is a fundamental ontological position that the lived experiences of the
participants are where the data lies in this research (Mason 2002). As we were also key
players in the development and delivery of the course we acknowledge that there is an
element of participant researcher here; we cannot remove ourselves from the researched
context. In order to openly acknowledge this the course leader is maintaining a reflective
journal which will be accessed to explore intention, observations about progress of
implementing the modules and working with course team, students and supporters. This
constitutes an autoethnographic approach within an ethnographic tradition seeking to
understand how a group of people, in this case associated with a new course, experience
and live through the experience (Cousin, 2009). Typically the researcher is also immersed
in that setting and participant observation is included (Robson 2002). There are limitations
with this as an overarching research approach which we recognise. The intention to
actually improve or change the experience should it be needed is more akin to an action
research approach, commonly used in pedagogic research as teachers are, or should be,
seeking to improve the learning experience for their students. This positions the
researchers firmly within the ethnographic group they are observing.
Naturally occurring data, in the form of student engagement with the learning tasks
and postings on the social media sites designed to encourage engagement, do correlate
with a ‘natural’ environment for research, but additional methods have been employed to
generate data which is the accounts of experience rather than the lived experience of
interacting with the course.
Focus groups were held in the second residential block with students and more
informal discussions between the course leader and industry representatives in order to
elicit views about their experience, particularly in relation to the research questions. The
framework for the focus group with students was about the experience of the course to
date and learning at a distance, how the group gelled together and what they understood
as professional in this particular context.
Ethics
All students were given a written description of the research project, its purpose,
intentions and duration. They were told about the intention to publish, where and to
whom the research would be disseminated and why. All were given the opportunity to
withdraw at any point in the process which is ongoing throughout the duration of their
three year programme. One student declined to take part in the research process, but all
others signed consent forms. No names or details of individuals are used in the research.
83
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
Analysis
Analysis of data was carried out in three phases, the focus groups, the communications
of students who had signed consent forms to allow us to use communications through the
VLE, social media sites and email communication and the use of social media image based
sites. The reflective journal of the course leader was used to contextualise the comments
and observations from these three phases and helped to balance the analysis. This paper is
primarily based on the student focus group outcomes.
A thematic analysis was used to identify characteristics of a community of practice
identity emerging within the student group and the relationship between the course,
tutors and the industry. This was contextualised by the design intention behind the course
and structural factors which helped to create a community of practice are included in the
analysis.
We recognised that the course design had already structured certain ways of behaving
which were aligned to a community of practice identity, so there were some structural
constraints which helped to shape activities. We also acknowledge limitations in using
focus groups which tend to block out any individual responses which might suggest that
there are those within the group who have less of an identity with the course or who don’t
feel part of a community. Discussion of the outcomes use a framework for creating a
Community of Practice identified by Wenger et al (2002).
Research Outcomes from the Student Focus Group
The focus group included all but one of the students on the course and was carried out
in an informal atmosphere. There was much laughter and jocularity, but amongst this were
some serious points about learning, the industry and the way the students bonded as a
group. Had our plans to create a group which would survive being at a distance worked?
Social media
Pinterest provided a fast way to bring people into a visual conversation around kitchen
and design more generally. Once the basics had been grasped most people continued to
engage enthusiastically in the first few weeks and then in bursts of activity as more
pressure to complete assignments began to bite. The use of Pinterest however was patchy.
As we had stressed the importance of using social media through the assessment criteria
for the first year as a way to embed behaviours which we wanted to see, it was important
for all students to use it and to contribute to the visual exchange of ideas. There were
some students who posted significantly more than others, perhaps because the purpose of
the postings was unclear to some as the focus group discussion identified.
Facebook tended to be used less frequently and for more text based exchange or to
post information which might be useful to others for example information about
exhibitions or designers. The focus group revealed that not everyone understood the
purpose of the Facebook page and not all students were habitual Facebook users!
Time
At the first residential weekend when the course started the researchers had been
preparing the learning environment whilst outside the room students were helping
themselves to coffee and making introductions. To an outsider it sounded as if they were
really getting on very quickly and were very sociable. This impression was enhanced by the
student visit to the local pub on the second night of their stay. During the focus group
84
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
however, it became clear that our perception needed to be tempered by an insider
viewpoint. Students pointed out that this, their second time of meeting as a group was an
occasion where they felt more at ease with each other and felt as if they were getting to
know each other better.
The group has been in contact over six months since the first face to face meeting, but
still they felt as if they were new friends and colleagues and the second physical encounter
was still part of an ongoing process of knowing and developing as a group. Despite these
feelings expressed they still demonstrated a caring and supporting disposition: ‘it’s a
relaxed atmosphere’, ‘more communal’, ‘there’s no competition’.
However, the importance of the face to face meetings in establishing trust over a
period of time was emphasised by comments around disclosing their inner feelings. The
newness of the course, both in its mode of attendance (mostly learning at a distance) and
its specific subject matter within the university meant that both the tutors and the
students were embarking on a journey into unknown territory with very few signposts in
the way of previous work to guide them. Once away from the first residential weekend
most students felt unable to voice their fears about assignments to the rest of the group
and thus get the reassurance they needed about the direction they were taking. Most
agreed that ‘I was scared to ask for help’. However, they all agreed that following the first
assignment and the discussions held at the second residential they were in a more secure
position as a group:
Now we know each other a bit more I would be a lot happier this time around to stick a
picture on Facebook: ‘this is what I’m doing, what do you think?’
Feeling isolated
Working at a distance however for most was an isolating experience: ‘Working at home
you don’t know if you’re doing the right thing or not’. Some people felt panicked at home
but were reluctant to say on social media that this was how they felt and were unable to
obtain a sense check from peers.
Sub groups/pairs
A couple of students had however made contact outside the group and outside the
formal mechanisms set up within the course. One pair used the phone to check up and
provide support, describing it as we ‘cried to each other’! Other students who lived
relatively near to each other also met and undertook joint visits which helped to provide
peer support. All agreed that they would be less worried now to use the course
mechanisms, but suggested during the focus group that they would set up a Facebook
group for each other, where the tutors were not invited! The tutors felt this was an
excellent idea and would give everyone ownership of their own learning and a space
where they didn’t have to worry about losing face or appearing ‘stupid’.
Social Environment
The location for the course was selected because of its professional atmosphere as a
conference centre. Students could have been invited to the studios and workshops of the
main campus, but we decided that the venue was important as we intended to immerse
them in the subject of kitchen design for two and a half days. The somewhat luxurious
setting in a country park and the excellent food were part of the course design; whilst
students were with us we wanted them to feel special. This was reflected in their
responses to the question of what helped them to ‘gel’ as a group. The social environment,
85
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
eating and drinking together were important factors in helping them to feel part of a
group. One of the designed learning activities was to visit a kitchen product company and
to work with their experimental chefs using the latest cookers, making and eating a meal
together in the evening. They also recognised the importance of contacting each other
between the residential weekends suggesting that they should have face to face meetings
in between, to visit companies or workshops, even if not all members would be able to join
in. This physical contact appeared to be important, even though mechanisms for
contacting each other through the course VLE, Facebook and Pinterest had been set up to
try and ensure multiple ways to create a community online. Some of these mechanisms
were not fully understood or used by all the group, suggesting more hands on activity at
the residential weekends might help to improve the use of social media. However, the
single most important factor in the group bonding was probably the common interest in
kitchen design.
Specialist Subject
The primary identities of most of the course participants are that they are already
involved in the kitchens industry, but not necessarily as designers. Roles range from over
twenty years’ experience in running a design business, through to sales, supply chain
experience and being newly employed in the industry. Some students were hoping to gain
employment in the industry in the near future.
The subject of the course was what brought people together and formed the focus of
their learning activities, conversations and experiences: ‘it’s easy to gel if you’re of the
same interests’; ‘we like the same thing’. However, it is clear from the wide-ranging
selections of images which they place on Pinterest, that they do have different interests
and are attracted to different things within the sphere of kitchen design. Each person is an
individual linked into a community of practice in some form which is centred on kitchens
and design.
Learning in Design
Many of the issues students raised in the group were also commonly raised by students
on full time design courses. These related to the ambiguity and uncertainty (Austerlitz et
al, 2008) which characterises learning in art and design. As they were at a distance and also
felt in the first six months that they couldn’t ask for help this emphasised the problem of
supporting students through the ambiguity associated with creative outcomes. They felt
that it was difficult, I didn’t understand [the assignment]’; ‘we were all getting upset about
it’. Because you couldn’t see what everyone else was doing you couldn’t check whether
you were on the right lines. One student ended up undoing quite a lot of work and that felt
‘demoralising’. It was clear that the course team would need to change the approach to
support at a distance and find ways to signpost more clearly the kind of work that was
expected in order to minimise the ambiguity; difficult when the course is new and no
previous examples are available to show what is expected. One student commented that
‘it’s research led’ implying perhaps that it was OK to be doing this at a distance, because
each person was undertaking something as an individual. This underlying understanding
that learning is student-led and owned through a ‘research led’ approach was interesting
and reflects findings in research by Orr et al (2014) suggesting that full time final year
undergraduate students perceive the pedagogy of art and design as student-centred,
86
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
where they are co-producers in their learning and the blended learning version might be
no different to full time experiences in this respect.
Rippling out
We had intended to create a group of students who worked together as a course and
who also linked out into the professional sphere of activity in kitchen design, through our
contacts and through the learning activities. Many of our students actually work as
professionals already and some have their own business. One would expect, with this kind
of profile, that a reach out into the professional sphere was almost a given thing in some
cases. We were also keen to engage all students with that outreach in order to create an
overlapping circle of practice (Logan 2006) which characterises much design teaching.
However, there was evidence that actually doing the course was helping to create new
relationships with industry and new ways to develop industry contacts for some people.
One student had taken advantage of a member of the course development team’s offer
and emailed her for advice, something we hoped would be happening. Others approached
people in retail and asked for information, or spoke to designers who worked in their
location. Most reported having received a positive response to their requests, indicating
that they were able to reach out into the industry as well as welcome input from industry
specialists through lectures as part of the course. New relationships with people and
knowledge were beginning to stretch their understanding of the subject area, but also the
way some of them felt about their roles. Two experienced kitchen designers expressed this
as ‘the lectures were all professional, they have much more useful information for me’ but
also there is an increase in self-esteem in undertaking a validated programme of study:
‘the customer will have more respect because you’re more educated’.
The awareness of many of the group about the politics and structure of the industry
was interesting to hear. They were aware of the discussions within the industry about
professionalism and problems with unqualified people being able to set themselves up as
kitchen designers. They called on the industry to do more to promote the need for a
qualification and also reflected on where they hoped it would take them, as the first
people in the UK to achieve a recognised degree in kitchen design. One expressed the view
that they would become ‘a design group that starts up the kitchen industry’ and ensures it
becomes seen as a profession. They thought the course would ‘turn us into professionals’,
but also they were aware that consumer attitudes to design and paying for design may
need to change. They hoped the industry would also work hard to help change this too. An
experienced designer with his own business felt proud to be doing a degree in kitchen
design, ‘customers are more relaxed’ knowing that he is doing a degree: ‘I tell everyone’.
Academic Perspectives
The design of the residential weekends was intended to provide an intensive
immersion in all things kitchen design. There were specialist speakers from industry and
the design professions, as well as engaging an award winning designer as a tutor. These
structures were deliberately set up to help create a community of practice which engaged
learners and the industry within the framework of a university validated programme.
We didn’t start out with much knowledge about the technology required or the kinds
of learning objects we might need to support our students, but we used previous
knowledge (even though second hand in some cases) about what had worked with using
social media in other design courses. The course leader increased his knowledge of
87
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
technologies for learning very quickly and engaged with other more experienced
academics. He began to take on the role of ‘technology steward’ (Wenger et al 2009)
identifying what worked, modifying and evaluating as the course progressed.
Discussion
The idea of Communities of Practice has been well established since its introduction by
Lave and Wenger in 1991 and Wenger’s (1998) elaboration of the idea. Many have
questioned whether a community can be constructed artificially (e.g.Lea 2005) and others
have challenged the importance of power relations within the CoP (Barton & Tusting
2005). Within this context the ongoing course development meetings established good
working relationships between the University and with the Industry with contributions
from representatives of different sectors: suppliers, designers, SMEs etc. The student body
are also drawn together because of their overriding interest in kitchen design and this has
to be the key factor in developing a Community of Practice. This interest is what creates a
common purpose and link between students spread over the whole of the British Isles and
a team of academics who were not specialists in kitchen design when they started this
programme. However, as Wenger (1998 p 250) states, in order to create a learning
community the infrastructure needs to provide opportunities for engagement, imagination
and alignment to the values of the community. It is perhaps these factors, as well as the
technologies in blended learning, which need work to ensure a community of practice is
built up.
As a general aim in setting up the Blended Learning course we had a more overarching
vision about what we wanted to see as a development group, rather than a road map
guided by principles. However, in reviewing progress it is helpful to see how closely we
have matched Wenger et al’s Seven Principles (2002) in developing the CoP idea.
Design for Evolution
Open Dialogue between inside and outside perspectives
Invite different levels of participation
Develop both public and private community spaces
Focus in value
Combine familiarity and excitement
Create a rhythm for the community
Designing for evolution requires the academic team to be open to opportunities from
students, the industry and our colleagues supporting the VLE. Listening to the students
through the focus group has been a useful experience for all of us, enabling the generation
of new ideas to evolve from the group (the students’ own Facebook group). Some
restraints on evolution are inevitable as we have university structures and timeframes to
manage, but some of the other categories for development also suggest that the seven
principles are important for the future success and evolution of the programme.
Discourse, according to Gherardi & Nicolini, (2002) is something which enables
interaction between different communities of practice, but is also a means to create a
sense of who we are and where we belong. Discourse is about performing a practice and
88
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
learning to take part in this practice is part of the development needed to become a
member of a CoP:
The performance of a community is achieved mainly through material and discursive
means which put the community on stage, on the basis of the things it is good at doing.
(p422)
Thus the necessity to enable opportunities to practice or engage with the discourse of
the community of kitchen designers is a very important issue in a blended learning
environment. Open dialogue was created with the introduction of industry specialist
speakers who have been very generous with their time and encouraging students to
contact them outside the limited face to face contact time. A range of different industry
specialists have been introduced in face-to-face sessions to encourage dialogue and
regular tutorials have been held by phone or skype to maintain exchanges with students.
However, time and evolution of the group is important as the focus group showed that
trust needs to be built up gradually so that peer to peer dialogue can take place through
social media and the VLE. The purpose and function of the technology also needs to be
more firmly embedded as a means to dialogue, as the focus group indicated mixed take up
with social media and with a forum for discussion on the VLE being misconstrued by most
of the students and not resulting in exchange or discussion. The students’ decision to
create their own space for dialogue via Facebook was a welcome development and one
which we shall monitor for its role in learning and fostering the community of practice.
Such student-led opportunities to create dialogue through web2 technologies, will ‘limit
the likelihood of students telling tutor’s stories’ about design as advocated by Ghassan &
Bohemia (2015) in a blended learning project. Independence in creating and developing an
identity of participation in a CoP through the practice of discourse appears to be essential.
On a more organisational level the course team have an Industry Advisory Board which
is a link to the outside world and enables discussion. The Kitchens, Bedrooms and
Bathrooms, KBB National Training Group have also been generous in inviting the course
leader into their Board meetings, to keep dialogue going around education and training
issues. Students are not part of these conversations, but connections between education
and industry are enabled through these relationships and the interest which many sectors
of the industry have expressed to us in the last 12 months also enables dialogue at
different levels within the CoP.
Public and private community spaces are evolving in the course. The VLE itself has
areas where individuals receive their grades and feedback unseen by others. The setting
up of student only areas is a welcome development and also the communication between
sub-groups is interesting. The concern of the researchers lies in those who might be
excluded from too many private spaces and who might not have voiced opinions or
concerns during the focus group or in other forums. This would be worth monitoring to
check whether identities of non-participation (Wenger, 1998 p190) are being created as
well as identities of participation within the CoP.
In addition to the functional aspects of the VLE which provide the regular input and
information which mimic the studio environment students are encouraged to reflect on
the new information. This aspect of the course is not well understood, but embedded
questions within the online presentations are being set in place to stimulate debate
89
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
around the content of the taught curriculum. This will have a twofold purpose, to check on
students’ learning and also to help them practice and rehearse the discourse of the CoP.
Since the second residential weekend the course leader has introduced a blog owned
by each individual student. This is a personal space where ongoing work can be presented
and commented on. This can range from small quotes, to images or audio capture. This has
been designed to encourage public presentation, sharing and getting feedback. These
blogs are open and accessible, either via the university microblog which will stream each
student’s individual blog, or directly to the student’s space. This is designed partly as a
professional face to the industry but it is open to scrutiny by interested public audiences
who may also comment on the blog, thus building in another way to extend into the wider
public sphere of kitchen design.
Shared values need to be fostered around the process and evaluation of kitchen design
within the course community. With no prior work to help them to imagine what is required
there was some demonstration of confusion in the focus group. Whereas design education
explicitly looks for the innovative and creative, there are still parameters within which
work is produced to an acceptable standard. The tutors hold the power (Barton & Tusting
2005) in this relationship as they are the arbiters of the accepted values for the community
(Orr & Bloxham 2012). In this case, where award-winning industry practitioners are also
tutors the power is also representative of standards present in industry practices. More
active joint construction of the shared values for the course would be helpful for students
and needs work over time as advocated by Wenger at al (2002) and may not remain static.
There is also a question about whose values are to be prevalent in the CoP and the value of
the CoP to the individual participants. These are not simple or straightforward issues, but
ones which require open discussion
Combining familiarity and excitement is an interesting observation. The focus group as
a whole was full of laughter and a sense of excitement about the course, but it was
tempered with observations about clarity of purpose and guidance. The challenge in
guiding students on a new programme when you are teaching design at a distance perhaps
calls for more use of the familiar than we were able to provide. Excitement is definitely on
the agenda at residential weekends, but some familiar frameworks might be helpful to
stabilise engagement as well. This is an issue the course team will take forward for
discussion.
A rhythm for the community is provided by the structure of the course, with its three
residential blocks and the module structure. However, it was interesting to note the
students need to have some face to face contact or activity between the residentials.
Regular tutorials were also offered, but whether this rhythm is the best or only way to
create the sense of community is questionable. Perhaps more focused questioning might
help to establish exactly what the best patterns or rhythms might be for learning as well as
developing the community. There was definitely a sense of students having worked too
hard, and spending too long on some assignments, producing more than we had
anticipated or needed. This was evidenced by those with dyslexia in particular who had
spent about twice as long on activities as we estimated. There was also evidence to
suggest that individual students needed to develop their own rhythms of working – setting
alarms and creating their own timetables around their busy lives. Rhythms then are
perhaps something which needs multiple levels and frequencies within the COP too.
90
Cooking Up Blended Learning for Kitchen Design
Conclusion
Are we succeeding in creating a course which helps students to create an identity of
participation in a community of practice? We think there is some evidence to suggest that
this is happening, but acknowledge that there is a temporal dimension which we have to
continuously negotiate. With more experience of providing blended learning in design we
think we will be able to improve the course experience. We already appreciate that there
are ways to prepare students before they arrive and to provide more practice in using the
communication tools of the VLE and social media sites in their first residential introduction
to ensure that they are familiar with using them and understand the purpose of different
digital tools.
The relationship of the course community of practice to the wider industry, which we
view as essential development for the students also offers us opportunities to do things
differently. As students are already reaching out into their local design communities this
might be something to encourage and facilitate. The use of mentors outside the course
could help to provide a link and also a new window into the industry. For students who are
new to kitchen design this could provide access to the situated knowledge (Billett 2001,
Lave & Wenger 1991) which ‘old timers’ in the community of practice provide.
Bearing in mind Duguid’s (2005) reminder that practice is at the centre of any CoP and
is what holds the community together, we will need to establish ways of working, being
and speaking which help to cement the community. It is the practice of a course situated in
two worlds, education in a blended learning mode and the professional world of kitchen
design which will enable students to feel as if they belong to the CoP and a shared
discourse which will enact the practice and help to create an identity of belonging
(Gherardi & Nicolini, 2004).
Making deliberate efforts to incorporate the ‘rich professional’ context of work places
may also provide a way to enhance the online learning community (Smith et al 2009). Most
of our students are employed in environments where kitchens are integral to their working
lives as well as their home lives. Bringing this knowledge into the shared environment
online may help to ensure identities of participation are encouraged and enabled,
increasing the flow between different communities of practice and the development of
integrated identities of learner and practitioner within the course community of practice.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank our students and industry
supporters for their help and cooperation in starting this course and in taking
part in this research project to evaluate progress.
References
Austerlitz, N., Blythman, M., Grove-White, A., Jones, B., Jones, C., Morgan, S., Orr, S.
Shreeve, A. &. Vaughan, S (2008) Mind the gap: expectations, ambiguity and pedagogy
within art and design higher education. In: L. Drew (Ed), The Student Experience in Art
and Design Higher Education : Drivers for Change (pp. 125-148). Cambridge:.Jill Rogers
Associates Limited.
Barton, D. & Tusting , K. (2005) Beyond Communities of Practice: Language, Power and
Social Context. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
91
ALISON SHREEVE & DAVID GILLETT
Billett, S. (2001) Learning through working life: interdependencies at work. Studies in
Continuing Education. 23(1): 19-35.
Cousin, G. (2009) Researching Learning in Higher Education. New York & London:
Routledge
Drew, L. (2004). The experience of teaching creative practices: conceptions and
approaches to teaching in the community of practice dimension. In A. Davies, (Ed).
Enhancing curricula: Towards the Scholarship of Teaching in Art, Design and
Communication (pp106-123). London: CLTAD.
Drew, L. (2015) The Experience of Teaching a Creative Practice: An Exploration of
Conceptions and Approaches to Teaching, Linking Variation and the Community of
Practice Dimension. In Tovey, M. (Ed) Design Pedagogies (pp95-112). Farnham, Gower.
Duguid, P. (2005) ‘The Art Of Knowing’: Social And Tacit Dimensions Of Knowledge and The
Limits of The Community of Practice. The Information Society: An International Journal.
21:2, 108-118
Gassan, A & Bohemia, E. (2015) Amplifying Learners’ Voices through the Global Studio. In
Tovey, M. (Ed) Design Pedagogy (pp215-236). Farnham, Gower.
Gherardi, S & Niccolini, D. (2002) Learning In A Constellation Of Interconnected Practices:
Canon Or Dissonance? Journal of Management Studies. 39:4, 419-436
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lea, M., R (2005). 'Communities of practice' in higher education: useful heuristic or
educational model? In Barton, D. & Tusting, K. (Eds). Beyond Communities of Practice.
Language, power and social context (pp180-197). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press..
Logan, C. (2006). Circles of Practice: educational and professional graphic design. Journal of
Workplace Learning. 18:6, 331-343
Orr, S. and Bloxham, S. (2012) Making judgements about students making work: lecturers’
assessment practices in art and design. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 234253
Orr, S., Yorke, M. & Blair, B. (2014) ‘The Answer is Brought About from Within You’: A
Student-Centred Perspective On Pedagogy In Art And Design. International Journal of
Art and Design Education. 33:1, 32-45
Robson, C. (2002) Real World Research. Oxford, Blackwell
Smith, P., Stacey, E. & Ha, T.S. (2009) Blending Collaborative Online Learning with
Workplace and Community Contexts. In E. Stacey & P. Gerbic (Eds) Effective Blended
learning Practices: Evidence-based Perspectives in ICT. Pennsylvania, Hershey.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice. Learning meaning and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R. & Snyder, W. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice: a
guide to managing knowledge. Harvard, Harvard Business School Press
Wenger, E, White, N. & Smith, J. (2009) Digital Habitats: stewarding technology for
communities. Portland, OR, CPSquare.
92
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
Alke GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
Staffordshire University
a.c.groppel-wegener@staffs.ac.uk
Abstract: Students within the design disciplines can be faced with a duality when
they are studying at university – the ‘practice’ they experience in a
workshop/studio environment is put in contrast with the ‘theory’ of contextual,
critical and historical studies. This paper presents a research project that
investigates whether the design thinking and problem solving used in the studio
can also improve students’ levels of academic literacy. The ‘Fishscale of
Academicness’ was initially inspired by an analogy in the work of Claire Penketh.
This analogy, likening texts to fish in the context of developing undergraduate
students’ reading skills, has been extended and developed into a lecture and
seminar activity to support students to better determine the provenance of
secondary sources for their own research and essay writing. This paper analyses
metaphors student groups developed and discovers that allowing students to
design their own personalised (and visual) metaphors turned the abstract
experience of analysing secondary sources into something more concrete. It
argues that integrating studio-like teaching and learning into the seminar
environment has the potential to develop not only understanding, but also
ownership, crucial to fostering engagement with academic skills in the Higher
Education environment.
Keywords: study skills, academic literacy, metaphor, fishscale, information
determinacy
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
Introduction
This paper is part of the evaluation of an ongoing research project which attempts to
develop ways of teaching academic practice based on learning strategies found in the
workshop/studio environment. A session was developed with the aim of prompting
students to focus on identifying the provenance of secondary sources using the metaphor
of sea creatures and utilising design thinking. While the overall research includes students
from a number of disciplines and levels, as well as feedback gathered through
questionnaires, the data discussed here is concerned exclusively with first-year students
from studio-based art, design and media courses and analyses the drawings students
produced and discussed during the sessions. For the purpose of this paper, particular
attention is paid to how the students visualised a selection of sources from different
academic levels, as well as the variations between their descriptions and the images they
produced. It will be argued that including a visual design task in the teaching of this very
academic practice allows design students to use learning strategies they are familiar with
from the studio environment and, in extension, experience more ownership of the task.
Background
Many students starting in Higher Education are faced with the hurdle of academic
practice so often hidden from all but the most inquisitive university starter. They might
think they are prepared for the work not realising how much of a step up from school they
will be expected to make. Their tutors most certainly will mention (and possibly instruct
them in) a number of vital study skills, but there is a reason that this is sometimes called
academic practice: it needs to be done repeatedly in order to be internalised.
In a way, one would think that students of design would be a step ahead of their peers
from other disciplines: they are well used to practising something in order to develop the
considerable technical and thinking skills a professional design practitioner needs on
graduation. While there are certainly Higher Education institutions in which theory and
practice are well integrated within design education, in others that is unfortunately not
quite the case. In the latter there still seems to be a divide between what happens in the
workshop/studio environment as opposed to what happens in the lecture theatre/seminar
room. In the studio these students hone their (technical) skills. In the lecture theatre and
seminar room things are happening that are integral to the future of a practising
professional, but often seem disconnected to the design student: the contextual studies,
the history and theory of their discipline and the broadening of their horizons to both the
past and the future. Students who have no difficulty doing immaculate research in order to
sort out minute details in, for example, the design of a new chair can seem completely
disengaged in the context of reflecting on said work and putting it into a larger context.
Maybe this disconnect is not due to the subject matter; the reason students often
seem utterly baffled by what we ask them to do in the lecture theatre and seminar room
could be based on a very different way of doing it. It is a different sort of practice they
need to engage with, and maybe it is this disconnect between studio practice and
academic practice that needs to be addressed. After all, a neat referencing system does
not make a high quality reference list.
94
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
At Staffordshire University, where this study is located, a certain disconnect can be
found between theory and practice in some of the art and design courses offered. Study
skills have been identified as a potentially challenging issue for students on these courses,
so much so that a writing-in-the-disciplines approach is followed with dedicated
contributions from a specialist. This includes credit bearing input into a dedicated module
on all the creative, studio-based disciplines in art, design and media, which include courses
in 3D design/crafts, animation, comic and cartoon arts, film and media production, fine art,
graphic design, illustration, photography, photo journalism, surface pattern design as well
as textile surface design. These modules are taught through a mixture of lectures and
seminar work and are assessed by short illustrated essays of between 1000 and 2000
words.
Traditionally a weakness in these modules has been that students, who more and more
rely on a simple search engine to find their sources on the internet, seemingly put little
effort into analysing the type of source they are using as evidence for their research. It
seems that these students are not alone; actively questioning the provenance of secondary
sources, particularly when found online, has been identified by Metzger et al. (2003),
Hepworth and Walton (2009), as well as Wiley et al. (2009) as a weakness in student
researchers’ academic practice. According to an estimation by Breivik and Gee (2006),
undergraduates are searching only 0.03% of the web, and there seems to be little
understanding of academic peer-review in the context of publishing information.
While research is common in the context of artistic and design practice, whether it be
investigating the properties of material or looking for inspiration, a deeper exploration of
academic sources unfortunately does not follow this, and art and design students seem to
be as (if not more) inexperienced at establishing the provenance of their sources as their
counterparts in less visual subjects. Hemmig (2008), for example, found that artists
particularly ‘frequently cannot evaluate information that is given to them’ (349). It seems
that merely explaining the importance of the provenance of secondary sources with some
choice prompts to identify which sources are trustworthy and valuable in the academic
context, has little impact on the sources cited in the students’ essays.
There are strategies that address this and introduce students to this field of academic
literacies. Walton and Hepworth (2011) used online discourse as the main tool to get
students to develop their own evaluation criteria. Balusek and Oliver (2012) tested their
students using a scaled point system and found that, with the help of this template,
students effectively distinguished between different types of sources, evaluated them and,
crucially, identified peer reviewed sources from examples.
However, in the particular context of art and design students, who often think of the
academic side of their studies as ‘boring’ and ‘dull’, presenting the provenance of sources
as something combining numbers and checklists is counterintuitive. An alternative
presented itself in the work of Claire Penketh, who used an analogy likening academic
texts to deep water fish in the context of developing undergraduate students’ reading skills
(Beaumont and Penketh, 2010). This concept has been extended and developed into a
lecture titled ‘The Fishscale of Academicness’ with supporting group work in a seminar
setting (see Figure 1 for a sample illustration). The teaching and learning strategies used
here draw specifically on turning the academic practice of determining a secondary
source’s provenance, which is so often hidden from students, into what is basically a
95
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
design problem. Rather than teaching resources and their use, learning activities were
created that would attempt to facilitate students to engage with information using a set of
Figure 1: An overview illustration showing the depth of the academic ocean populated by sea
creatures representing secondary sources from the Fishscale of Academicness resource.
Illustration by Josh Filhol
critical thinking skills, one of the main principles of inquiry-based learning (HamptonReeves et al., 2009).
The Fishscale of Academicness, discussed in detail in Gröppel-Wegener and Walton
(2013), is a teaching intervention based on the idea of giving students a task in order to
consolidate their learning. As in the studio, an initial demonstration by an expert would be
followed by the learners exploring and practising the newly introduced skill. Students are
not just asked to make a judgement call based on predetermined criteria, they are utilising
a learning-by-doing approach to analyse types of sources through their visualisation as sea
creatures. In the process student groups design their own personalised (and visual)
metaphors, thus also making use of one of Lawley and Tompkins’ (2000) key points about
metaphor: they are turning the abstract experience (of analysing secondary sources) into
something more concrete (the sea creatures). They are also linking the concept that some
sources are considered of more academic worth than others into the visual of depth in an
ocean, with the sea creatures representing their sources living somewhere between the
shallows (of little academic worth) and the deepest sea (of most academic worth).
The use of metaphors and analogies is key to this learning strategy. In the context of
psychoanalysis, metaphors are used extensively to discover meaning that might be
concealed. Similarly the ‘academicness’ of a secondary source is just as hidden to the
uninitiated, and the ‘proper’ vocabulary to discuss this is also something that students
might lack, particularly in their first year of studies. So it makes sense to use metaphors in
the context of the hidden academic practice of establishing a source’s provenance. But it is
not just the use of metaphors as such that is useful here, the trick is to ask students to
make use of two common stages of translating one form of metaphor to another:
verbalising and physicalising.
As Lawley and Tompkins explain:
96
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
Much of the Symbolic Modelling process involves facilitating the client to verbalise the
symbolism they ascribe to their imaginative representations, their nonverbal behaviour
and to the material objects that draw their attention. […] The other common type of
translation involves the client physicalising their spoken and imaginative metaphors,
that is, intentionally creating a physical symbolic representation. This could be drawing,
painting, sculpting, poetry, prose and making music. […] Physicalising a metaphor often
enables clients to depict things they cannot say, and to encapsulate and convey the
overall wholeness of an experience in a single material representation. (Lawley and
Tompkins, 2000, p. 16, their emphasis)
Determining the provenance of secondary sources is, of course, not happening on such
deep a level as psychotherapy and it is not a therapeutic process. However, some of the
same principles apply in the design process. Indeed, metaphors are already being
discussed in the context of designing and design education (see for example Coyne,
Snodgrass and Martin, 1994), with Hiort af Ornäs, Keitsch and Schulte arguing that
‘Metaphors are pedagogic tools for conveying certain ideas, providing ways of structuring
thinking and understanding abstractions’ and that ‘Metaphors can support learning in
novel ways and contexts. For beginners, they can be used to encourage students to
structure thinking and understand abstractions.’ (Hiort af Ornäs, Keitsch and Schulte, 2014,
p. 5)
The tasks linked to the Fishscale combine the processes Lawley and Tompkins discuss –
students are asked to verbalise their understanding of the sources in group discussions and
at the same time to physicalise them as a visual representation. As the ‘theme’ for this
visualisation is predetermined (sea creatures), students have a ready-made vocabulary of
both images and words at their disposal to work towards the understanding of what makes
a source academic. Design students go through a familiar process (of designing
something); they are tapping into tacit understanding (according to Biggs, 2004, tacit
knowledge ‘has an experiential component that cannot be efficiently expressed
linguistically’, p. 7) and make it more tangible through observation, verbalising and
physicalising, until it becomes understood.
Research Design
This paper analyses the way student groups drawn from first year art and design
disciplines physicalised and verbalised sample sources they had been given during a
session when the concept of the Fishscale was explained to them. The aim was to find out
whether the concept was understood and whether it was important to ask students to
both visualise and verbalise their understanding of the provenance of the sources.
Seven different classes of students took part in the research covering the disciplines of
Animation (17), Comic and Cartoon Arts (17), Film and Media Production (39), Fine Art
(26), Graphic Design and Illustration (21), Photography and Photojournalism (28), as well
as Surface Pattern and Textile Surface Design (17). A total of 165 students participated. In
groups of about 5 students each, the students discussed a number of sample sources, one
or two sources per group, depending on the time available during the class. The sources
were selected according to their type and care was taken that none of the small groups
97
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
worked with two texts of a similar academic depth. Each class had representations of all
the levels of academicness, which were later discussed as part of a ranking exercise.
The types of sources were drawn from leisure publications, the online presence of a
reputable newspaper, a page from Wikipedia, a ‘creative’ type high quality magazine, a
book giving examples of infographics curated for a general public, two peer-reviewed
academic journals and an academic book based on a PhD thesis. The same collection of
sample sources was used for all the classes, and students were told that these were not
connected to their subject disciplines on purpose as the point of the exercise was to
identify and appreciate the types of sources rather than their content.
The students produced a total of 65 images of individual sources as sea creatures in
response to the samples. Students were asked to include a commentary explaining why
these sea creatures had been chosen as representations, 8 of the images did not include
this commentary. The image examples included here are published with the permission of
the individuals who drew them. When this permission could not be obtained the images
are only described. An example can be seen in Figure 2, with the description given by the
student groups as the caption (original spelling and grammar has been kept here and in the
following captions). It is important to keep in mind that the students also presented their
designs in class, so another layer of communication, the oral presentation and discussion,
is in the mix for them. Unfortunately this layer could not be captured in this research.
Findings
To give an overview of the findings, first there will be a discussion of the images and
commentaries on the types of sources produced by the groups. Here particular attention
will be paid to the more academic ones and how they were perceived by students – as well
as whether this way of analysis allowed the students to show their findings even if they
were lacking the right academic vocabulary. This section will end with a discussion of what
the images show that the written commentary does not, with a particular focus on the
accessories that were added to the sea creatures.
The students successfully identified the sources from the leisure category as not
suitable for academic research and ranked them near to the surface of the ‘academic
ocean’. The 12 student groups working with those sources often portrayed them as groups
of small fish, and they were mostly either described as or drawn colourful. Other words
used to describe them were ‘lively’, ‘bright’, ‘cheerful’ and ‘friendly’. Comments also
showed that students analysed their sources, including terms such as ‘opinionated’, ‘onesided’, ‘all form with no function’ or ‘information is pointless’ (see Figure 3 for an
example).
6 student groups tackled the printout of a Wikipedia page. Most of these commented
on its potential ambiguity when it comes to academic work, mentioning the way it is
compiled. It was described as ‘straightforward’, eel-like, ‘fat’ (because it has a lot of
information in it), a pufferfish (because ‘the wrong part’ is ‘poisonous’), and as a jellyfish
(as incorrect information ‘can sting you’). All student groups ranked Wikipedia as a midrange academic source.
The newspaper article was investigated by 7 student groups. Most of the comments
here showed that students felt it was an accessible and trustworthy resource with lots of
information, located at a mid-range academic level. One group likened it to an angler fish,
98
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
saying that ‘the article relies on visual aids in order to guide the reader through the
information.’ Another group visualised it as a shark ‘because there is too much text and
there isn’t much photographic pieces that show anything’ (an example can be seen in
Figure 2).
Figure 2: It's fairly flat and has some quirky illustrations hence the star shape. I would trust starfish,
despite the lack of facial features. It lives on the rocks so it can be found both on the
surface (the web) and in a deeper source (the Guardian newspaper). [Graphics/Illustration
student on newspaper article]
Figure 3: -One-sided.-Opinionative.-Not a great deal of content.-Very image heavy.-Famous female
sex. [Photography/Photojournalism describing women’s leisure magazine]
7 student groups analysed the design magazine. All of them ranked its academicness as
not quite on the surface, but pretty shallow nonetheless. Terms to describe it included
‘personal’, ‘colourful’ – so much so that one group designed a ‘rainbow fish’ to visualise it
99
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
– and a lot of them mentioned that it included a lot of images. One group described it as
an eel, as it was ‘long and straightforward’ and another as an octopus (see Figure 4).
Figure 4: It is an octopus because it has a series of information which are all to do with the same
thing, the octopus is the main parts and the legs of the different facts. [Fine Art describing
creative Magazine]
Figure 5: We have chosen a jellyfish to represent our source of information given to us because, much
like a jellyfish it is colourful and comes in different colours. The information is spread out
and patterned around much like a jellyfish's limbs. It also may start off simple but it ends
complicated. Jellyfish also go and do what they want with no care, this book is sets out
the same way. [Film/Media Production describing infographic book]
The non-fiction book for the general public was analysed by 6 student groups. Terms to
describe this were ‘visual’ and ‘colourful’. The sea creatures represented ranged from
traditional fish shapes to the puffer fish (‘The information in the book seems small at first
100
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
but when you continue to read you realise that the information goes into more depth’), a
flat fish, rather like a flounder, and a jellyfish (see Figure 5).
Figure 6: It is large and full of information. It appears intimidating to anyone unfamiliar with it and its
content. It is black-and-white covered blue. [Comic and Cartoon Arts describing PhD book]
For this research it was of particular interest to see how academic secondary sources
were considered by the students. One of the aims of the session was to introduce them to
the concept of peer-reviewed journals and to make them aware that the further they
would progress through their three year programmes the more they would be expected to
engage with ‘deeper’ academic sources. For this reason three types of sample academic
sources were discussed in class: a book based on a PhD thesis and two peer-reviewed
journals, which will be discussed here in more detail.
The book based on PhD research was published for a specialist audience, but it was not
the PhD thesis itself, thus missing the formatting and idiosyncrasies that can be found in an
original doctoral submission. 7 student groups analysed this source. The attributes given to
it were well observed. Two groups described it as a whale (one example can be seen in
Figure 6), focusing on the amount of information given on one specific topic. Other groups
mentioned an octopus, a jellyfish, an eel-like fish and a flat fish.
Most of the student groups identified this as a very deep source, and terms used to
describe it included ‘boring’ and ‘dull’. A lack of pictures was remarked on, as was that it
was full of information.
While the PhD book was considered overall full of information, but dull, the two peerreviewed academic journals were often seen as scary and teeth featured a lot in the
relevant illustrations. Students were sampling two different academic journals, the Journal
of Writing in Creative Practice (JWCP), which is closely connected to creative practice in the
articles featured, and Teaching and Learning Inquiry (TLI), which is very theoretical in
scope. 11 student groups looked at the former. While some of them identified this as a
deep academic source, most of them had it in lower mid-range. There were also a lot of
differences in how it was described. Some students saw it as scary fish (piranha, two
sharks, kraken). Others saw it as flat and straight forward (turtle). One described an
101
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
octopus. Terms like ‘trustability’, ‘informative’, ‘references his findings’ were added. Some
students were not impressed, using terms like ‘wordy’, ‘unfriendly’, ‘quite bland but
content rich’ and even ‘nasty’.
Figure 7: This article is a kracken because the journal is big and unfriendly, has no images.
[Graphics/Illustration students describing an article in JWCP]
Figure 8: Shark grey scary, a lot of information. Star shaped because it talks about a range of
different things. [Surface Pattern/Textile Surface describing article in JWCP]
Both groups from the Graphics/Illustration class make the point that the source has no
images (which was true for the issues they had available, although more current issues of
this journal do include pictures). They describe a reading experience the students find
scary (Figure 7) simply by showing a kraken crushing a ship.
Other groups use the metaphor of sea creatures with limbs in order to make the point
that the journal includes information on different things; Figure 8, for example, shows the
journal as a combination of starfish and shark.
102
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
9 student groups analysed issues of Teaching and Learning Inquiry. Imagery used here
was mostly of sharks (one of them sleeping to show how boring the text was), and there
were a lot of terms in the descriptions identifying this source as ‘complicated’, ‘hard’,
‘intimidating’, ‘dull’, ‘academic’ and ‘formal’. A number of groups commented that this
journal made them feel out of their depth because it was not targeted at their own area of
expertise. In the commentary given in addition to Figure 9, for example, students are able
to identify features of this genre, such as ‘language is specialised’, ‘very complex’ and
‘orderly’.
Figure 9: The language is specialised and unfamiliar making it less accessible. Without a brief
knowledge of the background to the text it is very complex to understand. It is very
orderly and academic. [Fine art describing an article in LTI]
Figure 10: The fish is scary to begin with and it seems you will find nothing. But if you keep searching,
to the right person it becomes easier and there is useful information.
[Photography/Photojournalism describing article in TLI]
103
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
There is an interesting difference between the commentaries of two groups in
particular, both of which describe the experience of approaching the source rather than
the source itself. A group from Photography/Photojournalism (Figure 10) described (and
drew) a fish that initially is scary (with lots of teeth at one end), but which then becomes
‘easier’ to understand and with ‘useful information’ once the time is put in to understand
it in more detail. This is shown nicely by the nature of the fish changing at the tail, which is
less spiky than the rest of the fish and becomes more colourful. Figure 11, on the other
hand, an illustration provided by a group of Animation students, is described as looking
‘enticing from the outside’, but that once the reader is beyond the cover the source is
judged as ‘complex and rather intimidating-scholarly, academic and formal.’ This is not a
shark, but an angler fish, with very sharp teeth, complete with mortarboard and diploma
as a nod to its academic status. This illustration also includes the warning ‘Do not Feed’ to
show that it is potentially dangerous.
As with the mortar board and diploma in Figure 11, it is the sometimes added
accessories that make a bigger statement than the sea creatures themselves. By adding
mortarboards and diplomas students express a particular view of the university
environment; dressing up fish with pipes and monocles shows the expectation of a certain
traditional stuffiness when it comes to academia. But in this case, these stereotypes help
students get to grips with the fact that there are different levels of academic sources out
there.
Figure 11: Looks enticing from the outside, not a creative fish-once opened it is complex and rather
intimidating-scholarly, academic and formal. [Animation students describing article in TLI]
The students do not just reference their idea of academic life in this way, added
accessories are a way of making additional points, even when they are not mentioned in
the commentary. The source in Figure 3, for example, is dismissed as academically useless
through the visual clue of adding handbags to a whole school of fish, accessories that are
not mentioned in the written description.
Indeed, sometimes the images produced are more telling than the commentary. Figure
12 portrays a peer-reviewed academic journal and the written commentary is in a way
quite funny, with students trying to imagine the type of character this source could be
104
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
described as (‘Probably lives in a semi-detached house, has a library card’). The fish that
was drawn does not show teeth to show that it is scary, although the expression of its
mouth is probably best described as quizzical. What really gives this picture significance,
however, is the thumbs down gesture the fish makes. It is a tiny detail that clearly shows
how dismissive the students are of this source, and possibly this type of source.
Figure 12: Lots of text - very dull. Grey cover. Probably lives in semi-detached house, has a library
card. [Graphics Illustration students describing TLI]
Figure 13: [Fine Art on PhD book, no written commentary included]
As mentioned before, sometimes there was no commentary included with the pictures.
That does not mean that they do not tell a story about how the students perceived the
particular source, although of course some of this is down to interpretation and possibly
guess work. Figure 13 shows the analysis of the PhD based book by a number of Fine Art
students. It is clearly a jellyfish, so based on the use of this type of sea creature by student
groups we can assume that the ‘sting in the tail’ plays a part in this evaluation. This
105
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
particular specimen also has facial features, which are very neutral – a ‘mouth’ that is very
straight, no smile or frown is included. But most striking perhaps is the inclusion of a ‘nose’
made up of a question mark. The picture gets a sense of scale by the inclusion of a much
tinier fish alongside the jellyfish, which might relate to the amount of information included
in the book. The tiny fish also says ‘Help’, which (particularly when considered together
with the question mark nose) might be in reference to the students feeling helpless and
overwhelmed by this type of source.
Discussion
As the images and explanations show, in a relatively short time, students come up with
insightful assessments of sources and usually their assessments of how useful the
respective types of sources are in an academic context are accurate. The few times when
they are not, discussion in the classroom showed that students tried to determine the
value of the sources for them specifically in the context of their own subject, when they
did not take on board that the sources were chosen outside of their discipline on purpose.
As has been seen, sometimes the same creature was designed by different sets of
students for different sources, and it is interesting to see that the commentaries
accompanying these designs clearly explain why that particular creature was chosen. So
different aspects are highlighted, or they are explained in a variety of contexts.
It comes as no surprise that the shark features a number of times, particularly to
describe an academic source, because this is included as an example of representing an
academic source in the presentation that introduces the Fishscale concept. However, a
number of sea creatures came up repeatedly in student work that did not feature in the
presentation. For example, there are a number of different sources that are described as
creatures with a number of limbs, like starfish, squid or octopi. In these examples, the
limbs are often compared with different facts or perspectives, they are often chosen for
magazines or journals. However, there are still clear differences made between the octopi
which represent the academic level – the creative magazine visualised in Figure 4 is
multicoloured and sports ‘creative’ accessories like a hat and sunglasses, whereas the
kraken in Figure 7 visibly wreaks havoc making it not just more serious in appearance but
also scary.
Overall, the comments that students use to describe their reasoning behind which sea
creature best visualises a specific source gives an insight into their thinking processes and
it gives them the vocabulary to analyse types of text that might be unfamiliar to them.
Most of these students lack the right terminology to analyse academic literature, to the
point that many of them refer to journals as ‘books’. Encouraging them to describe the
sources in terms of sea creatures allows them to show their analytical skills by using means
of communication that they are familiar with: drawing/designing on the one hand and
talking about something that, while some of them might see it as an odd subject, is
nevertheless much less alien than academic terminology.
The concept behind the Fishscale of Academicness might be considered as particularly
useful for art and design students as it is a visual approach to a very real problem in Higher
Education. However, the visual nature of the concept is only one of the aspects that makes
it useful. Rather, it is the design task and integrated designerly thinking that makes it
invaluable. This works because students are alerted to the necessity of analysing the
106
Design Tasks Beyond the Studio
provenance of the secondary sources they are considering to use. Rather than just ranking
them, students need to find a way to represent sources through an analogy and
externalise a brief analysis of them in three ways: as picture, in oral discussion and as
written text. So any inherent understanding they might have that comes from skimming
the sources needs to be specifically externalised. As has been argued by Gröppel-Wegener
and Walton (2013) this task allows students ‘to move from an affective state of uncertainty
regarding the information they are engaging with to a point of relative certainty’ (p. 16).
The important factor is not necessarily the visual nature of this concept, but rather the
activities through which the translations of the students’ understanding into different
physicalisations become visible to them: because they are being asked to analyse and
describe sources they become aware that this is behaviour they need to integrate into
their own research practice. They develop a sense of ownership not just of the sources
they have analysed and translated into a sea creature, but also of this activity. It works
because it uses an approach that is embedded in the practice of design teaching. In a way
the presentation is a demonstration of how to go through questioning the provenance of a
secondary source. The students are using team work to practise (and practice) this crucial
stage of academic practice and they produce a physical outcome that potentially becomes
part of their research process, just as an early sketch becomes part of their design process.
Conclusion
The engagement of the students with the provenance of secondary sources and the
related design tasks clearly demonstrates an understanding of the concept of information
determinacy. While the research data collected at this stage does not show whether there
was long term retention of the concept, as a strategy to make the problem understood it
has been proven successful (and the data collected as part of the larger research project
confirms this).
Through the analysis of a range of metaphors student groups developed during these
sessions, it is clear that using a studio-like teaching approach is a possible way to make
students aware of the sometimes hidden academic practice of questioning the sources
they come across in their research. Engaging students in an active way gives them a readymade strategy for following this through individually – and taking ownership of this
activity.
What this research also has shown is that while first year students may lack the right
terminology to describe academic sources correctly, they do have the right skills to analyse
them and describe them if another vocabulary is presented. The physicalisations of the
metaphors the students are coming up with also show their impressions of the type of
sources they are expected to engage with – some of them are clearly intimidated by the
complexity of academic texts. However, hopefully they realise that academic practice gets
easier by being practised, just like the tasks design students encounter in their workshops.
References
Balusek, K. and Oliver, J. (2012) An Assessment of Students’ Ability to Evaluate Sources
using a scale. [conference presentation] International Society for the Scholarship of
107
ALKE GRÖPPEL-WEGENER
Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) conference, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada 22.-27. October
2012
Beaumont, C. and Penketh, C. (2010) Evaluating the Undergraduate Experience to improve
and Access Course. Presentation at Flying Start Symposium at Liverpool Hope
University, 10. June 2010
Biggs, M. (2004) Learning from Experience: approaches to the experiential component of
practice-based research in: Forskning, Reflektion, Utveckling. Stockholm,
Vetenskapsrådet, 6-21
Breivik, P.S. and Gee, E.G. (2006). Higher education in the internet age. Libraries creating a
strategic edge. Westport: Praeger.
Coyne, R, Snodgrass, A and Martin, D. Metaphors in the Design Studio. Journal of
Architectural Education. Vol. 48, No. 2, pp. 113-125
Gröppel-Wegener, A. and Walton, G. (2013). The Fishscale of Academicness. In: Walsh, A.
and Coonan, E. eds. (2013). Only Connect … Discovery pathways, library explorations,
and the information adventure. Huddersfield: Innovative Libraries, pp. 15-38
Hampton-Reeves, S., Mashiter, C., Westaway, J., Lumsden, P., Day, H., Hewertson, H. and
Hart, A. (2009). Students’ Use of Research Content in Teaching and Learning: A report
for the Joint Information Systems Council (JISC). [online]
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/aboutus/workinggroups/studentsuseresearch
content.pdf
Hemmig, W. S. (2008) The information-seeking behaviour of visual artists: a literature
review. Journal of Documentation, Vol. 64 Issue 3, 343-362
Hepworth, M. and Walton, G. (2009) Teaching information literacy for inquiry-based
learning. Oxford: Chandos
Hiort af Ornäs, V., Keitsch, M. and K. Schulte (2014) Metaphors in design curricula.
International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, 4 & 5
September 2014, University of Twente, The Netherlands
Lawley, J and Tompkins, P (2000) Metaphors in Mind – Transformation Through Symbolic
Modelling. The Developing Company Press
Metzger, M.J., Flanigan, A.J. and Zwarun, L. (2003). College student Web use, perceptions
of information credibility, and verification behavior. Computer & Education, 41, 271-290
Walton, G. and Hepworth, M. (2011). A longitudinal study of changes in learners’ cognitive
states during and following an information literacy teaching intervention. Journal of
Documentation, 67 (3), 449-479
Wiley, J., Goldman, S., Graesser, A., Sanchez, C., Ash, I. and Hemmerich, J. (2009). Source
evaluation, comprehension, and learning in internet science inquiry tasks. American
Educational Research Journal, 46, 1060-1106.
108
Whose Job Is It Anyway?
Fiona GRIEVE a and Kim MEEK*b
a Threaded
Media; b Unitec Institute of Technology
*kmeek@unitec.ac.nz
Abstract: Many undergraduate students struggle to successfully manage the
transition from academic study to creative sector employment. Talented
graduates with great portfolios don’t necessarily connect to meaningful
vocational outcomes.
A lack of experience in the ‘business of design’ is often cited as a significant
impact on employment decisions made by creative directors. Placements and
internships can add valuable commercial experience that offer employers
confidence that graduates will add value. Paradoxically, many studios are
insufficiently resourced to offer meaningful experiential learning opportunities
and frequently, students are poorly prepared to access them. Coupled with an
international paradigm shift in rhetoric, both fee-paying students and
institutional managers are respectively demanding and promising, higher value
vocational relevancy from investment in tertiary education. Responding to these
challenges, many Graphic Design programmes are not only revaluating their
curriculum and currency of practice, but also seeking greater connectivity
vocational support between academy and industry. This paper case-studies the
development of an integrated and experiential teaching model that fosters
engagement with Graphic Design industry partners, effectively coordinating and
leveraging the power of academic and alumni relationships across a range of
professional experiences including non-residential project based learning
opportunities and collaborative learning partnerships.
Keywords: design education, design curriculum, learning collaboration,
vocational success
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Introduction
Undergraduate students wake up every morning facing a climate of change,
uncertainty and intricacy. Educators wake up facing increasingly diverse students needs,
organisational restructuring, curriculum reshaping and portfolio diversification, while
Design professionals wake up to global and business challenges in a competitive and
challenging marketplace.
Are we chasing each others coat tails as we try to establish our own identities and roles in
a ‘supercomplex world’ (Barnett, 2000, p.257).
Supercomplexity shows itself discursively through the world of work through such
terms as ‘flexibility’, ‘adaptability’ and (more recently still) ‘self-reliance’ (Barnett, 2000,
p.257). Shelly Kramer highlights key attributes for graduates for businesses at Dell’s Think
Tank sessions, ‘It’s important to be resourceful, adaptable, and willing to learn new skills’
(Kramer, 2015). These are familiar terms which highlight businesses preferred graduate
profile and are also embedded in undergraduate programme brochures and heralded as
graduate aims and profiles the world over.
‘Increasingly, students are being asked to take on the general capacities (core skills)
required by the corporate world’ (Barnett, 2000, p.261), before they have even entered
the workforce. We know that students are undertaking degrees founded on sound and
current pedagogical theories promoting ‘work integrated learning’, ‘experiential learning’,
participatory ‘communities of practice’ and multi-modal collaborations.
If we inhabit ‘a world in which we are conceptually challenged, and continually so’
(Barnett, 2000, p.257) is it any wonder then, that students have uncertainty about the
graphic design profession as a whole, including their own (and our) professionalism?
As defined within our Bachelor of Design and Visual Arts programme regulations
(Unitec Institute of Technology, New Zealand), we promise to ‘provide learning
experiences that stimulate students to critically reflect on their own practice, and that of
others, and which fosters in graduates a commitment to lifelong learning, personal
development and the advancement of the creative professions’ (BDVA Programme
Document 2008, p.15).
So how is it that at the end of every semester we reflect on our value as senior
academics teaching undergraduate Graphic Design we are increasingly perplexed by the
lack of intention, motivation and professionalism exhibited by our final-year degree
students?
Have we become side tracked by the constant renegotiation and ever increasing
expectations in our dual role as educator and professional practitioners/researchers? Did
we have a misplaced notion that design-led businesses were watching us from the wings,
waiting to be offered perfect graduate with ‘that certain spark’ (Beverland, 2012, p.47)?
Were we failing to effectively stimulate our students into being ‘performative learners’,
did we care more about their futures; were we more invested in the profession than they
were?
Trying to understanding what motivates our student goes hand in hand with the
growing interest in the measurement of ‘learning outcomes’ outside the classroom
(Hoover, 2009). In his essay The Millennial Muddle (2009), Hoover contradicts claims cited
by Howe & Strauss in Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation (2000).
110
Whose Job is it Anyway?
The authors assigned them seven ‘core traits’: special, sheltered, confident, teamoriented, conventional, pressured, and achieving . . . Their life mission will not be to
tear down old institutions that don't work, but to build up new ones that do. (Hoover,
2009)
We wanted to believe it all. However, we were left struggling to equate Millennials
Rising with the behaviours we were seeing in our students. Hoover (2009) identifies that ‘a
competing narrative about students had developed. In it, more of them were anxious and
depressed, and more were as self-centered and demanding as diners in a crowded
restaurant’.
Jeannine C. Lalonde’s observation (Hoover, 2009) as assistant hall director at Boston
College, was that her job was not only to support students, but also to challenge them.
Yet some students, who seemed to see themselves as customers, did not want those
challenges — they wanted problems solved for them. ‘I was seeing many of these
positive things, but I was also confused by all the entitlement I was seeing. (Hoover,
2009)
Perhaps to prepare graphic design students for the ‘business of design’, we would need
more effective signposts, with enticing journeys to overtly attractive career destinations?
As educators we know that re-shaping the graphic design curriculum to deliver
experiences that meets the needs of all stakeholders is involved and elaborate. With a
summer break in hand we could only start ‘to consider economic, political, historical,
social, and cultural factors’ (John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996) required to underpin the type of
substantial curriculum reform required to transform student learning and development.
Our scenario
By the close of the academic year in 2012, we were made acutely aware of the
international paradigm shift in institutional rhetoric, both fee-paying students and tertiary
managers respectively demanded and promised, higher value vocational relevance from
investment in tertiary education.
Responding to these challenges we identified the need to develop a teaching model
that could provide high quality collaborative and vocational experiences for our students.
One that evaluated curriculum and currency of practice, but also sought greater
connectivity and vocational support between academy and industry.
Acknowledging that the ‘desire for a new partnership between education and
professional practice is an on-going and relevant discussion that continues to intensify’
(Buchanan, 1998), we set about developing a blended learning and teaching model that
sought to engage our students, modified conventional course structures and re positioned
‘‘the general metaphor of the studio’ (Clinton & Reiber, 2010) cited in Cennamo & Brandt
(2012, p.842).
Recognising that teaching and learning is a continuous journey which need not be
‘formalized within a timeframe of a formal education but as a constant state of being’,
libertes both educators and students. The idea that the ‘studio’ experience ‘can be like a
nested network on its own, connecting institutes, profession, business and society.,’ offers
111
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
new and ‘fluid’ counterpoints to evolve and deliver curricula, ones which connect and
motivate our students for a ‘supercomplex world’ (Pos, n.d.).
The Rhetoric: The fundamental transformation of
Higher Education
As design educators we are continuously challenged by emergent transformative
practices of the creative industry. We were acutely aware of the multitude of internal and
external, local and global economic, structural, social and cultural influences and policies
that are shaping our design programmes. The ‘higher education sector is undergoing a
fundamental transformation in terms of its role in society, mode of operation, and
economic structure and value’ (Ernst & Young, 2012, p.4).
Significant change to undergraduate programmes is routinely orchestrated and
aggressively actioned with universities in Australasia responding to the ‘need to
significantly streamline their operations and asset base, at the same time as incorporating
new teaching and learning delivery mechanisms, a diffusion of channels to market, and
stakeholder expectations for increased impact’ (Ernst & Young, 2012, p.4).
Like many American counterparts, our institution is adopting a more fluid and flexible
model of tertiary education delivery, ‘it’s estimated that adjuncts constitute more than
forty per cent of all instructors at American colleges and universities’. Our reality was
already a restructured department with significantly reduced tenured appointments, with
‘the rest … filled by ‘experts’ drawn from industry’ (Cumming, 2013).
In this type of shape shifting environment, how could we form a teaching collaboration
between academy and industry that embraced some of the principals of ‘convergence’
(the coming together of students, staff and professionals across faculties to work on
projects, undertake research and learn from one another) without undermining the value
of tenured roles?
To ensure that we didn't exploit our ‘experts’ and peers from creative industry and
practice, we needed a value proposition that could meaningfully engage and collaborate
with the profession in a way that wasn’t founded on recruitment or economic transaction.
For our sector partners (many of whom were successful alumni), the value proposition
was one of manifold reciprocity. Industry professionals could directly shape curricula and
inform assessment, influence student experience and capability development, and allow
the ‘preflighting’ of potential graduates for internship and employment opportunities.
What are creative industries looking for?
According to the New Zealand Government, career opportunities for our students were
looking relatively positive, ‘Two years after completion of a Bachelors degree in graphic
and design studies, 72% of graduates were employed and 17% we in further study. This
compares to 64% employed and 30% in further study for all graduates with a bachelors
degree’ (Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, 2015).
But what did the future needs of the creative industries look like in New Zealand? The
common finding and signal for the creative industries by the Alliance Sector Skill Council,
(2011) was the call for graduates with ‘hybrid skills’ (as cited in Creative Arts Qualification
Review Needs Analysis Report, 2013).
112
Whose Job is it Anyway?
These hybrid-skills (Alliance Sector Skill Council, 2011) included:
Multi-skilling (understanding different technology platforms and their impact on
content development and digital work flow and new approaches to working in crossfunctional creative/technical teams within and across companies);
Multi-platform skills (having the creative and technical skills to produce content for
distribution across all potential platforms and the ability to understand and exploit
technological advances);
Management, leadership, business and entrepreneurial skills;
IP and monetarisation of multiplatform content (understanding intellectual property
legislation to protect from piracy, exploiting intellectual property internationally to
take advantage of emerging markets);
Sales and marketing;
Diagonal thinking skills;
Creative skills;
Archiving of digital content.
Clearly new initiatives in education were going to be required — and we would be
playing catch-up. Internationally, institutions and programmes were already leading
collaborative inter- and multi-disciplinary studio environments and projects demonstrating
a new level of integration that superseded both the liberal arts and specialised discipline
models.
Collaboration in various forms (inter-, multi-, trans-disciplinary) claimed to be the
preferred working model for future designers (e.g. Bennett, 2009; Ligon & Fong, 2009;
Davis, 2011; Hunt, 2011). This begs the questions: What kind of designer is needed?
More specifically, what depth or breadth of knowledge does the industry require of a
young designer or design graduate to successfully participate in a contemporary work
environment? And, furthermore, how can they be educated? (Fleischmann, 2014)
Trying to bridge the gap
Was it time for our specialist degree in Design and Visual Arts to be replaced by a new
award that responded to new discourses, technological developments, social and
environmental responsibilities? Our institution and senior management certainly believed
so, they had introduced a Bachelor of Creative Enterprise (BCE). Perhaps this new award
could preserve the value of specificity and provide a multi-disciplinary design education
that better serves employees needs for graduates with ‘hybrid skills’?
Meanwhile, we were interested in a new approach to professional practice based
inputs, one that would intrinsically develop and flex students ‘hybrid skills’ through integral
relationships with professionals in their workplace, participating in their methodologies,
projects and critique. Friedman (2012) argues ‘that design graduates need two kinds of
education: ‘One is specialty training in the advanced skills of a specific design practice. The
other is a broad training that involves the kinds of thinking and knowledge designers need
for a wide range of professional engagements’ ‘(as cited in Fleischmann, 2014).
If economic structures, IT and business models had been the recent driver of curricula
change, how could we incorporate the types of provocations and thinking that Sarah Stein
113
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Greenberg’s was sharing in Radical Ideas for Reinventing College, From Stanford’s Design
School (2014) which place students at the centre of change?
Trying to measure the gap
The Mind the gaps: The 2015 Deloitte Millennial Survey seeks to highlight the
discrepancy between what business values, skill sets and attributes our graduates believe
they bring to employers after graduation and what capabilities business want in
employees.
With the obvious exceptions of academic knowledge or intellectual ability, Millennials
say they were stronger on ‘soft’ attributes such as being professional, hard-working,
flexible, and in possession of integrity and maturity. They were not as confident in their
technical or specific business skills, including financial, economic, and general business
knowledge; the ability to challenge or disrupt current thinking; the ability to create
opportunity; sales and marketing; and similar talents. (Deloitte, 2015)
Recent graduates agree that upon graduation they did not have the ‘full range of skills,
personal qualities, and experience’ that today's employees and organizations require. Only
28 percent of Millennials feel that their current organizations are making ‘full use’ of the
skills they currently have to offer (Deloitte, 2015).
Reporting such as this triangulates with current reporting parallels across both
international and New Zealand business contexts and further highlights employee needs
for ‘hybrid skills’, that are ‘a combination of technical, business, creative and interpersonal
skills to have the ability to successfully understand, navigate, use and meet the
requirements of the current environment (NZQA National Qualifications Services, 2013).
When Millennials were asked what skill sets they would emphasise if they were leading
businesses and hiring it was interesting to note that they would focus on ‘softer’ and
personal skills which aligns with the qualities that Millennials believe they brought to the
table. ‘So, despite their acknowledgement that this may not be what businesses currently
value, Millennials would overstate the merits of ‘personal traits such as integrity’,
‘flexibility and team working’, ‘professionalism’ along with ‘creative thinking’ (Deloitte,
2015).
The Deloitte Executive Summary (2015) recommendations propose that closer
relationships between academics and business would potentially clarify assumptions on
the currency of educational content and re-calibrate the location of students at the centre
of change.
Location, location, location: situated graphic design
education
As academies have begin to grapple with the hydra-like conditions impacting the future
scope of graphic design education, there has been a number of innovative models trialed,
that are useful to introduce.
Many of the models we examined had resources and networks in place to cultivate
collaborative inter- and multi-disciplinary studio environments and projects that went
beyond our initial ambition to situate graphic design education within professional
114
Whose Job is it Anyway?
domains of practice, to ‘actively encourage students to develop empathy, optimism and
integrative thinking’ (Edwards-Vandenhoek & Sandbach, 2013).
Cross-institutional collaboration such as Global Studio which involves teams of students
from a UK University and international Universities, ‘the Global Studio responds to shifting
trends taking place in design practice with regards the emergence of globally networked
organisations and the inherent shift in ways of working’ (Ghassan & Bohemia, 2013).
Responding to alumni calls to address a need ‘for more integrated, interdisciplinary,
and hands-on educational experiences for students’ (Shadinger & Deborah, 2014), North
West Missouri University introduced their Knacktive model which employs highly selected
groups of undergraduate students to ‘replicates the intense teamwork atmosphere of a
technology-oriented, professional marketing communication agency’ (Shadinger &
Deborah, 2014). During the Knacktive experience, student-led teams conduct market
research, analyze data, write creative strategies, and ultimately develop an integrated,
digital, marketing communication campaign and promotional materials for a ‘real-world’
client.
While University of Western Sydney (UWS) Rabbit Hole aligns closely with the intent we
had to develop a model that ‘incorporates participatory design methods and work
integrated learning’ and facilitate a studio experience ‘that is both student-centred and
client-focused, with the teaching team providing opportunities for students to work on real
life design projects with community bodies and industry partners, with an emphasis on
design advocacy and professional engagement’ (Edwards-Vandenhoek & Sandbach, 2013).
The rise of professional vocational training
Whilst we have identified situated learning models that straddle and negotiate the
interdependence of education and research/industry, we pondered what other models
challenged or augmented the traditional location of graphic design education within the
academy?
In a Network society and a sustainable design education, Pos argues that:
ambitious students and young designers make use of the global network by studying
abroad or applying for apprentice worldwide. Their mobility by using the digital or the
(public) transport network makes them like ‘journeyman’ in the medieval guild system.
A professional whose work isn’t at mastery level yet and travels to gather experience in
a wide range of his profession. (n.d.)
While what briefly follows below is in no way not a definitive record, our initial survey
of subscription models within private practice reveals a wide range of online, web-based ,
blended and face-to-face offerings marketed within the spectrum of professional
vocational training.
The adoption of non-credentialed skills is being met by a significant number of learning
communities for creators, Skillshare.com pride themselves on nearly ‘1 million skillshare
students’ with a mission statement set on ‘dismantling the traditional barriers to learning
so that anyone, anywhere in the world, can learn whatever they set their minds to’
(Unlocking the World's Creativity, 2015).
115
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
The pedagogical platform for many of these these initiatives is varied when reviewing
Udemy for PC Magazine, William Fenton touches on some of their distinctive
characteristics:
Online education suffers from something of an embarrassment of riches. With
platforms as varied as Khan Academy, Udacity, Coursera, and edX, learners can enroll in
just about any course that sparks curiosity, and often at no cost. But what about learners
who also want to share their expertise? Whereas platforms like Coursera and edX curate
courses from universities, and Udacity and Khan Academy host their own content, Udemy
(free) is unique because it allows any user to act as either learner or instructor. (Fenton,
2015)
Meanwhile, Australian-based design school Tractor (http://www.tractor.edu.au), ‘an
independent design school created by designers for designers’, is leveraging their
relationship with The Design Kids (http://thedesignkids.com.au), an active online design
community of 30,000+ ‘emerging’ Australasian designers, who work with students and
graduates to offer industry knowledge, exposure and opportunities through events and
online resources.
In contrast independent named designers are leveraging their brands to offer
alternative vocational educational experience ranging from James Victore web presence
(http://www.jamesvictore.com) to the bespoke co-located studio-based experience
offered at Studio Catherine Griffiths (http://www.catherinegriffiths.co.nz).
Then there are well-known marquee graphic designers unflinchingly sharing their
perspectives on education and practice through internationalised professional conference
programmes and web-forums, arguably the most well known being Stefan Sagmeister.
Not that global reach is required to project firm opinions, Holger Jacobs (both professor
of typography and principal of Mind Design, http://www.minddesign.co.uk), offers frank
insight into a range of designerly concerns and provocations regarding preparation for
industry.
Why do so many graduates still feel the need for more experience? Are the colleges not
responsible for preparing students for 'real life'? Small studios are not a training camp
for the big world . . . Forget about internships, get real, find some clients, start working,
start making mistakes, start enjoying your achievements. (Jacobs, 2011)
LiveStudio: An emerging pedagogy
Our role in LiveStudio has been to re-set the conditions for ‘experiential learning’ and
to facilitate student negotiation of the effectiveness of their individual practice. Students
are evaluated not on what they know about a particular subject/discipline but the manner
in which they practice it. Ongoing formative feedback operates throughout the LiveStudio
course of practical study which provides opportunity and incentive for students to become
self aware and responsible for their own insights.
Studio Practice: Graphic Design & Animation, is the Level 7 undergraduate course
(BDVA) that provides the pedagogical platform for LiveStudio. This 30 credit, practitioner
focused course is predicated on the belief ‘that acquiring knowledge through practice is
dispositional. This performative knowledge is in part, acquired through practice, through
116
Whose Job is it Anyway?
repetition and imitation and active experimentation. Practical knowledge is acquired as
much by example as by discursive instruction.
Thus while the programme not only aspires to relevance in addressing the accelerating
changes faced by ‘networked’ society it also aims to deliver a heuristic learner–centred
pedagogy in which students take responsibility for their direction of personal
development. By means of the project–method a highly motivated ‘focal’ interest ensures
practice with those particular ‘subsidiary’ application and skills necessary for a holistic
project resolution.’ (BDVA Programme Document, 2008, p.17)
Socio-cultural theories continue to underpin new developments in teaching and
learning, which reaffirmed the type of pedagogical experience a ‘live studio’ model needed
to foster. John-Steiner & Mahn (1998, p.16) focus on three central tenets from Vygotsky's
complex legacy, social sources of individual development, semiotic mediation, and genetic
analysis, ‘and have presented an argument for viewing learning as distributed, interactive,
contextual, and the result of the learners' participation in a community of practice.’
Communities of practice are of course not isolated; they are part of broader social
systems that involve other communities (as well as other structures such as projects,
institutions, movements, or associations). So the social world includes myriad practices;
and we live and learn across a multiplicity of practices. (Wenger, 2010, p.3)
Figure 1
Students pitch design concepts to Special Group creatives, Heath Lowe & Emma Kanuik.
Source: K. Meek.
The principles and structure of ‘communities of practice’ supported the ambition we
had for a tripartite collaboration between ourselves, the academic institution, the design
profession and our students that would authentically create professional co multi-modal
and cross-sector nature contexts for student practice.
Blended learning modes of delivery and formative feedback occurred simultaneously
through tripartite collaboration to provide motivation for independent learning in the form
of web-based, face to face, small group tutorials, site based presentations and critique,
industry feedback online and via phone, peer to peer and lecturer to student.
117
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
LiveStudio: Testing a framework
With an emphasis on co-participation and cooperative learning we adopted small
collaborative groups and maintained project-based web platforms accessible to peers,
staff and design studio partners throughout the duration of LiveStudio. Web-based forums
were used for online critique, feedback and resource hosting using web-based tools such
as WordPress, Pinterest, Moodle, Instagram and Facebook.
‘Students are required to give oral presentations on their projects,’ engage more in
group feedback to foster collective knowledge and ‘attend to their written communicative
`skills’ and develop self-monitoring capacities’ (Barnett, 2000, p.261).
Students also enrol into 15 credit Practice in Context course and are required to
produce a research methods framework which informs a ‘Project Document’ that is a
critical component of the LiveStudio project. Parallel guest speaker programmes were
introduced to expose students to research methods and social and cultural contexts.
‘The notion of experiential learning, which is embedded within Studio learning, is
predicated upon the practical integration of pure and applied knowledge and the
interdependence of theory and practice’ (BDVA Programme Document, 2008, p.13).
Introducing LiveStudio 1.0
LiveStudio is an initiative developed to facilitate engagement with design sector
industry partners, coordinating a range of professional experiences ranging across work
integrated learning (WIL), internships, negotiated studies, studio collaborations, through to
project partnerships.
LiveStudio connects students to a network of work integrated learning experiences
through external partnering. Partnering is initiated, brokered and coordinated through the
extensive and long standing contacts and connections held by academic staff. The
development and maintenance of industry relationships is integral to establishing the
currency of LiveStudio and is an ongoing dialogue.
Learners are exposed to the processes, conventions and systems of industry
professional practice through experiencing project work-flows driven by industry
professionals and supported by academic staff.
LiveStudio non-residential structure allows for industry partners to contribute in a
hands-on way (but on their own terms) to the active development of work-ready creative
talent through learning experiences, contribution to assessment and moderation processes
and identification of potential interns or future employees.
As academics this model allows us to research and rethink the future of practitioner
(graphic design) focused education as we test a model that challenges ‘the gap’ between
academy and industry. LiveStudio also allows staff to be seen externally as professionally
credible and to demonstrate currency within the creative industry sector. Enabling staff to
further develop active stakeholder partnerships and opportunities for ongoing professional
development and insight.
In 2013 and 2014 we selected LiveStudio partners from our network of professional
relationships established from either our role as educators or from our research and
professional ‘networks’ (Rost, 2011). All of the partners we approached were interested in
118
Whose Job is it Anyway?
an open and inclusive educational structure which located the centre of learning within
their design-led studio.
We were cognisant of the fact that we needed to pitch an ‘open structure’ (Rost, 2011)
that allowed partners to embed their own creative processes, content and methodologies.
One that worked within business time frames, at their workspace, and with the hope that
we could offer a tangible value exchange beyond investing in emerging designers and
giving back via alumni connections.
LiveStudio partners
Industry partners, largely drawn from alumni, were invited to work on a schedule of
industry focused projects through a programme of non-residential learning partnerships.
Our partners developed ‘real world’ briefs in consultation with academic staff, engaged in
an iterative series of reviews and student critiques.
Introducing the LiveStudio in to students on the first day of our semester revealed
several key findings. Firstly, that the majority of our students had selected graphic design
because Visual Arts and Design had been the subject they had performed best in at
secondary school and secondly because they perceived it as a subject where they didn't
have to read or undertake written exams. In both 2013 and 2014, barely 10% of students
had been to visit a design-led studio and seven could name their dream studio job. By
getting them to identify their strengths and interests we were able to place the students
into the following practice/content areas; Brand Identity, Editorial Design, Interactive
Design, Illustration and Motion Graphic Design.
2013 Industry Particpants 2013 (teamed with 53 GDA students)
Fairfax Media, Inhouse, Federation, gardyneHOLT, Special Group, Waxeye, Fuman,
Supply.
2014 Industry Particpants (teamed with 43 GDA students)
Special Group, Waxeye, Fuman, Supply, Milk, Threaded, AS Colour.
The LiveStudio process
Based on the above survey and identification of their personal and professional
interests, student were assigned to a LiveStudio groups. Unless otherwise told, they were
working as a group of individuals, contributing to a ‘community of practice’ and responding
to a brief as determined by their design agency partner.
Students were encouraged to; research the design agency they were going to; check
out the location on a map before the day; take a pen and notebook; dress appropriately;
ask questions, be themselves and be on time and take morning tea!
The development of a LiveStudio Project Document was initiated as a durable record of
learning and was designed to ensure that all participating students acknowledge and
understand the process and design methodologies implemented by our retrospective
industry partners. Students were required to construct and design a definitive record of all
creative phases and embed a reflective and reflexive discourse that communicates ideas,
content, context, research and outcomes.
The Project Document draws from core design methodologies accounting for all phases
of the project; including:
119
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Overview: Project Background, Client Background,
Brief: Design Requirement, Design Deliverables,
Research: Target Audience, Sector Insights (visuals),
Brand: Purpose, Attitude, Positioning (keywords), Brand Story, Single Organising Idea
(SOI), Moodboard (visuals),
Design: Concepts, Artwork and Application.
Aside from briefing sessions and initial partner meetings students overall process
involved:
2 weeks set for preparation of research into moodboards
4 weeks set for initial design concepts (2 of these are a mid-semester study break),
3 weeks set for preparation of finals,
1 week set for final production for assessment.
LiveStudio Case Study: Special Group (2013)
Special Group is a creatively led independent advertising and design agency based in
New Zealand and Australia (http://www.specialgroup.co.nz).
Creative Director: Heath Lowe & Senior Designer and Alumni: Emma Kanuik
I NDUSTRY B RIEF
Pineapples Pineapples Pineapples! Our challenge is to create the identity for the
pineapples that are Good for the land, good for the growers, and good for you!
E LEMENTS REQUIRED :
Identity for All Good Pineapples, considering type, colour, graphics and the ability to
tie in with the All Good Umbrella.
Label to appear on individual pineapples.
Street poster or posters to communicate this new product.
Tee-shirt.
W HO WE ARE TALKING TO :
Existing All Good customers, who appreciate the fair trade principle.
Likely to be a female household shopper.
New customers who do not yet know of, or purchase All Good produce.
C REATIVE BRIEF SUMMARY :
GET: Health and ethically conscious consumers.
WHO: Appreciate ‘good’ produce and the All Good attitude.
TO: Buy All Good’s pineapples.
BY: getting them excited about how tasty and delicious these pineapples are; as well
as communicating the ‘good for the growers, good for the land and good for you’
message.
LIKE THIS: Attitudinal, innovative, exciting with a clear message.
120
Whose Job is it Anyway?
M ANDATORY :
Must use the All Good Logo.
Must work along side the All Good Banana’s branding.
S TUDENT P ROJECT R ESPONSE
Figure 2
All Good Pineapple brand ideation. Souce: J. Body.
Figure 3
Online community of practice feedback. Souce: J. Body.
121
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Figure 4
. All Good Pineapple packaging treatments. Souce: J. Body.
LiveStudio Case Study: Annabel Langbein (2014)
Milk is a strategic design communications agency. Their work changes outcomes for
businesses and their brands (http://www.milk.co.nz).
Creative Director and Alumni: Ben Reid
I NDUSTRY B RIEF :
Annabel Langbein is a New Zealand celebrity cook, food writer and publisher. She is
also a regular radio guest and TV presenter, and has fronted her own TV series, Annabel
Langbein The Free Range Cook, which launched on the TV One network in New Zealand
and now screens in over eighty countries. She is known for promoting organic food,
primarily using seasonal ingredients and is a member of the Sustainability Council of New
Zealand.
C REATIVE O UTPUT
Explore the Annabel Langbein brand architecture and brand language (style, voice,
design, illustration, photography)
Ensure your creative and narration captures and evokes Annabel’s values (A free
range life).
Apply to a range of everyday home-wares products (Demonstrate how you might
brand actual product, packaging, what materials you might use – think of economics
and sustainability).
This is a range with critical commercial viability milestones – the product needs to sell.
Use your own intuitive self-assessment and interrogate your work: Does it communicate,
would I buy this, do I love it, is it distinctive, is it appropriate to its price point, and does it
seem right for the Annabel Langbein brand.
122
Whose Job is it Anyway?
Figure 5
LiveStudio project team being briefed in by Milk’s Creative Director, Ben Reid. Source: K
Meek.
S TUDENT P ROJECT R ESPONSE
Figure 6
Annabel Langbein pattern concepts. Source: A. Apercho.
123
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Figure 7
Annabel Langbein mgzine and web landing page concepts. Source: A. Apercho.
LiveStudio: Student Reflection
A small scale online survey study was conducted seeking feedback from students on
the most valuable aspects of working with a LiveStudio project. Student respondents
highlighted aspects such as ‘preparation for the real world’ and ‘development of time
management skills’, an ‘increased work ethic’, along with ‘professional networking
opportunities’ that could extend beyond graduation.
Tellingly, students often questioned whether they were prepared for ‘industry centred
learning’ and felt is was ‘a large shift’. One that challenged their confidence and ability to
manage timeframes, to develop the ‘empathy’ skills needed to design solutions that met
the needs of their client, audience and target market.
There was value placed in receiving critique and constructive feedback from industry
partners, but this new level of accountability coupled with a lack of ‘real world experience’
left many feeling ‘lost and uncertain’ calling for ‘more frequent updates, meetings and
emails’.
Upon reflection, students identified and described how commercial and professional
priorities fostered new attention to research, timely execution of concepts and
communication to clients as a positive creative shift in their design ability.
Several students commented on the transference of professional experience to their
freelance work and how the incorporation of LiveStudio project outcomes into their
portfolio enhanced their ability to get work.
When asked how the LiveStudio programme could be improved, students wanted to
see situated learning imbedded earlier in their degree. With requests to incorporate
‘professional conduct’, ‘industry based expectations’, ‘becoming better thinkers and
makers’, and to ‘decide whether or not graphic design is the right calling for them’ into the
course.
Feedback suggests that students wanted more frequent updates from studio partners
and clearer milestones as they struggled to ‘set goals’ for themselves, which left them
feeling a little open’ to critique or unrealistic expectations.
124
Whose Job is it Anyway?
More general feedback included learning to ‘fit in’, ‘earning trust, ‘keeping up with
tasks’, ‘quickly learning new technical skills’ and ‘knowing the most efficient way of
accomplishing things’ along with ‘being decisive in decision making’.
At the completion of internships, students cited learning industry standards, processes
and techniques, responding to fast deadlines, incorporation of feedback into design and
need to ask questions and keep learning as core learning experiences they took away from
their internship.
When asked to look back and identify the ‘real’ value of their internship, students
noted that it ‘reaffirmed their career aspiration in graphic design’, ‘improved their
communication and technical skills’, and ‘enabled the development of professional
networks’.
LiveStudio: Academic and Industry Reflection
From an educational perspective we were positive about the LiveStudio feedback from
students. Our intention to provide high quality collaborative and vocational experiences
that fostered greater connectivity between students, academia and industry had
motivated and engaged our students. Evidence from formative assessment events to
summative (end of semester) grades revealed improved performance and increased
student retention.
In critique session educators noticed how the adoption of ‘communities of practice’
galvanised students and increased ‘peer to peer’ mentoring and knowledge transfer.
Students were now sharing research methods and actively participating in brainstorming
and critique sessions.
Blended learning modes of delivery provided motivation for independent learning and
we witnessed the emergence of ‘self-reliance’ (Barnett, 2000, p.257) as students now had
a richer range of forums to stay connected. This range of delivery approaches was more
sympathetic to the diversity of student schedules and supported increased administrative
and communication channels for collaborative learning.
The 2013 LiveStudio ‘communities of practice’ groups had been required to manage
and publish Wordpress blogs to account for and share their process with peers, partners
and lecturers. While the blog was a requirement in 2014, it was heavily impacted by staff
resourcing issues, as this modality challenged our students and required close tutor
supervision.
Noticeably, participating Industry partners across both case study years, were
disappointed with the levels of professional engagement and group collaboration in 2014,
leading us to re-assess the importance of online collaborative spaces and contribution to
communities when working with non-residential industry partners.
The relocation of formal presentation and critiques into professional domains of
practice necessitated new levels of communication, execution and presentation strategies.
We witnessed the early development of ‘soft’ attributes, as students gained new levels of
respect for receiving and responding to critical feedback.
Industry partners quickly identified the students in each group that were invested and
responsive, these students were committed and eager to impress. Notably, in several
instances strong initial concepts were presented by outlier learners, who were unable to
125
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
resolve their ideas or manage an iterative progression systematically — a source of
frustration for both industry partners and educators.
The intention of re-situating the learning environment in a professional domain was to
encourage the unlocking of student performance from institutional administrative
boundaries to open, free-flowing engagement aligned to our industry partners’ workflows.
However, we frequently observed that the reality of a modular multi-course academic
schedule curtailed this mode ideal, leading us to question the value of timetabled learning.
In the essay Network society and a sustainable design education, Pos argues ‘that the
phenomena of the design-education based on a local institute with a hierarchical program
structure and fixed time of study is an outdated concept. 21st century education can thrive
from a fluid and dynamic non-linear and non-hierarchical network (n.d.).’
Interim provocations and speculative thinking
LiveStudio occupies a space that sits between tutor-led design education and studentled design education (Ghassan & Bohemia, 2013), whereby the tutor is an active conduit
facilitating learning experience from multiple viewpoints – translating, interpreting,
dissecting, repeating, promoting, listening, inquiring – supporting decision making,
fostering design process and feedback.
However, LiveStudio primarily centres on students taking responsibility for their own
decisions through self-reliance and collaborative peer engagement. We construct this
approach to give learners the opportunity of ‘dealing with uncertainty’. LiveStudio
attempts to model the professional demands of ‘normal chaos’ that are characteristic of
contemporary studio design practice, but frequently found students struggling to navigate
competing interdependent demands of communication, design process, problem solving
and time-based tasks (Ghassan & Bohemia, 2013).
Were we poised to develop a multi-disciplinary model that responds to business and
institutional desire to foster ‘T shaped’ people more adaptive, collaborative and resilient to
real world environment and an uncertain future?
A similar question has been anticipated in Design futures—future designers: give me a
‘T’?, while testing the POOL Model framework, an alternate learning and teaching model
developed in order to facilitate the education of the T-shaped design student
(Fleischmann, 2014, p.7). Fleischmann asks if undergraduate students can ‘learn the skills
required for effective collaboration and thus develop a broad understanding of other
disciplines while simultaneously continuing to develop their discipline-specific skills’.
CEO of IDEO, Tim Brown, has detailed his desire to only employ graduates with
‘nascent T-shaped potential’. According to Brown, T-shaped people have two kinds of
qualities:
The vertical stroke of the ‘T’ is a depth of skill that allows them to contribute to the
creative process . . . The horizontal stroke of the ‘T’ is the disposition for collaboration
across disciplines . . . T-shaped people have both depth and breadth in their skills.
(Hansen, 2010)
In Why we should talk to our neighbour, Dauppe (1995) anticipates a similar need for
greater development in graphic design education by recommending improved grounding
126
Whose Job is it Anyway?
in cultural and media studies, giving students the best chance of engaging in new
discourse, that often speaks of social responsibility and ethical awareness.
Alternatively, could the establishment of a commercial studio staffed by academics,
graduates and interns (albeit driven by 21st century pedagogical needs) offer graphic
design services to internal and external clients? Powered by our Institution and partnered
through academic, industry, and cultural linkages, this model would pursue both an
academic research agenda and be a community facing, socially responsive project centre.
In contrast and given the challenges of delivering engaging education models to
Millennials, should we dispense with timetables, campus based learning and face-to-face
engagement and allow students to be at the centre of control to freely navigate the
powerfully disruptive offerings of the online learning sector.
Professional vocational education is big business, Linkedin recently announced its
purchase of Lynda.com for $1.5 billion in April 2015 (Sawers, 2015). Many of these options
offer a membership based economic structure which must be an attractive option for
students seeing the value of learning but set on bypassing significant or unsustainable
student debt. Is membership based learning the future economic paradigm for education
with associated badging acting as a discrete back channel to industry endorsement and
ongoing professional development?
Could the future of design education be as Pos (2011) suggests, ‘within a networkbased structure, with talented people making use of all the connections and learning as
well as teaching within fluid communities’ with ‘the idea that education is not an isolated
and formalized state or commercial ‘product’, but part of the daily routine and
incorporated within the networks of local and global society’.
High profile and venerable institutions globally are beginning to future-proof their
legacies through speculative thinking. Specifically, can the on-campus experience be kept
relevant in an era where online learning is becoming increasingly disruptive? Sarah Stein
Greenberg, executive director of Stanford Design School, introduces one such provocation
with Open Loop University, what would happen if we give ‘students six years of college to
use whenever they wanted throughout their adult life’ (Vanhemert, 2014)?
Speaking of the results of a purposeful year long workshop where staff and students
authentically collaborated on behalf of the institution, Greenberg says, ‘We need to be
training our students not just to expect that they will be society’s leaders, but also to be
our most creative, daring, and resilient problem solvers’ (Vanhemert, 2014).
When envisioning future developments beyond LiveStudio, we find ourselves
immersed in new types of speculative thinking that both challenges and informs key
aspects of our role as educator and practitioner. This much we know, ‘the traditional fouryear undergraduate track — basically that today’s system makes way for a bunch of welltrained sheep’ (Vanhemert, 2014).
LiveStudio presupposes that New Zealand educators can be leaders in designing
emergent pedagogy for the creative industries. However, to explore and create new
initiatives, the tertiary sector will need to have confidence to acknowledge and invest in
the specificity of the local context, alongside integrating the best of international
innovation.
127
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
References
Alliance Sector Skills Council. (2011). Sector Skills Assessment for the Creative Industries of
the UK. Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/download/144895_LinkClick2.pdf
Barnett, R. (2000). Supercomplexity and the Curriculum. Studies in Higher Education no. 25
(3):255–265. doi: 10.1080/713696156.
Beverland, M. (2012) Four Skills Graduates Need to Cut It in Design-Led Firms. Design
Management Review no. 23 (4):46–54. doi: 10.1111/j.1948-7169.2012.00211.x.
Buchanan, R. (1998). Design education. Education and Professional Practice in Design.
Design Issues: Volume 14, November 2 Summer 1998.
Cennamo, K. & Brandt, C. (2012). The ‘‘right kind of telling’’: knowledge building in the
academic design studio. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60:839–
858 doi: 10.1007/s11423-012-9254-5
Clinton, G., & Reiber, L. P. (2010). The Studio experience at the University of Georgia: An
example of constructionist learning for adults. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 58, 755–780.
Cumming, G. (2013, December 9). Tertiary education restructure: Death by design. The
New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from http://www.nzherald.co.nz
Deloitte. (2015). Mind the gaps: The 2015 Deloitte Millennial Survey. Retrieved from
http://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/global/Documents/AboutDeloitte/gx-wef-2015-millennial-survey-executivesummary.pdf
Dauppe, M.-A. (1995). Why we should talk to our neighbours. Eye. (4) 16. Retrieved from
http://www.eyemagazine.com/opinion/article/why-we-should-talk-to-our-neighbours
Edwards-Vandenhoek, S. & Sandbach, K. (2013). Down the Rabbit Hole: A Situated
Approach to Design Education that Facilitates Socially Responsible Emergent Designers.
Proceedings of the 2nd International conference for design education researchers. Oslo:
ABM-media.
Ernst & Young. (2012). University of the Future. Retrieved from
http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/University_of_the_future/$FILE/Universit
y_of_the_future_2012.pdf
Fenton, W. (2015, May 8). Udemy. PC Magazine. Retrieved from
http://au.pcmag.com/udemy/30473/news/udemy
Fleischmann, K. (2014). Design futures—future designers: give me a ‘T’?, Studies in
Material Thinking. Retrieved from
https://www.materialthinking.org/sites/default/files/papers/SMT_Vol%2011_Paper%20
03_Katja.pdf
Friedman, K. (2012). Models of Design: Envisioning a Future Design Education. Visible
Language, 46(1/2), 133-53.
Ghassan, A., & Bohemia, E. (2013). From Tutor-led to Student-led design education: the
Global Studio. Proceedings of the 2nd International conference for design education
researchers. Oslo: ABM-media.
Greenberg, S. S. (2014, 11 November). Radical Ideas for Reinventing College, From
Stanford’s Design School [Video]. Retrieved from http://video.wired.com/watch/wxdradical-ideas-for-reinventing-college-from-stanford-s-d-school
128
Whose Job is it Anyway?
Hansen, M. T. (2010, January 21). IDEO CEO Tim Brown: T-Shaped Stars: The Backbone of
IDEO’s Collaborative Culture. Retrieved from http://chiefexecutive.net/ideo-ceo-timbrown-t-shaped-stars-the-backbone-of-ideoae™s-collaborative-culture
Jacobs, H., (2011). The dilemma with internships. Retrieved from
http://www.minddesign.co.uk/show.php?id=206&pos=2#internships
Hoover, E. (2009, October 11). The Millennial Muddle. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Millennial-Muddle-How/48772/
Howe, N. & Strauss, W. (2000) Millennials Rising: The Next Great Generation. New York:
Vintage.
Jacob, H. (n.d.). The dilemma with internships. Retrieved 20 Feb, 2015, from
http://minddesign.co.uk/show.php?id=206&pos=2#internships
John-Steiner, V, & Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural Approaches to Learning and
Development: A Vygotskian Framework. University of New Mexico.
Kramer, S. (2015, January 20). Millennials in the Workforce: What Really Matters To Them.
Retrieved from http://www.v3b.com/2015/01/millennials-in-the-workforce-whatreally-matters-to-them/
Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). (2015). Occupation Outlook,
Creative Industries: Graphic and Web Designers. Wellington, New Zealand: MBIE.
Retrieved from http://www.mbie.govt.nz/occupation-outlook/pdf-library/creativeindustries/graphic-web-designers.pdf
Multi-disciplinary Design Network. (2010). Multi-disciplinary design education in the UK.
London: Design Council.
NZQA National Qualifications Services (NQS). (2013, July). Creative Arts Qualification
Review
Needs Analysis Report. Retrieved from http://www.nzqa.govt.nz/assets/qualifications-andstandards/qualifications/Creative-arts-quals-review/Creative-Arts-Needs-Analysis-Jan2014.pdf
Pos, P. (n.d.). Network society and a sustainable design education. Retrieved 20 Feb, 2015,
from
https://www.academia.edu/9474610/Network_society_and_a_sustainable_design_edu
cation
Rost, K. (2011). Network society and a sustainable design education. Research Policy, 40(4),
588–604.
Sawers, P. (2015, April 9). LinkedIn acquires online education company Lynda.com for
$1.5B to help progress your career. Retrieved from
http://venturebeat.com/2015/04/09/linkedin-acquires-online-education-startup-lyndacom-for-1-5b-to-help-you-progress-your-career/
Shadinger, D. & Deborah, T. (2014). Knacktive: Answering a Call for More Interdisciplinary,
Collaborative, Educational Experiences. College Teaching, 62:2, 55-61, doi:
10.1080/87567555.2014.885875
21st Century Learning Is Not A Program. (2013, June 1). Retrieved from
http://www.teachthought.com/learning/21st-century-learning-is-not-a-program/
Unitec Institute of Technology. (2008). Bachelor of Design & Visual Art Programme
Document.
Unlocking the World's Creativity. (2015). Retrieved from
https://www.skillshare.com/about
129
FIONA GRIEVE & KIM MEEK
Vanhemert, K. (2014, November 11). Radical Ideas for Reinventing College, From
Stanford’s Design School. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2014/11/radicalideas-reinventing-college-stanfords-design-school/
Wenger, E. (2010). Chapter Communities of practice and social learning systems. Retrieved
from http://wenger-trayner.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/09-10-27-CoPs-andsystems-v2.01.pd
130
Research Meets Practice in Master’s Theses
Marja SELIGER
Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture
marja.seliger@aalto.fi
Abstract: Discussions about art and design research – the epistemologies,
ontologies and methodologies – have prevailed since 1990s when several art and
design universities in Europe launched doctoral education. The debate has
concerned academic research and requirements for doctoral dissertations,
whereas very little attention has been paid to Master’s theses and the research
skills acquired on the Master of Arts level. This study investigates whether
Master’s theses in art and design have become more research-oriented and how
research meets practice in the theses. The study is conducted at Aalto University
School of Arts, Design and Architecture. First, faculty interviews were arranged
and thesis guidelines analysed. Secondly, theses published in 2010–2014 were
surveyed to find out what research-orientation means in Master’s theses. The
outcome of the study shows a paradigm shift towards research in Master’s
theses. Three different types of research-orientation in theses are identified and
presented: theoretical, artistic and production-based research. Secondly, faculty
interviews reveal the uniqueness of study programmes and their specialised
educational goals. As Master’s theses aim to provide evidence of the skills
learned, both practical and theoretical skills are exemplified in theses. Profiling
study programmes means defining research practises, strategies, methods and
expected outcomes in Master’s education.
Keywords: Master’s thesis, study programmes, research-orientation
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
MARJA SELIGER
1. Introduction
Completing a Master’s thesis is the final step in achieving a Master of Arts degree in
any university. The purpose of a thesis is to demonstrate a candidate’s proficiency and
ability to apply skills and knowledge learned. Therefore a student conducts his/her thesis
project independently, although consulting a professor or another supervisor specialized
on the field of study. The Master’s thesis is a mandatory assignment, which has to be
completed and approved by the faculty before the Master’s degree is granted.
The requirements for a Master’s thesis are based on the field of study and therefore
considerable differences can be found in theses produced within various disciplines and
universities. In science universities, theses are usually independent studies demonstrating
candidate eligibility and knowledge in their major subjects. Respectively in art and design
universities, Master’s theses have traditionally been independent artworks or design
projects to show evidence of candidates’ artistic qualities and originality.
The aim of this study is to discuss various types of Master’s theses in the fields of art
and design, as well as the developments over the recent years. Based on a survey and
faculty interviews at the Aalto University, the author presents three models of researchorientation embedded in Master’s theses. The models labeled as theoretical, artistic and
production-based take different epistemological stances and lead to different types of
inquiries and methodologies.
Since 1990s when several art and design universities in Europe launched doctoral
education, vivid discussions and debates have revolved around artistic research, what it is
and how new knowledge can be produced, what the dominating ontologies and
epistemologies are. The debates have often concerned academic research vs. artistic
research, which H. Borgdorff calls ‘an uneasy relationship’ (2012, p. 59). Discussions
advancing doctoral education have had an impact on Master’s education, as well. This
study aims to explore how the development towards research in art and design is
materialized in recently published Master’s theses.
Chapter 2 describes the survey conducted at the Aalto University and Chapter 3
presents the findings explaining what research orientation means in art and design
Master’s education. Chapter 4 elaborates the thesis process, and finally, Chapter 5
recommends topics for further discussions.
2. Survey of Master’s Theses
Altogether 18 faculty members, professors and university lecturers conducting
Master’s seminars and supervising students at the Aalto University participated in informal
conversational interviews to discuss the Masters’ thesis process and types of theses
produced in 2010–2014. The faculty members were asked to name recently published
theses which they considered high quality and characteristic of their study programme.
Out of the altogether 70 theses, 50 were analyzed as regards to research goal,
methodology adopted and outcomes.
In the interview sessions, teachers were first asked to describe their own thesis topic
and process. Quite spontaneously, the older faculty members began to describe the
changes which had taken place since their graduation. Theses used to be either artistic or
scientific, although scientific theses were rare. In artistic theses, the outcome was either
132
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
an artwork or production, accompanied by a short descriptive text about the process.
According to one professor: ‘Today a Bachelor’s student writes a better thesis after three
years’ study than what an average MA student wrote after five years in 1980s. The
improvement concerns especially academic skills, research writing.’
On one hand, the teachers considered the development positive, because today’s
working life requires research skills, conceptualization and verbalization. On the other
hand, the graduation of some students is delayed because of problems in writing and
finding the theoretical frame. Some students are ambitious and make an excellent artistic
production and write an excellent study, almost completing work for two theses. Teachers
were clearly proud of the achievements of their students and the high-quality work,
although at the same time worried about the time taken to graduate. The only problem
mentioned about art works was that they tended to become too large and require more
than six months to complete.
The interviewed faculty members described academic writing and research skills
courses, additional writing clinics and mini-seminars arranged as tools to speed up
graduation. Some doctoral candidates and researchers with the PhD degree participate in
thesis supervision, which was considered a positive trend.
The requirements and types of theses have been specified in the Master’s thesis
guidelines of the Aalto University. During the interviews in 2014 the guidelines stated:
‘Master’s theses can be roughly divided into two categories: artistic and scientific. Some
degree programmes may also comprehend additional categories, such as production-based
or pedagogical theses.’ The written part is mandatory, although ‘The length of the written
portion varies depending on the extent of the artistic or productive portion. […] The
minimum length is 60,000 characters, but that implies a strong emphasis on the artistic or
production portion.’ (Master’s Thesis Guidelines, 2012)
The interviewed teachers avoided using the word scientific and rather talked about
theoretical theses. They felt that scientific refers to natural sciences. Some teachers
criticized the division into artistic and production-based theses, because ‘[…] in an art and
design university, every production includes an artistic or aesthetic function’.
The wording of theses guidelines changed in 2015: ‘The thesis may be a piece of
theoretical, artistic or applied research, a work of art or a combination of these; it may also
include a production component. The production component may be, depending on the
field, for instance a design, a work of art, an exhibition or project.’
The requirements for the length of the written part are expressed more precisely in the
renewed guidelines: ‘The recommended extent of the written component of the thesis is
25–70 pages (approx. 50 000–140 000 characters) depending on the extent of the possible
production component.’ (Master’s Thesis Guide 2015) The most essential change concerns
the statement of objectives, which are more explicit in the renewed guidelines:
– Students demonstrate command of the field of the Master’s programme and ability to
apply the knowledge and skills acquired in the programme independently;
– Students demonstrate ability for research-oriented work on an artistic, theoretical or
applied research topic and demonstrate ability to use data and source material for
research purposes;
– Students demonstrate good communication skills for work in the field of study
133
MARJA SELIGER
The first objective describes the aim of art and design education as it has been since
the time of Bauhaus in 1920s: to provide evidence that the candidate has the necessary
command of the study field in order to independently apply knowledge and skills in
demanding tasks and assignments. The second objective is more recent and strengthens
the role of research: The ability for research-oriented work on an artistic, theoretical or
applied research topic. Research has taken its place in art and design education although
the word research-oriented leaves room for various interpretations and types of theses.
The third objective is to prove that a candidate has sufficient skills in work-related
communication.
As regards artistic and production-based theses, especially the type of the written
component has changed since 1990s. A short description of the production process used
to suffice, whereas nowadays the expectation is that a student conceptualizes or reflects
his/her work on a topical discourse or an art genre. The variety of theses has increased and
students have more possibilities to tailor their artistic, production-based or theoretical
theses. According to the interviewed faculty members, the huge variety of topics and
approaches and the freedom of choice can sometimes confuse a student. Therefore more
emphasis needs to be given to the thesis process and supervising.
3. Research-orientation
The interviewed teachers were asked to name recently published theses from their
study programme and then place the exemplified theses into some of the categories
mentioned in the thesis guidelines: artistic, theoretical, production-based, pedagogical or
applied research. The variety of theses named was great and showed the uniqueness of
departments and study programmes. Some theses were clearly theoretical or artistic, but
some were hybrid or qualified both as theoretical and artistic.
The topics of the analysed theses varied from architectural planning to films, media, art
exhibitions, industrial design, art pedagogy and so on. The variety of methods employed
was huge, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods, co-creation,
participatory and usability studies, interventions and design games. When analysing the
theses and their strategies of inquiry, the synthesis showed three main categories of
research-orientation: theoretical, artistic, and production-based research. In this study,
the epistemological stance of the three types of research is reflected on the texts written
by Crotty and Frayling.
Michael Crotty in The Foundations of Social Research (1998) introduces four elements
of research: methods, methodology, theoretical perspective and epistemology. (p. 2) He
describes epistemology as ‘[…] a way of understanding and explaining how we know what
we know’ and discusses three major positions in social research: objectivism,
constructivism and subjectivism. (pp. 3–9) In objectivism, the reality is believed to exist
apart from the researcher’s conscious mind, and objective truth is discoverable.
Constructivism, meanwhile, denies the existence of objective truth, because truth or
meaning is constructed in and out of the researcher’s engagement with the world, within
her conscious mind. The third position, subjectivism, goes further and argues that the
meaning is imposed by the researcher on the reality, and the reality does not contribute
with anything to the meaning.
134
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
Christopher Frayling stated in his well-known article Research in Art and Design in
1993: ‘Much of the debate – and attendant confusion – so far, has revolved around the
stereotypes of what research is, what it involves and what it delivers.’ (Frayling 1993) He
introduced three categories in art and design research using the prepositions into, for and
through, and instigated a vivid discussion about the epistemological stance of art and
design research.
With research into art and design Frayling meant historical, aesthetic or perceptual
research. This type of study includes ‘Research into a variety of theoretical perspectives –
social, economic, political, ethical, cultural, iconographic, technical, material, structural …
whatever.’ (Frayling 1993, p. 5) Art and design activities and artifacts are observed and
scrutinized from outside and the researchers themselves need not be artists or designers.
Thus research into art and design shows an objectivist position.
With research through art and design, Frayling referred to ‘[…] development work – for
example customizing a piece of technology to do something that no one had considered
before, and documenting the results.’ (p. 5) Frayling included materials research,
development work and action research into the category of research through art and
design. Thus research through art and design aims to document technical and practical
knowledge development in art and design from either objectivist or constructivist
positions.
‘The thorny one is the research for art and design […]’ Frayling wrote and continued:
‘Research where the end product is an artifact – where the thinking is, so to speak,
embodied in the artefact, where the goal is not primarily communicable knowledge in the
sense of verbal communication, but in the sense of visual or iconic or imagistic
communication.’ (1993, p. 5) Thus research for art and design can be produced from a
subjectivist position.
Frayling’s text has caused misinterpretations and category confusions, which according
to Ken Friedman, are based on a failure to read Frayling’s text. (Friedman 2008, p. 156)
Friedman claims: ‘Many designers confuse practice with research. Rather than developing
theory from practice through articulation and inductive inquiry, some designers mistakenly
argue that practice is research.’ (p. 154) Friedman’s point is that practice is the source of
inquiry in empirical research. To conduct research means applying scientific methodology
and rigor when making interventions into research practice and analyzing design
processes, artifacts and their use.
Theoretical Research
According to Aalto University Thesis Guide (2015), a theoretical thesis is research which
does not include a candidate’s own art or design production. A survey on recently
published theses and the faculty interviews revealed that although research topics are
connected to the field of study, the variety of methodologies adopted is large. For
example, a theoretical thesis can be a study of the history of architecture. This leads to
methodology different from research on media audiences or gender representations, or a
research about curating practices, which constitute topics of some recently published
theses.
Crotty (1998, pp. 3-9) suggested considering epistemology and philosophical
perspectives first, before selecting methodology and research methods. Also Creswell
points out the importance of philosophical worldviews: ‘Although philosophical ideas
135
MARJA SELIGER
remain largely hidden in research, they still influence the practice of research and need to
be identified.’ He introduces four philosophical worldviews – postpositive, social
construction, advocacy/participatory and pragmatic – and adds that the discipline that a
student represents, the beliefs of advisors and faculty, and past research experiences
shape these worldviews (Creswell 2009, p. 5).
Creswell defines the term research design as ‘[…] plans and procedures for research
that span the decisions from broad assumptions to detailed methods of data collection and
analyses.’ In social sciences, the strategies of inquiry are qualitative, quantitative and
mixed-method strategies, which lead to different research methods. (Creswell 2009, pp. 3–
5) Creswell elaborates the term strategies of inquiry as ‘[…] designs or models that provide
specific direction for the procedures in a research design.’ (p. 11) In this study, the term
strategies of inquiry is applied, because it well describes the manifold research cases, tools
and methods used in Master’s theses in art and design.
A student writing a theoretical research in art and design might end up employing
similar qualitative methods than used in social and behavioral sciences, e.g. ethnography,
grounded theory, case studies, phenomenological or narrative research (Creswell 2009, p.
13). In some cases, quantitative methods and statistics are needed to describe the
research case, e.g. to yield figures about art gallery visitors or newspaper readers’ topic
preferences and time spent on reading papers. From the epistemological point-of-view,
the objectivist position is strong in theoretical research.
Artistic Research
Discussions about artistic research became heated at the end of 20 th century, when art
and design doctoral education was launched in many universities. The debates have
focused on academic research and doctoral dissertations, questioning whether new
knowledge can be acquired through a researcher’s own artistic or practical design work
and productions.
The focus in this study is on Master’s education, in which artworks as theses are a
common practise and a tradition. An artistic thesis typically shows a strong subjectivist
position and equals to Frayling’s description of research for art and design. The tradition in
the field has been that while artistic theses provide evidence of a candidate’s design skills
and artistic expressions, they also contribute novel ideas and ways of seeing to the
professional design community. That is achieved by exhibiting the artefacts concerned,
while a short description of the production process and techniques has been sufficient.
Presently the requirements for the written part are more explicit, while leaving room
for various interpretations. For example, the written part may reflect the artwork on artphilosophical theories or previous works within the art genre. Sometimes an artistic
production takes a stand on a social question or discourse and unfolds everyday behaviour
patterns and phenomena.
Instead of adopting systematic methodology, artistic research is more about discovery,
as John Dewey wrote already in 1934: ‘Art expresses, it does not state. It is concerned with
existences in their perceived qualities, not with conceptions symbolized in terms.’ (p. 140)
By juxtaposing scientific and artistic inquiries, Dewey explains that regardless of different
methodologies, new knowledge and understanding can be found both ways: ‘A wellconducted scientific inquiry discovers as it tests, and proves as it explores; it does so in the
virtue of a method, which combines both functions.’ (p. 176)
136
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
John Dewey’s classic book is based on ten lectures on the Philosophy on Art at Harvard
University in 1930s. During that time philosophers, historians and other scientists
researched art from the objectivist position. Sometimes also artists and designers wrote
texts, which were used for art education, e.g. at the Bauhaus school. The books written by
Johannes Itten, Paul Klee and Lásló Moholy-Nagy investigated art, design processes and
artefacts from a constructivist or subjectivist position.
Hannula, Suoranta and Vaden use the notion inside-in: ‘The research is done inside the
practice, by doing acts, which are part of the practice.’ (2014, p. 3) They describe the
framework, the context and the artistic process: ‘[…] moving back and forth between the
periods of intensive (insider) engagement and more reflective (outsider) distance-taking.’
(p. 16) Research means taking part in a research tradition, in which an artistic work needs
to be contextualised and situated in the art tradition. In addition, it needs to be verbalized
and published. (p. 17) The style of writing an artistic research can be narrative or essayistic,
whereas theoretical research is written in a more formal research reporting style.
Artistic research includes also visual communication research and production of
artefacts, e.g. comic books, animations and films. Visual communication has increased and
the world has become ocular-centric or eye-centred, as Gronbeck cites Jay (Gronbeck
2008: xxi) to describe the expanding use of visual media.
Production-based Research
In academic discussions, the notions of practice-based and practice-led research are
often used as synonyms for artistic research. For the sake of clarity, this study applies the
terms artistic research and production-based research due to different strategies of
inquiry. Artistic research is discovery-led, whereas production-based research means
searching solutions to a situated problem using a pre-defined methodology. The word
production in this context is not limited to tangible artefacts, but can also refer to a service
or an innovative design process. In most cases, production-based research takes a
constructivist position and equals to Frayling’s description of research through art and
design.
Simon wrote that as natural sciences are concerned with how things are ‘[…]Design, on
the other hand, is concerned how things ought to be devising artifacts to attain the goals’
(1996, 114). How to change existing situations into preferred ones and which methods to
use, is the question Nigel Cross investigates in his book ‘Design Thinking’ (2011). Cross
discusses design ability and the way designers think and approach a problem to find
solutions. He introduces key strategic aspects which appear to be common for professional
designers. First, innovative designers seem to take a broad systems approach to a problem,
rather than adopting narrow problem criteria. Secondly, they frame the problem in a
distinctive and rather personal way. The third aspect, identified by Cross, is designing from
first principles. Cross exemplifies the first principle with product design cases, in which
function and usability are the key principles. (p. 75-76)
Cross refers to Lawson (1994), who interviewed a number of internationally leading
architects. One issue these architects especially emphasized was the importance of
sketching and drawing within the design process. Drawing meant imagining or discovering
something, and understanding the problem. Lawson also suggested that skilled designers
are good at coping with uncertainties, and one way to cope is trying to impose order.
(Cross 2011, pp. 13–15) In addition to sketching, designers use mock-ups, prototypes,
137
MARJA SELIGER
scenarios, mood boards – design things, a term introduced by Pelle Ehn (Koskinen et al.
2011, p. 125).
What is essential in design is formulating and re-interpreting the design problem into a
task, and especially so if the work is conducted in a team. Nigel Cross discusses design as
teamwork, the related problems and possibilities, and brings up new emphazes: cocreation, collaboration and persuasion. (Cross 2011, pp. 91-93) Koskinen et al. use the
term constructive design research and describe the shift from industrial design to usercentred design (2011, p. 18).
Although a Master’s thesis is a student’s individual work, it can be conducted within a
bigger research project. Service design projects are typically cases which involve
multidisciplinary design teams, customers and stakeholders. Stickdorn and Schneider
(2011) define service design as an iterative, nonlinear process, the structure of which
consists of four stages: exploration, creation, reflection and implementation. Exploration
means discovering and gaining a clear understanding of the situation from the customer
perspective. The creation phase begins with ideation, brain-storming and sticky notes.
Instead of discussing research methods, they describe tools, which can include shadowing,
contextual interviews, cultural probes and personas. (pp. 122-213)
Similar processes and methods are applied in design projects, which enhance social
responsibility and aim to identify solutions to situated problems to improve well-being.
Inspired by the heritage of Victor Papanek (1985), some Master’s students choose thesis
topics for environmental or human-centred design.
In summary, production-based research contributes through expertise in art and design
and practical knowledge embodied in constructive nature of work, work processes, and
resulting outcomes. The discussion of production-based research has been most active in
the fields of design where the focus is both on products and on services. As it includes
architectural planning, production-based research can also be called applied research.
Findings
The outcome of this study shows that the theoretical backgrounds and research
methods adopted in theses vary according to the departments and study programmes. The
composition of a theoretical thesis may resemble theses written in social sciences,
whereas artistic and production-based theses do not find equals in other disciplines.
In an artistic thesis, a student may reflect his/her work on philosophical, aesthetic or
artistic discourses. A production-based thesis may involve a problem-solving task, which
begins by exploring the present situation and continues by creating and building a
prototype. The research methods include observations, interviews or empirical data
analyzes. The aim is to combine practise and research in order to reach the objectives of
higher university education, including qualifications to continue to doctoral studies.
4. Master’s Thesis Process
Based on this study of art and design research in Master’s education, the author
concludes that the strategies of inquiry can be theoretical, artistic or production-based.
Each one of these research orientations leads to different methodologies and thesis
designs. It is advisable to define the topic and goals first, before deciding whether the
thesis will include an artwork or a production, or whether it will be a theoretical thesis.
138
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
A thesis process in art and design is illustrated in Figure 1. The process begins by
defining the topic and goals for a thesis. A student’s personal interest and curiosity offers
the starting point, but often the first topic is too general and wide and needs to be
narrowed down. A good piece of advice is to write a short description of the intended
contents and aims like ‘My thesis is about… My intention is to find out…’ and discuss the
idea with a professor and student colleagues. There are many guidebooks for writing a
thesis, e.g. Furseth and Everett (2013, pp. 1–16) give practical instructions and tips, helping
to make progress by resorting to brainstorming, analogies, mind-maps and open-ended
questions.
The TOPIC and a tentative TITLE for the thesis
GOALS for the thesis
THEORY BASE and key literature
Theoretical research
Objectivist position
· Research question
· Hypotheses
Artistic research
Subjectivist position
· Art-philosophic focus
· Reflection
Production-based research
Constructivist position
· Problem statement
· Design thinking
Methodological approach
· Quantitative
· Qualitative
· Mixed methods
· Laboratory tests
Artistic work approach
· Inside-in engagement
· Distance taking
· Social / human aspect
· Discovery
Problem-solving approach
· Exploration
· Creation
· Reflection
· Implementation
Theory generation
Artistic production
Product or service design
Written research
Work of art or design +
a written component
Documented production +
a written component
Figure 1: Thesis Process
Once the topic has been defined, the aims of the research need to be stated, because
they influence the strategies of inquiry and research methods to be adopted. Reading
literature begins already at the planning stage, to review how the topic has been
researched before, out of which sites, and what have been the outcomes. Studying earlier
research helps in finding a novel approach, and planning the artistic or production
component, if relevant.
Gillian Rose introduces methodological tools, sites and modalities to study
interpretations of visual images. There are three sites at which the meanings of an image
are created: the site(s) of production, the site of image and the site(s) of an audience. Each
of these sites comprises three different aspects, which Rose calls modalities –
technological, compositional and social. He suggests that each one of these modalities can
contribute to a critical understanding of images (Rose 2010, p. 13). As regards industrial
design research, Koskinen et al. (2011) introduce emerging methods, which bridge
research to design practice.
There are topics which can lead either to a theoretical, artistic or production-based
thesis. For example, if the research topic centres on visual images and representations of
139
MARJA SELIGER
oneself (selfies) in social media, the research question could be: What are the reasons to
produce selfies and for whom are they made? This leads to a theoretical, empirical study
investigated from the site of producers. Interviews could be a method added to an analysis
of visuals. The same topic could also lead to an artistic research, in which a researcher
produces her own selfies, communicates with an audience and conceptualizes the process
in writing. Or a researcher could be a facilitator in a selfie workshop for a specialized group
of people. The research question and accompanying methods lead the production-based
research. In each case, a literature review is needed to build a theoretical frame.
An essential part of any empirical research is data collection and analysis, requiring a
description of the method, of the procedure of data gathering and analysis, together with
references to the literature and pictures used. When collecting data from people or about
people, researchers need to follow research ethics, protect their research participants and
create trust. Creswell writes about ethical issues to be considered in different stages of a
research, from the statement of the research problem and research questions to collecting
and analysing data and disseminating the results. (Creswell 2009, pp. 87–92)
In some cases, a written consent is needed and signed by the participants. It discloses
the facts and purpose of the research and guarantees the confidentiality of any privileged
information. The Aalto University has a Research Ethics Committee, which provides exante advice and evaluation of research ethics in studies with human subjects. The
Committee informs researchers about decisions of the National Advisory Board of
Research Integrity.
5. Discussion: A Paradigm Shift
The recent development towards research and theoretical theses in art and design can
be described as a paradigm shift. Since the Bauhaus time in 1920s, the educational goal in
universities of art and design has included training skilled practitioners for design
professions needed by industries such as textile, ceramic, furniture, building or graphic.
Training art and design professionals still remains the goal today, although the
requirements for design expertise have changed and increased in number. Both practical
skills and theoretical knowledge, conceptualizing, teamwork and leadership skills are
required. In addition, a Master’s degree should give qualifications to continue with
doctoral studies and research.
The decision to launch doctoral education at the former University of Art and Design
Helsinki (since 2010: Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture) was both
disputed and defended by the academic society, provoking active, sometimes impetuous
debate about art and design research. This was the case also in other countries, as
Borgdorff describes in The Conflict of Faculties and introduces criteria for the assessment
of particular artwork or practice as research (Borgdorff 2012, p. 212).
The research debates have focused on doctoral education, but when looking back at
the period of over twenty years, it is obvious that the discourse and debates in art and
design research have had a positive influence on Masters’ education and theses, as well.
However, a big divergence between study programmes, their educational strategies,
practices and theories surfaced in this study. The author suggests various study
programmes to build their identity and specify their philosophical worldviews, strategies of
inquiry and methodologies.
140
Research Meets Practise in Master’s Theses
To conclude, this study shows that research has taken its place in the education of
professional designers. Design thinking methods are adopted to solve problems and to
improve existing situations in societies. The scope of visual communication has increased
and more research is needed about interpretations of visual representations in the global
context. Based on this study, the author recommends more discussions about Master’s
education research in art and design: what research is, what it involves, and what it
delivers.
References
Borgdorff, H. (2012). The Conflict of the Faculties: Perspectives on Artistic Research and
Academia. Leiden, the Netherlands: Leiden University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design – Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods
Approaches. Los Angeles, London: SAGE Publications.
Cross, N. (2011) Design Thinking. Oxford, New York: Berg.
Crotty, M. 1998. The Foundations of Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications Ltd.
Gronbeck, B.E. (2008) ‘Visual Rhetorical Studies. Traces Through Time and Space’ in Olson,
L.C.; Finnegan, C.A. and Hope, D.S. (eds.) Visual Rhetoric. A Reader in Communication
and American Culture. Los Angeles, London: Sage Publications.
Jay, M. (1994) Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in the Twentieth-Century French
Thought. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dewey, J. (2005) [1934]. Art as Experience. London: The Berkley Publishing Group.
Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. London: Royal College of Art. Research
Papers, 1(1), 1-5. Retrieved 15 Jan, 2015, from
http://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/view/creators/Frayling=3AChristopher=3A=3A.html
Friedman, K. (2008). Research into, by and for design. In Journal of Visual Art Practice,
Volume 7 Number 2, pp. 153–160.
Furseth, I., & Everett, E.L. (2013). Doing Your Master’s Dissertation. Sage Publications
Hannula, M., Suoranta, J., & Vadén, T. (2014). New York, Washington: Peter Lang.
Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redström, J. & Wensveen, S. (2011). Design
Research Through Practice. From the Lab, Field and Showroom. Amsterdam: Morgan
Kaufmann.
Lawson, B., (1994). Design in Mind. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann
Master’s Thesis Guide of the Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture
(2015) Helsinki, Aalto University. Retrieved 15 Jan, 2015, from
https://into.aalto.fi/display/enmasterarts/Graduation+and+Thesis
Papanek, V., (1985). Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. London:
Thames and Hudson.
Rose, G. (2012). Visual Methodologies. An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual
Materials. London: SAGE Publications.
Simon, H. (1996) [1969] The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Sticdorn, M., & Schneider, J., (2011). This is Service Design Thinking. Hoboken, New Jersey:
BIS Publishers.
141
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and
Education
Mark GRAHAM* and Daniel BARNEY
Brigham Young University
*mark_graham@byu.edu
Abstract: An important topic in art and design education is how the confluence
of design disciplines with media arts and other fine arts disciplines is shaping
content and pedagogy at both the college and K-12 levels. The problem for those
who train artists and art educators is how to prepare students within a field
where art, design, and media arts are changing both in content and in their
relationships to each other. This problem is particularly acute for art education
where there is a need for current and future teachers to have experience with
and be able to teach within various art, design, and or media arts areas. This
paper describes an ongoing research project that is exploring the pedagogy and
interrelationship of design, media arts and art programs within university level
art programs. This study is still in progress; data is being gathered and
interpreted. This research is designed to provide insights and recommendations
for the preparation of artists and art teachers who will need to navigate
educational assessments, licensure requirements, and art and design programs
within rapidly changing schools.
Keywords: college art, design, education
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
Introduction
An important topic in art and design education is how the confluence of design
disciplines with media arts and other fine arts disciplines is shaping content and pedagogy
at both the college and K-12 levels. The significance of this topic is reflected in the theme
of the 2014 NAEA annual conference, which was media arts and the 2015 conference,
which was design education. The problem for those who train artists and art educators is
how to prepare students within a field where art, design, and media arts are changing both
in content and in their relationships to each other. At the same time, many university art
and design programs have very different philosophies and approaches toward both
content and pedagogy. Design, media arts, and other art disciplines are often in separate
departments and very different approaches to both content and teaching. As a
consequence, there are limited opportunities for students in one area to take classes in
another area. This problem is particularly acute for art education where there is a need for
current and future teachers to have experience with and be able to teach within various
art, design, and or media arts areas.
This ongoing research project describes the interrelationship of design, media arts and
art programs within university level art programs. It is designed to provide insights and
recommendations for the preparation of artists and art teachers who will need to navigate
educational assessments, licensure requirements, and art and design programs within
rapidly changing schools. The theory and practice of design disciplines and media arts have
distinctly different perspectives on both the theories and practice of art education. How
these disciplines evolve and interact has enormous influence on student learning in the
visual arts and on art and design pedagogy. This study of undergraduate art and design
education is particularly urgent in light of changes confronting higher education and the
continuing debate about the content and teaching within undergraduate art education
(Salazar, 2013).
Purpose of Study
The purpose of this study is to describe selected art and design programs at the
university level in order to anticipate future directions of the field and address the future
needs of both K-12 and college students in relation to the various art and design
disciplines. A primary audience for this study is university educators and in particular those
who train art teachers. In addition to describing existing programs, we looked for
innovative curricula and programs in an attempt to describe excellent or emerging
practices. The ultimate goal was to describe generative possibilities for university art and
design education that addressed emerging needs and changes within the field of K-12 art
education. There are few studies of college art or design pedagogy, and in particular, few
studies of how these disciplines are organized, how they interact at the university level,
and how art education programs work among these programs. Within the context of art
and design programs, the researchers were looking for generative possibilities for the
training of educators.
143
GRAHAM & BARNEY
The Problem
Within the field of art and design education and in many art and design programs,
there are significant philosophical and pedagogical differences and divergent descriptions
of desired student learning outcomes. Some of these differences include the need for BA
generalization versus BFA specialization, different definitions of scholarship, differences in
foundations content and philosophy, and the tension between applied programs and
liberal arts programs. At the same time, communities of practice in art, design, art
education, and media arts are experiencing rapid changes as well as significant overlaps in
methodologies and blurring of boundaries among disciplines. The trend is toward
interdisciplinary collaboration and experimentation. New media, including digital media
are transforming the way children, students, and adults see art and design and the roles of
artists and designers in society.
Although this research focuses on college level art and design programs, it is intended
to inform university art educators who train K-12 teachers. This distinct subset of
university art and design faculty have unique aims for their students. In addition to training
students to become practicing artists or designers working within their respective
disciplines, art educators are concerned with the added layer of teacher preparation. In
their communities of practice within schools or other sites, art educators must be
prepared in art, design, and media arts disciplines. Consequently, there needs to be viable
ways for art and design education students to navigate among these disciplines during
their preparation.
Theoretical Background
There are many different aesthetic theories that frame contemporary art and design.
This study is concerned with how university programs define the content and teaching of
their disciplines. Related to these issues are disciplinary organization, collaboration, future
vision, and governance. The primary focus is on pedagogical and interdisciplinary issues
that influence how students are initiated, informed, introduced, or sequenced within and
among various art and design disciplines. One area of particular interest is foundation
programs since this is where art and design disciplines often converge.
Foundations
The discussion of foundations content and pedagogy is germane to this study because
this is where students are initiated into both art and design content and pedagogy.
Foundations within college art programs have many different purposes and often include a
composite of critical thinking, technical skills, formalist principles, and conceptual skills
(Barney & Graham, 2014; Graham & Sims-Gunzenhauser, 2010). There is often a strong,
taken-for-granted sentiment that students should develop functional competence in
manipulating the basic elements, principles, and vocabulary of visual art (Dickerman,
2012). There is also a distinction between design disciplines and fine art disciplines that
the Bauhaus sought to erase, but which seems to be deeply entrenched in both the
thinking and practice of many art programs (Bergdoll & Dickerman, 2012). Critics of
traditional fundamentals in art education have suggested that the formalist agenda ignores
important contexts of culture and postmodern practices. New technologies have
144
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
challenged definitions and functions of art and in turn challenged a foundations program
that was, to some extent rooted in a response to traditional artist materials (Tavin,
Kushins, & Elinski, 2007).
Olivia Gude (2004, 2013) suggests that the elements and principles of design are
insufficient for 21st century art making and only a weak reflection of an avant-garde that
was inspirational 100 years ago. She describes postmodern principles of art-making
including appropriation, re-contextualization, layering, and hybridity. Her approach
includes development of expanded self-awareness, self-forming ideas, empowered
making, and community themes as a basis for art making. According to Gude, a good art
project encodes complex aesthetic strategies, gives students tools to investigate and make
meaning, and uses the actual methodologies of artists. In contrast to abstracted, universal
principles, it may include post-studio practices that emphasize concept and repurposing of
forms and materials that are culturally situated. Similarly, Terry Barrett (2007, 2011),
suggests that postmodern approaches such as working collaboratively, layering, mixing
codes, and collapsing boundaries are generative ways to frame art education.
The content of art education is being re-imagined in contemporary practice and
teaching. For example, visual culture, critical pedagogy and the discourse surrounding artmaking are important components of creating an image. This is a shift from the quest for
abstract form to a focus on historical, political, and understanding of visual culture and
social responsibility. Paul Duncum (2010) describes seven principles of visual culture
education that focus on critical theory and the deconstruction of images. Both Gude and
Duncum want to ground art making in the practices of contemporary art, including
performance art. This is a shift from an emphasis on materials, techniques, and objects to a
focus on concepts, problems, and ideas about social engagement. Student artwork is not
seen so much as an aesthetic object, but as a platform for learning or evidence of learning.
Art becomes a kind of research text that is framed by critique, analysis, theory, and
documentation (Frigard & Taylor, 2013). Writing as a way to articulate personal
interpretation or critical analysis may also become an important part of art education. The
problems of defining foundations programs are significant because they reflect recurring
issues that characterize both pedagogical and philosophical differences between art and
design programs.
College Art Pedagogy
Salazar’s (2013) study of the art education at the college level considers teaching and
learning in undergraduate studio art program and also notes the paucity of research of
pedagogical practice in studio art programs. There is an ongoing debate about the nature
and purposes of undergraduate studio training (Madoff, 2009; Lupton, 2005). Programs
vary, depending on how they define skill and how much they depart from Bauhaus models
as well as how much they integrate digital culture and the design disciplines that are
concerned with clients and commercial enterprises. For example, some design educators
have called for renewed attention to the development of skills, including conceptual skills,
technical skills, and critical skills (Lupton, 2005). Other studies of design programs
highlight the importance of design in promoting social change and economic opportunity
(Van Zande, 2011). The landscape of art and design education at the university level is
rapidly changing due to changing communities of practice and traditional debates about
the content and teaching within various art and design disciplines.
145
GRAHAM & BARNEY
In 2008, the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD) formed a
working group to research Design Education in this country. They found that over 45,000
students were enrolled annually in design programs. This study noted that industry models
typically emphasize cross-disciplinary work within design disciplines and often include
collaboration with media, communications and computer experts rather than fine artists
and historians. These projects are typically team-based projects, rather than the work of a
solo artist, and include work produced on behalf of a client or an organization. These
features of design production methods can be key differentiating factors between art and
design disciplines.
Methodology
This is an ongoing, qualitative, collaborative investigation of both local concerns and
trends in the field. The investigators from the Department of Visual Arts at Brigham Young
University met together regularly to discuss data gathered from site visits from different
university level art programs. This was not an attempt to conduct research for purposes of
generalization. The purpose of the inquiry is to help generate ideas, to see what others in
the field have done, to understand solutions they have found concerning curriculum and
program structures, and to gain a broader vision of curricular practices in other locations.
The inquiry is qualitative, rather than quantitative; purposive, rather than normative; and
educational, rather than scientific.
Data Collection
Initial contacts were made and information was gathered through phone calls, Skype
interviews, or email correspondence with individual faculty members who we know or
who have been recommended to us. Prior to site visits, participants were sent an email
with our key questions. We started our conversations with general questions and asked
follow up questions that were more specific to our research objectives. We collated the
interview notes, along with gathering general information from school websites. We then
informally analyzed and summarized this data, looking for ideas and themes as we
conversed with members of the committee.
R ESEARCH Q UESTIONS
The four basic research questions directed toward participants in the study were:
What sets your school or discipline apart from others and what are its core competencies?
What is important for students of the visual arts to learn in the 21st century?
What does collaboration look like at your school?
How are your art, design, and other academic programs organized and governed?
These questions are elaborated below.
M ISSION , AIMS , AND CORE COMPETENCIES
Tell us about your programs. What sets your school apart from others?
146
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
Describe the mission, aims, core values, guiding principles or top priorities of your
department. What approaches or practices are working best to help accomplish these
goals? What challenges do your programs face and how are you dealing with them?
T HE FUTURE VISUAL ARTS STUDENT
What is important for students of the visual arts to learn in the 21st century?
What trends or changes do you see in the Visual Arts and higher education?
How are your programs responding to anticipated future trends and changes?
How is your school utilizing technologies old and new?
I NTERDISCIPLINARY AND COLLABORATIVE WORK
What does collaboration look like at your school?
How are collaborative/interdisciplinary projects or courses encouraged and facilitated?
Where does the collaboration take place?
What do your foundations/core curricula look like?
When do students begin to specialize into a major and how do you sort them? What
opportunities do students have to access courses outside their area?
What kinds of disciplinary boundaries exist, how are mediums and methods
experiencing hybridization?
A RT , DESIGN , AND ACADEMIC ORGANIZATION AND GOVERNANCE
How are your academic programs organized and governed?
How does this affect students and faculty?
How does your faculty deal with disagreements?
R ESEARCH S ITES
Research sites were chosen based on the reputations of particular programs, known
contacts, experience with the program or recommendation. It was a purposeful sample
designed to illuminate possibilities rather than make generalizations quantitative
generalizations about the field. The sites included:
New York: Parsons School of Design, New York University, Pratt Institute, Columbia
University, Hunter College, Queens College, Fashion Institute of Technology
California: Laguna College of Art, Otis Art Institute, Art Center College of Deign
Laguna College of Art and Design, California State University at Fullerton, California
State University Northridge.
Illinois: University of Illinois at Champagne-Urbana, University of Illinois at Chicago,
School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Colorado: University of Colorado, Boulder
Pennsylvania: Carnegie Mellon
147
GRAHAM & BARNEY
Texas: University of North Texas, Denton
Utah: Brigham Young University, Utah Valley University
Canada: University of British Columbia
Results
A number of themes emerged from the study. They are grouped in the categories of
use of media and medium, collaboration, learning approaches, and organization.
M EDIUM , MEDIA , AND THE USE OF MEDIUMS
We observed a general direction toward an attitude of medium neutrality, where
disciplines are defined less by their use of medium. The ability to navigate fluidly between
mediums was seen as an important learning outcome for artists and designers. The
movement toward medium neutrality is manifest in a number of different approaches.
a. Disciplinary ‘gates’ to enter into the department: Students enter into the department
via a media or process designation, but after entrance students are simply visual arts
students ( See Pratt, although some areas retained tracks here, Columbia graduate
school in studio, Hunter, and SAIC).
b. Cross disciplinary study BA/BFA: Students can create their own area of focus, moving
across areas (See University of British Columbia, SAIC).
c. Cross disciplinary teaching: Faculty can propose to teach any course in any semester
(Hunter and NYU).
C OLLABORATION AND TRANS - DISCIPLINARY STUDY
Collaboration is often mentioned as a philosophical objective that is difficult to
implement at the university level because of the high degree of disciplinary focus, which is
often manifest in rank and advancement requirements that tend to emphasize expertise
and specialization within one field. Some approaches to interdisciplinary work included
co-curation of exhibitions, peer-to-peer teaching, and team-taught courses that model
disciplinary practices for students.
a. Departmental Theme: Expanding the Studio idea of work based on ideas, issues, or
themes, an entire department works on a theme throughout the semester and within
all coursework. Examples would be systems, play, etc. Application of departmental
theme would be up to each faculty member. This approach might involve a show or
display of the work at some point.
b. Freshman Seminar Lab Tours: First year students are given a tour of all of the
resources, labs, work areas at their disposal. Training could include whatever they
need to know in order to access them.
c. Identify Available Interdisciplinary: Describe existing courses in the departments or
university that are available for interdisciplinary study and publish or promote them to
students throughout the department.
148
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
d. Encourage Inter-disciplinary Work: Students are encouraged to engage across
disciplines through special scholarships, grants, student show awards, gallery
exhibitions, etc.
e. Department Interdisciplinary Grants: Provide grants for faculty and student teams
who work across disciplines.
f. Open Labs: Configure all labs schedules to allow for significant open lab access.
g. Senior Level Interdisciplinary Course. Faculty teams teach a course specifically
designed to engage students outside their area in a project or theme class.
h. Visiting Lecturer Fellowship: Invite visiting artist or scholar for a year or semester,
who will focus on trans-disciplinary investigation.
i. Studio Environments: Shuffle studio spaces, mix people up around the various
facilities instead of having isolated studios.
j. Shuffle Faculty Offices: Shuffle all of the faculty spaces, mix people up among
different areas instead of having isolated disciplinary or individual office and studio
spaces.
k. Fine Arts Press: A press as a vehicle for faculty/students from various disciplines to
produce limited edition, collectible work together (see the Red Butte Press at the
University of Utah).
L EARNING APPROACHES
This area included learning how to learn, rather than specific technologies or
processes; cross-curricular learning beyond disciplinary boundaries and curricular
flexibility that adapts to learner needs.
a. Cross-area Critiques: Students work is critiqued outside of their area (see Pratt,
Hunter, School of the Art Institute of Chicago).
b. Cross-area Mentorship: As is often done in graduate thesis committees in other
disciplines, students are assigned to or select to advisors outside of their area on
specific research projects.
c. Peer-to-peer Teaching: Students can teach students within their courses, but also
teach students from others. This could take place through collaborative projects
between courses.
d. Modular Curriculum. Curriculum accommodates students wishing to move within
areas of focus. For example, a student wishes to study photographic techniques within
photo but then moves into studio to develop a fine art photographic focus. The
curriculum is divided into ‘chunks’ which allows the students to construct their own
curriculum in modules (see Carnegie Mellon).
e. Lived Curriculum/Emergent Curriculum: The curriculum is co-constructed by the
students and faculty who are currently involved in a specific course. Students or faculty
enter with a theme or concept and the curriculum arises in relation to student
questions and faculty interests.
149
GRAHAM & BARNEY
f. Studio Environments: Students learn from cross-pollination of practices, cultural
production, and through proximity based on how studios are designed and organized.
g. Amateur Courses: Advanced students take courses outside the comfort of their own
discipline in an effort to force new perspectives, express a unique point of view, and
approach problems with a different skill set. This approach values the outsider or
amateur perspective.
g. Cross disciplinary Teaching: Instructors facilitate thematic exploration and inquiry
instead of determining the specific skills, techniques, purposes, and philosophical
approaches chosen by individual students.
h. Improvised Technologies: Using technology outside of its original or intended
context.
J. Public Practice: This is connected to service learning and identifies and facilitates
student opportunities to engage in public art and public projects outside of the
university.
C RITICAL THINKING
This area includes the importance of art studies in relation to history, critical and other
theoretical perspectives, context, discourse, audience, curatorial ideas and exhibitions.
One objective of this area is to develop student autonomy and self-sufficiency.
a. Core or Foundation Inquiry Courses: This is a course or courses that emphasize critical
thinking, inquiry methods, and visual problem solving. Topics might include curatorial
studies, art criticism, philosophy, critical theory or visual culture readings and theory.
These courses are designed to orient students towards critical thinking, rather than
discipline specific techniques or mediums (see Fashion Institute of Technology core
class).
b. Core or Foundational Research/Theory Course: This is a survey of various theoretical
frameworks, the research methods that come out of these frameworks, and the
aesthetic philosophies and artistic practices that relate to them.
S OCIAL PRACTICES , COMMUNITY , AND SERVICE LEARNING
a. Lived curriculum/emergent curriculum, see learning approaches e.
b. Cross-disciplinary service learning and service design. Students work in teams built
from various areas, graphic design, photo, art education, studio, history, illustration,
etc., going out into the community and finding organizations that can use specific
services. Students learn within these spaces.
c. Placed-based practices. Learning about a specific location and then creating in
relation to self, community, histories, and disciplinary practices and politics.
C OMPLEXITY AND SYSTEMS THINKING
This area includes holistic perspectives, deep ecology, place-based education,
networks, and relationality as a part of art and design.
150
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
a. Departmental theme. Introduce courses or themes that focus on complexity and
systems thinking. Students learn to think holistically rather than in discipline specific
terms.
b. Lived curriculum/emergent curriculum: See learning approaches e above.
c. Placed-based practices: See social practices c above.
d. Time-based practices. These include New Genres: documentation, ephemera,
documented performances, video, etc.
I NTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION , INTERTEXTUALITIES , LITERACIES
a. Cross-area critiques and mentorship for students: See learning approaches a above.
b. Writing and artistic social practices: Students could take an English course
specifically tailored to artistic practice (See Emily Dyer’s collaborative courses with D.
Barney at BYU).
c. Core inquiry course: See critical thinking a. (See also the research from the Literacy
Research Study, a group of educational researchers at BYU where an expanded notion
of ‘texts’ are described and the literacies surrounding these texts are explored via
disciplinary practices (Barney et. al in press).
d. Interdisciplinary studio: An inter-disciplinary work space that could foster
collaboration, facilitate use of equipment from other disciplines, etc. (CCA has the Craft
Lab, which may serve as a model).
e. Department center for interdisciplinary study: A formalized department center for
collaboration of all types. For example, see Bradley Agency, Ad Lab, etc. It could
function as a part of curriculum or be a separate entity.
I NTERDISCIPLINARY BA DEGREE
a. Interdisciplinary BFA degree: In addition to the regular BFA requirements, add the
possibility of an inter-disciplinary BFA degree. Consider disciplines both in and outside
of the college e.g. Biology/illustration; Writing/Graphic Design, etc. (UVU. Carnegie
Mellon).
b. Interdisciplinary MA degree. Consider the possibility of an inter-disciplinary MFA or
MA degree that might include disciplines both in and outside of the visual arts
disciplines, e.g. biology/illustration; writing/graphic design, etc. Add emphasis in areas
that would like to participate in an MA degree but do not currently have one.
c. Flattened departments: No more areas, students are free to graze at the entire VA
buffet, with pre-requisites as the only barrier. Specific BFA emphasis could still exist,
but with more movement allowed or encouraged among disciplines.
d. Summer programs for high school-age students: This is a program that serves as a
practicum for pre-service art education students (see University of Illinois at Chicago
Spiral Workshop). These programs are also used for recruiting students. They also
involve faculty members in creating innovative and experimental curricula.
151
GRAHAM & BARNEY
e. Saturday or after school programs for secondary students: These programs can serve as
l lab school for any areas to collaborate and test out curriculum and pedagogical issues.
This also provides a practicum experience for pre-service education students as well as
serving local high school-aged students.
f. Team teaching/interdisciplinary team teaching: Bringing more than one perspective
to curriculum.
Discussion
Collaboration
Research described a number of academic trends that included hybrid teaching, multidisciplinary, and team teaching. Other approaches included panel critiques with
representation from multiple areas and collaborative approaches being modeling by team
teachers. Throughout our research and campus visits we have seen a significant emphasis
placed on the value of interdisciplinary teaching as an approach to collaboration. Many
schools spoke of the benefits of team teaching, both as a way of creating more dynamic
classroom environments and as a way of aligning the visions and goals of their teachers.
Additionally, many schools with separate studio and applied programs maintained strong
collaborative ties by allowing open access to one another’s courses as electives.
Several schools incorporated innovative teaching programs allowing students to work
closely with mentors and artists in off-campus settings. For example Columbia has a
mentorship program that invites prominent artists to take small groups of students on
open-ended research excursions across the country. Hunter has a similar course called
Artist’s Institute that invites one artist per semester to structure an experimental project
and invites students to work together outside of the classroom. Another structure that
facilitated collaboration was the implementation of interdisciplinary panels for critiques.
These provide students with a range of feedback while engendering a greater
understanding among professors as to the views and opinions of their peers. As indicated
by a survey of alumni, students perceive a strong need to increase interdisciplinary study
across all areas within the department.
Structure: Organization and Governance
We surveyed dozens of institutions, including both art schools and universities, in order
to get a sense of the kinds of structures at work in institutions with visual arts programs.
Many institutions have separate departments for each of their areas (photography, art
history, and so forth); this is certainly the case in larger and highly esteemed art schools
(SAIC, Pratt) and universities (Northwestern, Columbia). We saw examples of institutions in
which there was a large Art & Design program (such as University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign) that shared the same organizational structure as BYU’s Department of Visual
Arts, i.e. areas with program heads. Advocates of this organization talked about this
structure as helping them to realize their vision of breaking down the ‘degree’ program
and training artists in the broadest sense of the descriptor. Notably, these schools have a
number of programs with MA, MFA, and PhD programs. A few years ago at Parsons New
School of Design, they took 18 departments and turned these into 5 schools—a move that
152
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
was viewed by the two faculty we spoke with as concerned with administrative, rather
than philosophical, purposes.
Conversely, the University of Illinois at Chicago had just orchestrated a split of their Art
& Design program into a School of Art and Art History, a School of Architecture, and a
School of Design. This decision was reached after a sustained discussion of individual
area’s distinct vision, study, and even use of a mediator; it was decided that each program
should have the freedom to self determine their future and that this was best
accomplished when programs were separate entities. Some resources are shared,
including a business and technology staff, but otherwise, they are functioning
autonomously. There are many instances in which Art and Design function as separate
departments or schools (Laguna College of Art & Design; NYU). Similar sentiments were
expressed by faculty in several institutions with strong art programs (Hunter, Columbia),
who shared their belief that combined programs were disposed to chronic tension.
Governance
Unsurprisingly, we found a number of different governance models. In art schools, such
as the School of the Art Institute of Chicago or Fashion Institute of Technology, it is
common that each area is their own department, participates in a faculty senate, and
reports to deans who make allocations in terms of faculty positions and resources. At
larger institutions such as Columbia, some kind of permanent administrative assistant is
assigned to the faculty chair and his/her associate chairs. In university settings, an
executive council composed of two or so associate chairs and one chair seems to be
typical. At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, their School of Art & Design has
one director, two associate directors, and one assistant director of graduate studies who
serves as an executive council over their ten individual programs. This executive council
model is seen in other academic units, such as BYU’s Theater & Media Arts, where their
two programs essentially function as separate entities and is governed by a chair and two
associate chairs.
We have noted that the most contentious issue within the Department of Visual Arts at
BYU is the allocation of FTEs. Several programs indicated that FTEs remained in individual
departments after a faculty retire, thus alleviating concerns about losing faculty positions
(Hunter, Pratt). Some saw the practice of not awarding FTEs to growing programs as
evidence of academic inertia and reactionary tendencies (Cal State Fullerton). We saw
some instances in which chairs applied for positions to deans and then to provosts and/or
presidents (NYU, FIT). Several emerging trends were identified for organization and
governance. Trends that were identified as important included: medium neutrality,
collaboration, varied learning approaches, complexity and systems thinking and increased
forms of social practice. The design disciplines may need to approach these issues
differently and with sometimes with more urgency than other areas.
This suggests a closer collaboration among the applied disciplines is needed. Design
students need to navigate multiple mediums, rather than focusing on a single discipline.
Many function at the nexus of several disciplines such as a designer/illustrator. Other
emerging areas of study, such as camera-less photography are a hybrid discipline at the
intersection of animation, photography and design. Modular curriculum design, which
allows for a hybrid approach, while not sacrificing professional development is of great
interest to the applied disciplines.
153
GRAHAM & BARNEY
Conclusions
Preliminary conclusions of this study are framed as questions and recurring issues
rather than recommendations. There remain distinct philosophical, content, and
pedagogical differences between undergraduate art and design programs that tend to limit
cross-disciplinary experiences for art, design, and art education students. This study is still
in progress, and conclusions reflect an interpretation of layers of information including
anecdotal data that are still being added upon and analyzed. This paper is designed to
bring forward important questions within art and design education and the preparation of
art and design teachers within the context of university art programs, rather than
establishing final recommendations on the subject. The various descriptions of programs
are intended, at this point, to reference different stances toward pedagogical,
collaborative, and organizational issues.
Design faculty often cited the need for a rigorous foundational experience based on
principles and elements of design. They cite, for example, a foundations course that might
be structured according to a traditional Beaux-Arts and/or Bauhaus education model. This
notion of foundations is based on the idea that art or design is a visual language and that
this language is grounded in a visual grammar and vocabulary based on the principles and
elements of design. The idea of a foundation, derived from the Bauhaus, among other
places, asserts there are universal, abstract principles that underlie all art making, the
notions of universal design, and other approaches to design. These ideas as developed by
modernist artists and designers were expressed in the quest for a universal language of
design and formalism.
But postmodernism exposed this notion as naïve and oppressively colonial.
Postmodernism values the idioms, narratives and mediums of diverse cultures and
subcultures. The universal language of formalism has been replaced by the software
languages of Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, and After Effects (Lupton 2009). Universal
design has become a language integrated with technology used by an unprecedented
range of people. In practice, both artists and designers share this common language, as
framed by software. But even as disciplines overlap, particularly in the use of digital
media, college art and design programs, continue to exhibit significant philosophical and
pedagogical differences.
As distinct from design disciplines, art disciplines often articulate a different vision of a
foundations program, one that moves further from traditional models based on adherence
to principles of design and technique. These art foundations emphasize theory over
practice, philosophy over fundamental skills, and social experience over individual
discipline. The fundamental pedagogical practice becomes the critique (Lufton, 2009). It
was noted that often foundations year programs hire faculty who will define their
respective fields very narrowly to protect their own biases and influence students in their
attitudes, opinions, and definitions in an effort to sustain recruitment numbers in their
areas for the following year. This works to undermine broader opportunities for students
cross disciplines. A broader perspective would allow students to come to their own
conclusions about various art and design disciplines. For example, fine arts faculty tend to
stereotype illustration (and other design disciplines) as commercial art, eliminate
figuration from the definition of drawing, and demean the outlets for figuration as trivial
(Arisman, 2012).
154
The Confluence of Art and Design in Art and Education
References
Arisman, M. (2012). Teaching Illustration. New York: School of Visual Arts.
Barney, D. T. & Graham, M.A. (2014). The troubling metaphor of foundations in art
education: What foundations affords or limits in high school and college art
programs. Fate in Review 2013-2014
Barrett, T. (2007) Escaping the confines of the museum: Postmodern attitudes ideas,
approaches influencing postmodern artmaking. FATE in Review, Foundations in Art:
Theory & Education, 2006-2007.
Barrett, T. (2011). The importance of teaching interpretation. Fate in Review, 20102011.
Bergdoll, B., & Dickerman, L. (2012). Bauhaus 1919-1933. New York: Museum of Modern
Art.
Dockery, C. & Quinn, R. (2007). Finding balance in contemporary foundations
programs. Fate in Review 2006-2007.
Frigard, K., & Taylor K. (2013). Beyond the traditional and representational: Writing as a
tool for understanding contemporary art in foundation courses. FATE in Review,
Foundations in Art: Theory & Education 2012-2013, 34.
Graham, M. A. & Sims-Gunzenhauser (2010). Advanced placement in studio art and the
contested territory of college art foundations. Fate in Review, Volume 29.
Gude, O. (2004). Postmodern principles: In search of a 21st century art education. Art
Education, 57, 1, 6-14.
Gude, O. (2013). New School art styles: the project of art education. Art Education (66), 1.
Lupton, E. (2009, March). The re-skilling of the American art student. Voice: The AIGA
Journal of Design. Retrieved from http://elupton.com/2009/10/reskilling-the-artstudent/
Madoff, S. H. (2009). Art school (proposition for the twenty first century). Boston, MA: MIT
Press.
McKnight, J. (2013). Hybrid methods: How designer-artists solve visual problems. FATE in
Review, Foundations in Art: Theory & Education, 2012-2013.
Salazar, S. M. (2013). Laying a foundation for artmaking in the 21st century: A description
and some dilemmas. Studies in Art Education, 54, 3, 246-259.
Tavin, K., Kushins, J., & Elniski, J. (2007). Shaking the foundations of postsecondary art(ist)
education in visual culture. Art Education, 60, 5, 13-19.
Van Zande, R. (2011). Design education supports social responsibility and the
economy. Arts Education Policy Review 112, 1, 26-34.
155
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two
Pedagogical Schools in Industrial Design Education in
Turkey
Ilgim EROGLUa* and Cigdem KAYAb
a Mimar
Sinan Fine Arts University; b Istanbul Technical University
*ilgim.eroglu@msgsu.edu.tr
Abstract: In a recent prior study effects of students’ backgrounds on design
education were evaluated through distinctively different product design
undergraduate programs in Istanbul. In Turkey, product design departments
elect their students through either drawing exams where students’ visual
perception and expression skills are tested, or a national math and science exam.
In this regard, prospective design students concentrate on different subjects
prior to their graduate education. As there are studies supporting the idea that
thinking habits may affect problem solving decisions, it was investigated if a
difference between students’ capabilities and preferences in design process exits.
A previous study by authors among students showed that students that took
science based national examination prefered to use objective data, while
students taking the art based examination prioritized subjective problem solving
(Eroglu and Kaya, 2014). When product design stages were defined through
three different problem solving activities suggested by Dorst (2003), it was seen
that students with different backgrounds were comfortable with different
problem solving techniques. In this study, the subject is investigated further
through semi-structured interviews done with instructors who are familiar with
both of the systems. It was seen that instructors can detect difference in actions
of those two student groups.
Keywords: design education, studio, skill development, problem based learning
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
Background of the study
In Turkey, there are four industrial design departments which have been providing
undergraduate education for more than 20 years. These departments elect their students
based on a national math-based exam or aptitude tests. As the students’ acceptance
criteria are different in these departments, students’ education and study orientation prior
to industrial design undergraduate program may also differ. As some educational
psychologists suggest that thinking habits have an affect on problem solving skills (Resnick
2001, D'Zurilla et.al. 1971), it can be argued that the students’ background education may
influence their approaches to design processes. This study aims to explore if the industrial
design processes differ for students in relation to admission style and prior preparation.
Industrial Design Departments in Turkey
In Turkey, industrial design education dates back to 1971. The first four industrial
design departments with undergraduate education were founded in Mimar Sinan Fine Arts
University (MSFAU) in 1971 (URL-1), Middle East Technical University (METU) in 1979 (URL
2), Marmara University (MU) in 1985 (URL-3) and in İstanbul Technical University (ITU) in
1993 (URL-4).
These four universities have two distinct student acceptance procedures for industrial
design education in the country. ITU and METU accept students based on national LYS
(undergraduate placement examination) scores. MSFAU and MU accept their students
through a combined score of secondary school achievement scores (calculated by the
average of student’s high school grades), LYS, university’s general aptitude test and
department’s aptitude test. In the latter process, the final score is majorly affected by
department's aptitude test score. As the acceptance procedures are different, candidates’
main preperations before acceptance to the program are also not similar. Students who
want to attend MSFAU and MU mostly aim to improve their drawing and artistic skills,
while the candidates for METU and ITU mostly prepare themselves for LYS through solving
problems on subjects like mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc. Also, their high school
education may also concentrate on different subjects. Students’ of METU and ITU are
mostly graduated from ‘Anatolian high schools’’ or ‘science high schools’’ science divisions,
while a significant amount of candidates of MSFAU and MU come from ‘fine arts high
schools’. Most of the candidates do not prepare themselves for both of the examination
techniques and they only prepare for one type of test (Ekmekçioğlu, 2012)
The differences of both approaches have been clearly stated and discussed in the
Turkish design education scene. However, the reasons have not been studied scientifically.
Clarifying the factors that form the two different approaches and their impact may both
raise consciousness in the design community and serve to improve design education.
Background’s Affect on Students’ Undergraduate
Education
According to related studies, artistic problem solving and mathematical problem
solving can have different characteristics. Ho and Eastman (2006) suggest that 2D and 3D
spatial abilities are inter-dependent while being independent from mathematical abilities.
157
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
Therefore they hint that mathematical thinking and visual capabilities may require
different problem solving habits. In addition to this, researchers who study mathematical
and artistic thinking stress different aspects about students that are familiar with those
two problem solving methods.
Some educational psychologists imply that thinking habits may affect problem solving
skills. Resnick (2001) supports the idea that intelligence can be thought and previous
mental activities have an effect one’s approach to a problem, as ‘..., one’s intelligence is
sum of one’s habits of mind’. D’Zurilla and Goldfried (1971) suggest that, problem solving
may also be described as a learning process. Therefore, successful problem solvers have a
tendency to adopt unknown phenomenon into subjects they are familiar with. In this
regard, studying the prior education on students can shed light to their approaches to
design processes.
Schoenfeld (1992) claims that studying mathematics is empowering. Mathematically
empowered students understand, gather and analyze quantitative data more easily to
make balanced judgements. He also implies that mathematical thinking can be applied
practically like in proportional reasoning for scale models. Mathematically empowered
students are suggested to be flexible thinkers who can deal with unique problems and
situations: ‘They are analytical, both in thinking issues through themselves and in
examining the arguments put forth by others’ (Schoenfeld 1992).
Visual arts students are different from science oriented students in terms of problem
formulating and solving behaviors. Caves (2000) suggests that artists’ problem solving
practices resemble scientific research as they both search for a new discovery to create
value and also a strategy to realize it; but visual artists formulate problems and solutions
internally. So, the problem is not certain. In most cases it can hardly be named as a
problem since insight is a factor. The creation may be based on a feeling or an issue before
a problem arises. Therefore, visual arts practitioners are different from other students as
‘...being serious and introspective, socially reserved, relatively indifferent to accepted
standards of behavior and morality, imaginative and unconventional in outlook, intensely
subjective and highly self-sufficient’ (Caves 2000). It is claimed in some of the researches
that one of the most common problems for visual arts students can be the transition from
problem solving to problem finding. When creating compositions within a given
description by their instructor, students need to define a solution to a certain problem,
whereas to succeed in a creative thinking process, they also need to formulate a problem
that is to be solved (Gibbons 2007).
Since students who have been studying science versus art may have adopted different
thinking skills as discussed above, it can be thought that students coming from diverse
backgrounds may have dissimilar approaches to problem solving in product design process
stages.
The different practices of students in these departments have also been observed by
the authors, who have been working in these schools as instructors. Also there are studies
that hint, students’ background may have an effect on their approach to bachelor studies
(Ekmekçioğlu, 2012).
158
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
Problem Solving in Industrial Design
There are several researches on problem solving in industrial design, some of which
supporting the idea that design problem solving has a complex structure, requiring
different problem solving skills.
Cross (1990, 2001) claims that characteristics of problem solving in design involves
dealing with ambiguity. Similarly, according to the seminal proposal of Rittel and Weber
designers deal with ‘wicked problems’ by nature. Wicked problems are hard to pin down
and describe (Rittel and Weber 1973, Buchanan 1992, Dorst 2011). The solution of a
problem may lead to formation of another question. Cross (1990) also argued that
designers can (1) create novel and unusual solutions, (2) study with incomplete
information (3) work with uncertainty, (4) employ their imagination to solve practical
problems (5) use drawings and other modelling media for problem solving. Also, in his
study it was emphasized that designers mostly apply a solution-focused strategy, while
scientists have a problem-focused strategy (Cross 1990, Norman 1990). In another study,
he supported this idea by stating that ‘...successful design behaviour is based not on
extensive problem analysis, but on adequate ‘problem-scoping’’.In later research, he
claimed that problem and solution should be explored together (Cross, 2004).
Dorst (2003) provided a more structure based approach on problem solving in design
deconstructing the concept of design problem into three kinds of sub-problems. He
claimed that design processes are gradual deals with ‘determined’, ‘underdetermined’ and
‘undetermined’ problems. Determined problems include ‘...‘hard’ (unalterable) needs,
requirements and intentions’ that should be discovered and analyzed by designers.
Determined problems can be solved by rational problem solving, whereas
underdetermined problems are defined by ‘...interpretation of design problems and the
creation and selection of possible suitable solutions’ which can only be done during the
design process through exposition of problems and possible solutions together (Dorst,
2003). Finally, Dorst (2003) declared that undetermined problems are mostly freely solved
by designers’ own skills, tastes, style and abilities. Dorst’s categorization forms the coding
scheme of students’ reports in this study. By looking at the definition of three categories as
‘determined’, ‘underdetermined’ and ‘undetermined’, it can be assumed that determined
problems will require more mathematical problem solving skills as they deal with more
objective criteria, while undetermined problems should require more artistic skills.
Underdetermined problems should stand somewhere in between as they both require
reasoning an interpretation, and they may differ in each design process.
Norman and Verganti (2014) provide a different perspective to problem solving in
design. They suggest that, in order to find radical innovative solutions to design problems,
designers should make a connection between different product meanings. Exploring new
ideas within a single product’s meaning will result with incremental innovative design
solutions (Norman and Verganti, 2014).
Students’ Preparation Prior to University Examinations
In a prior study, students were interviewed about their preparation to university
examinations and their tendencies in product design project courses (Eroglu and Kaya,
2014). One of the unpublished results of that study was about students’ studies before
they start their undergraduate studies.
159
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
31 MSFAU students and 31 İTU students were asked about how did they prepared
themselves to university examinations. All of the İTU students declared that they mostly
solved science based test problems. In those tests, the most included topics were
mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology. However, MSFAU students declared that
they focused on improving their drawing skills. When they were asked the context of their
drawings, students declared that they almost always draw figures in a context defined by
their instructors at the course they attended. The students who didn’t attend a course also
declared that they drew compositions within contexts either they have heard or saw
somewhere else.
It was observed by researchers own experiences that, most of the high school teachers
encourage students to explore alternative solutions for science based problems. On the
other hand, instructors who prepare students for arts based examinations encourage their
students to draw within the context they described, as well as it can be.
Research
In our research we made a survey between 7 instructors who had experience in
universities that elect students with either of the examination techniques. Instructors
could have experience in these universities either as instructor or as a student. Instructors
were chosen according to this criterion in order to let them make comparisons between
two different disciplines. Therefore, purposive sampling was used in this study (Robson,
2002). Backgrounds of the instructors are given in the table below.
Table 1. Backgrounds of the instructors
I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
Bachelors Degree from
MU
ITU
ITU
ITU
MSFAU
MSFAU
MU
Instructor at
MU/ITU
MU
MU
MSFAU
ITU
ITU
ITU
In this section, at first, structure of the research will be explained. Afterwards
evaluation of the results will be described.
Structure of the Research
Instructors were interviewed with open-ended questions to get an understanding
about differences between students’ design processes in two different disciplines. These
questions were: (1) ‘Can you summarize the design process of the students in these
universities?’ (2) ‘What are the aspects that students mostly struggle?’ (3) ‘Can you tell the
strong/weak aspects of final product designs of students?’ (4) ‘Do you think problems can
be eliminated through proper syllabus changes?’ Since it was an open-ended interview,
instructors sometimes jumped from topic to topic between questions. Therefore the
results for the first three questions will be examined together. Instructors’ opinions about
improvement of the education will be discussed separately.
After notes were taken from 7 interviews, thematic coding was used (Braun and Clarke,
2006). The questions about design stages were coded into categories mentioned below;
160
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
the main theme for coding were ‘determined’, ‘underdetermined’ and ‘undetermined’
problem solving techniques as described above.
Each question were made mandatory to answer.
Results of the Research
Here, at first results for students’ capabilities will be given. Insights of instructors about
improvement of university education will follow.
Results for Evaluation of Students Capabilities
The codes for the interviews could be defined either as a problem, or a strenght. Codes
were divided into two groups as ‘codes for students’ and ‘codes for universities.’
Codes for students are as follows;
Table 2. Codes for student
Code
Description of Capabilities
Problem Structure
S1
Intellectual
Determined
S2
Visual presentation
Undetermined
S3
Problem analyze and reseach
Determined
S4
Finishing of product
Undetermined
S5
Rationality of the product
Determined
S6
Time management in design process
Underdetermined
S7
Consistency in project process
Underdetermined
S8
Application of projects
Underdetermined
S9
Developing a product idea
Underdetermined
S10
Developing a form
Undetermined
S11
Management of product design process
Underdetermined
S12
Producing alternative product ideas
Underdetermined
S13
Novelness of product ideas
Determined
S14
Induction from detail solving
Determined
S15
Deduction from form
Underdetermined
S16
Technical drawing
Determined
161
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
S17
3D perception of products
Determined
S18
Conceptualizing and creating a scenario
Underdetermined
S19
Evaluation through model making
Underdetermined
S20
Detailing of the final form
Undetermined
S21
Solving production details
Determined
Codes for universities are as follows in Table 3. None of the listed university codes refer
to undetermined problem solving issues, as undetermined problem solving is a subjective
process by nature.
Table 3. Codes for universities
Code
Description of Capabilities
Problem Structure
U1
Interaction with students
Underdetermined
U2
Project brief
Determined
U3
Description of project process
Underdetermined
U4
Management of process
Underdetermined
U5
Providing alternative points of view
Underdetermined
U6
Objectivity in assessments
Determined
U7
Obtaining project outcomes
Determined
Codes detected for university that accepted students through scientific based
examinations (ITU) are as follows.
Table 4. Codes for ITU
Capabilities/
Obstacles
I1
I2
I3
I4
I5
I6
I7
Total
Determined Capability
S1,S3
S5
U2
S13,
S14,
S3, S5
S13, S3,
S5
S3,
U2,
S13
S1,
S1
Student 14
University
-2
U2
Student - 0
University
Determined Obstacle
U2
162
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
-2
Underdetermined Capability
S6, S7
U4,
Underdetermined Obstacle
U1
U3,
S9
U5,
S11,
U4
S18,
S19,
S11, S9
U3
U4,
U5
Undetermined Capability
Undetermined Obstacle
U4,
U1
Student - 7
University
-4
S12, U4
S2,
S2, S4
S10
S2
S10, S2,
S20
S20
S4
Student - 2
University
-6
Student - 1
University
-0
S2, S9,
S10,
S20
Student 13
University
-0
Codes detected for universities that accepted students through aptitude tests (MSFAU
or MU) are as follows. Code ‘positive’ stands for the capabilities, as code ‘negative’ stands
for obstacles.
Table 5. Codes for MSGSU or MU
Capabilities/
Obstacles
I1
I2
I3
Determined Capability
S3, S14,
S5, S1
I4
I5
I6
I7
Total
S17
U2,
U7
U7,
U6
S17
Student - 2
University
-4
S5, S3,
U6
S3
S21
S1,
S21
Student 14
University
-2
U4,
U7
U4,
S7, U1
U3,
U4
Student - 2
University
-8
Determined Obstacle
S1,
S3
U2, S3,
S13
Underdetermined Capability
U1,
S8
U3
Underdetermined Obstacle
U6,
U7,
U4,
S12,
S11
U5,
S11, U4
S18,
S12,
S19
Undetermined Capability
S2,
S4
S10, S4
S15,
S10, S2
S2, S10,
S4, S20
163
Student - 6
University
-5
S10,
S20
S2,
S20
Student 15
University
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
-0
Undetermined Obstacle
Student - 9
University
-0
As it can be seen from the results, instructors evaluate students that are elected with
scientific based tests as stronger in determined problem solving issues but weaker on
undetermined problem solving areas. Out of 16 mentioned determined problem solving
capabilities, only 2 were related to the universities’ education methods. Instructors
mentioned 13 undetermined problem solving obstacles, none of which were related to
university syllabus. Only one undetermined problem solving capability mentioned for these
students, and one determined problem solving obstacle was mentioned which was related
to the university’s education system.
When results for universities that elected students through aptitude tests were
evaluated, it was seen that none of the instructors mentioned any obstacle regarding
undetermined problem solving methods. However, undetermined problem solving
capabilities were mentioned 15 times. There were 6 determined problem solving
capabilities mentioned, 4 of which were university related. Determined problem solving
obstacles were mentioned 16 times, and 2 of them were university related. Therefore it
can be said that instructors mostly evaluate students that are elected through artistic
examinations as capable of solving undetermined problem solving methods, but
problematic in terms of dealing with determined issues.
When results for underdetermined problem solving are compared, instructors mention
11 capability, and 8 obstacle for ITU. Most of the obstacles are university centered.
Departments that elect students through aptitude tests seem to have more problems with
underdetermined problem solving issues, as instructors mention 11 obstacles and 10
capabilities. However, since the numbers are rather close for each student group,
capabilities for underdetermined problem solving can be investigated further.
Instructors Insights on Improvement of Industrial Design
Education in Departments
The instructors were asked whether weaknesses they mention could be improved
through changes in department syllabuses. There were both positive and negative
responses.
Some of the instructors mentioned that, a change of understanding was necessary.
Without a change in understanding a change of syllabus would fall short to address
problems. The following citations from interviews indicate the necessity of change in
understanding.
‘I don’t think it can be solved through syllabus changes. A students’ drawing skills can
be improved if only they exist at the beginning…’ (I7)
‘A change in syllabus would be meaningful and important if they come with a change of
understanding… if a syllabus fits for a certain understanding, then it can be regarded as a
good syllabus’ (I4)
164
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
‘A radical change and a mentality change should be applied… Project courses can be
taught with more hours in a design studio environment to get better results.’ (I1)
‘Tests are not quite beneficial as the industrial design practice still has connections with
crafts’ (I6)
There were also instructors who mentioned that students can benefit from changes in
syllabus.The following citations from interviews indicate that a change in the syllabus can
solve the weaknesses they mention.
‘ITU was quite weak in terms of visual presentation, it could be improved with more
course hours on these subjects… Students (of MU) can be provided with a deeper
understanding of research techniques’ (I2)
‘The way that syllabus applied may be changed to get better results from project
courses’ (I3)
‘Syllabuses can be made more up to date… Artistic environment in a university may
affect students’ perception.’ (I5)
These insights provide varied views on how industrial design can be improved in
universities that accept students with different backgrounds. There are instructors
claiming that change of an understanding could have a greater effect than a change in
syllabus. It may be inferred that the way students are elected can be regarded as a part of
an understanding, as some instructors hint that the way students elected has an effect on
the skills they can build during their education.
Discussion and Further Studies
Findings of this study support the idea that students coming from different
backgrounds have a different approach to product design process. This result also supports
other studies done previously in the field (Ekmekçioğlu, 2012).
One of the contribution of this work is analyzing the differences among students,
through different types of problem solving methods that are seen in product design
process. This way, different students’ behaviours are coded and evaluated in relationship
with their backgrounds. It was seen that students that are accustomed to mathematical
problem solving were more comfortable with determined problem solving, as both of
these problem solving techniques mostly deal with objective data. On the other hand,
students with an artistic background struggle with determined data, as they are more
accustomed to undetermined problem solving practices.
Interview with instructors also hint two different approaches to logic and action of
students during a design process. Students with artistic background mostly express and
develop their ideas through drawings, sometimes in expense of a prior research study.
Their actions may be evaluated through reflective practice as in crafts, where the object is
designed through making; by doing visual experimentation on the object to develop a
product. On the other hand, students with a scientific training background tend to follow a
more linear approach; they start with a research and scenario building activity and try to
build a form out of their findings. Most of the time the form itself comes out of a
functional detail solving process.
165
ILGIM EROGLU & CIGDEM KAYA
As stated in the beginning of the article, student background is one of the factors
shaping the difference between science-based universities and art-based universities
delivering industrial design education. Such demystification may help educators to cover
the missing parts in the curriculum.
In further studies, two different approaches identified in this research may be
theorized as ‘a crafting approach’ versus ‘research based approach’ to problem solving to
understand students’ activities better in order to build a stronger link with their
backgrounds. Most of the students who prepare to artistic examinations make hands-on
drawings within given contexts on daily basis. This approach may be discussed with crafts
activities, where form is explored and developed in a certain context by drawing and
making. Here, problem formulation may be as important as its solution. To understand the
structure in artificial world, analytical physical observation is necessary. This can be
regarded as problem formulation. Afterwards the artificial world is replicated by drawing.
This can be regarded as problem solving. This kind of holistic and kinesthetic exploration
maybe the reason why some students feel more comfortable when tackling with
undefined problems. Opposite to this, students who prepare for scientific examinations
concentrate on finding a suitable solution to a concrete problem. Sometimes students are
encouraged to build logical connections between several contexts (like formulas or basic
principles) in order to find a solution to a determined problem. This differences may lead
to different design approaches that are explored by Norman and Verganti (2014) within
incremental and radical innovative design concepts.
The differences between students’ preparation activities may be documented through
interviews with their high school instructors, who prepare them for university exams. Their
instructors’ definition of success may provide a clue about the way students head
themselves. This way, their approach to a design problem may be analyzed better to
evaluate their product design outcomes. Another exploration may be done through
interviews with independent evaluators to understand the characteristics of students’
projects from different universities. This maybe done through blind review of project
presentations of students from these universities. Since different design approaches are
defined in literature (Norman and Verganti, 2014), a stronger relation may be built
between students activities prior to university education and their product design project
outcomes.
References
Braun, V.; Clarke,V. 2006. Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology. 3. 77-101.
Buchanan, R. 1992. Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues. 8(2), 14-19.
Caves, R. E. 2000. Creative Industries: Contracts Between Art and Commerce.. Harvard
University Press.
Cross, N. 1990. The Nature and Nurture of Design Ability. Design Studies. 11:3, 127-140.
Cross, N. 2001. Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. 17:3,
49-55.
Cross, N. 2004. Expertise in Design: An Overview. Design Studies. 25:5, 427-441.
Dorst, K. 2003.The Problem of Design Problems. Expertise in Design. Design Thinking
Research Symposium 6. 17-19 November. University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
166
Art or Math? Two Schools, One Profession: Two Pedagogical Schools In Industrial Design
Education In Turkey
Dorst, K. 2011. The Core of Design Thinking and It’s Application. Design Studies. 32, 521532.
D'Zurilla, Thomas J.; Goldfried, Marvin R. 1971. Problem solving and behavior modification.
Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Vol 78(1), Aug 1971, 107-126.
Ekmekçioğlu, D. 2012. Bir Meslek İki Farklı Profil: Türkiye’de Endsütriyel Tasarımı
Eğitimindeki Farklı Öğrenci Kabul Sistemleri ve Yansımaları. ITU Graduate School of
Science Engineering and Technology, Unpublished Master Thesis.
Eroğlu,I; Kaya, Ç. 2014. A Study on Effects of Student Admission Methods on Students’
Design Practices. DesignEd Asia Conference 2014, 2-3 December, Hong Kong.
Gibbons, H. 2007. Teaching Dance: The Spectrum of Styles. AuthorHouse, Indiana.
Ho, C.; Eastman, C. 2006. An Investigation of 2D and 3D Spatial and Mathematical Abilities.
Design Studies, 27. 505-524.
Norman, D.A.; Verganti, R. 2014. Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research vs.
Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues. 30:1, 78-96.
Resnick, L. 2001. Making America Smarter: The Real Goal of School Reform. In Costa, (Ed)
Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking: Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development
Rittel, H.W.J, and Webber, M.M. 1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy
Sciences. 4,155-169.
Robson, C. 2002. Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner,
Blackwell Publishing
Schoenfeld, A. H. 1992. Learning to Think Mathematically: Problem Solving, Metacognition
and
Sense Making in Mathemetics, In: D. Grouws (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Mathematics
Teaching and Learning, New York: Macmillan.
URL 1 http://www2.msgsu.edu.tr/msu/pages/502.aspx
URL 2 http://id.metu.edu.tr/en/metu-department-of-industrial-design/department-ofindustrial-design
URL 2 http://eut.gsf.marmara.edu.tr/genel-bilgiler/
URL 3 http://www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr/en/history.html
167
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design
Education
Maarit MÄKELÄ* and Teija LÖYTÖNEN
Aalto University, Finland
*maarit.makela@aalto.fi
Abstract: Within art and design, education material experimentations are an
integral part of learning processes. However, the attention to materiality in
educational studies has been rather limited. In this study, we discuss materiality
in design education and explore the relation of materiality to learning, that is,
how learning is entangled with or an effect of the engagement with the
material. We base our review on an MA course called Design Exploration and
Experimentation (DEE) organised at Aalto University, School of Arts, Design and
Architecture, Finland. The paper is based on ethnographic notes and
documentation gathered from the participating design students from the course
during a five-year period of time, including courses from 2010 to 2014. By
describing some critical elements, the paper sheds light on the role and
relevance of materiality in learning within design education. Based on the study,
we propose that physical environment and materiality have agency in learning
processes and that together they create a performative learning space. In such a
space, learning becomes a more unpredictable and experimental process,
opening up new, emergent possibilities.
Keywords: Design education, material experimentation, learning, curriculum
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Introduction
Learning is a concept central to education, but it is still extremely slippery and even
abstract in meaning. On the one hand, learning has been understood as a solely individual
process: an individual is conceived of as the basic unit of knowing, and learning as a
process in which the individual agent acquires knowledge. On the other hand, learning has
been understood as a process of socialising into a community, and to function according to
its socially negotiated norms (Sfard, 1998; Lave & Wenger, 1991). Thus, it is now a
commonplace in educational theory to understand learning as more than the purely
individual, cognitive and acquisitive process. Notions of learning as socio-cultural
participation that is embedded in particular joint activity, tools and routines have become
widespread in educational writings and practices (Fenwick et al. 2011, pp. 5-6).
In addition, learning as socio-cultural participation has been elaborated into
understanding it as knowledge creation. Here, learning focuses on activities organised
around the systematic and deliberate pursuit of creating or developing something new –
such as concepts or design artefacts (Paavola & Hakkarainen 2005; Hakkarainen et al.,
2004). Alongside these developments, a notion of practice as an enactment of and a
medium for learning has been argued. This ‘practice turn’ weaves learning together with
action; that is, learning is entangled with the everyday activities in a kind of knowing-inpractice manner (e.g. Gherardi 2011; Gherardi & Strati 2013; Nicolini 2012). Despite these
new re-conceptualisations, an element still often relegated to the background in
educational theories and practices is the material part of learning, that is, how learning is
entangled with or an effect of the engagement with the material, both human and nonhuman (Fenwick et al., 2011; Fenwick & Nerland, 2014).
Within art and design, education material experimentations are an integral part of
learning processes. However, the attention to materiality in educational studies has been
rather limited. Related studies (Welch et al., 2000; MacDonald & al. 2007; Anning 1997)
show that rather than using sketching, novice designers explore their mental images using
three-dimensional materials. For example, Malcolm Welch & al. (2000, p. 142) discovered
that designing for simple three-dimensional forms may start from sketching, but modelling
is often used when developing the idea further. Furthermore, they considered materiality
important when generating and communicating ideas as it provides an informal and
supportive way to develop the ideas further.
In this study, we elaborate the discussion on materiality especially within a university
context. By describing some critical elements within a specific design course, this paper
sheds light on the role and relevance of materiality in learning, especially in design
education. We base our review on an MA course called Design Exploration and
Experimentation (DEE) organised at Aalto University, School of Arts, Design and
Architecture, Finland. The core idea of the intensive eight-week course is to support
students in managing their own creative processes, for example via documentation,
reflection and discussions. For most students, material experimentations play a significant
role in the formation and framing of the concept and the expected final artefact.
The DEE course has been previously discussed in two publications. In their study, Krista
Kosonen and Maarit Mäkelä (2012) discuss the overall purpose and structure of the
course, and examine how the platform supported one student in framing and managing his
individual creative processes. They describe how one student experimented with weaving
169
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
and woodwork, with the final output of the course resulting in a weaving house, a
combination of looms and house. Concurrently, when connected to the reflective process,
the making of the construction enabled the student to negotiate his identity as a designer
in a profound way. Kosonen and Mäkelä conclude that by offering both freedom and
structure, the course encouraged the students to experiment with new materials and
media, but also personal topics while working (ibid., 237).
Camilla Groth and Maarit Mäkelä (2014) in their study on the knowing body in material
explorations during the DEE course suggest that the students’ previous material
experiences gathered through the body, guided them in material explorations even before
the actual physical manipulation of the materials began. For example, tactile impressions
and images of materials were key elements both in the choice of materials as well as in
making sense of the materials and their behaviour. They describe how the manipulation of
materials helped to resolve complicated spatial design problems as the design was taken
into the lived experience through material prototypes. They propose that physical material
explorations strengthen the students’ confidence in managing new materials and offer
them a wider toolkit to work with in their future endeavours. 19
In our paper, we focus on a novel perspective to the Design Exploration and
Experimentation course. Instead of looking at the material experimentations as such, we
will explore the relation of materiality to learning, that is, how learning is entangled with
or an effect of the engagement with the material. We begin by providing a brief overview
of the course. Thereafter, we describe the methodological approach of the study, namely
at-home ethnography. Based on insights gained through this approach supported by the
DEE students’ written reflections, we then give some specific accounts that show the
critical role that materiality and physical organisation of the environment played in the
learning process. We conclude by briefly discussing the challenges for university teachers
in relation to materiality in educational processes.
Design exploration and experimentation as an
educational platform
The DEE course was designed in 2009 to complement the Industrial and Strategic Design
education in the Design Department at Aalto University School of Arts, Design and
Architecture Helsinki, Finland. At that time the Master programme’s curriculum was
lacking proper studio-based practices, and individual design projects had been mainly
replaced by group assignments. In our view, this resulted in a too narrow concept of both
design and learning, highlighting a linear process of problem-solving exercises where a
potential solution is specified and an outcome is achieved through a series of processes,
such as specifying, researching, prototyping, testing, refining, and evaluating. As noted by
19
In addition to the aforementioned studies a special issue in Studies in Material Thinking (2014,
volume 11) was dedicated to design education in higher education. The papers suggest the gradual
emergence of new directions in design education, which position the designer and design itself as a
more flexible and relevant response to continuing global changes. The many articles illustrate on the
one hand some notions on the materializations of design education and on the other hand the
relation of learning within natural environments.
170
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Patrick Dillon and Tony Howe (2007, p. 71), together these processes constitute one kind
of design model, which also affects design education.
We believed that the design students could benefit from handling processes typical to fine
art. They often proceed through the personal, unique expression of each individual
student, highlighting exploratory ways in design, which are fluid, sometimes chaotic, often
complex and frequently involving a large element of uncertainty (see also McDonnell 2011,
p. 569; Dillon & Howe, 2007, p. 71.) Hence, one of the aims in the DEE course was to bring
together art and design, and experiment how artistic and ‘designerly’ ways of working can
feed one another (Kosonen & Mäkelä 2012, p. 229).
We use the term ‘platform’ to emphasise that the course utilises the premises offered by
the university profoundly: the students receive support from the professor, lecturer and
course assistant involved, who have their background either in industrial design or studiobased design disciplines and design research. Other professionals, including different
workshop facilitators, such as studio masters in wood, glass and ceramics, are also invited
to help the students in their experimentations. For enhancing the material
experimentations, the platform utilises different physical environments, including the
diversity of studio environments that the university offers. The other important physical
environment is a trip to a destination. Thus, the platform builds on extensive mutual
interaction with different stakeholders both inside and outside the university.
The foundation of the DEE course can be related to the field of practice-led research
initially developed within art and design universities. In the design context, practice-led
research was originally closely connected to studio-based doctoral degrees with the
intention of opening up and studying creative processes from within by a designerresearcher herself (e.g. Mäkelä 2003; Turpeinen 2005; Nimkulrat 2009). As Kosonen &
Mäkelä (2012, pp. 228 and 236) have noted, the course can be considered an educational
implication of practice-led research, in which research and learning is intertwined. It
emphasises the use of hands-on work and the dialogue between a person and medium.
The overall structure of the DEE platform
The creative process during the DEE course is supported by providing a framework
including numerous assignments related to becoming inspired, documenting the process
and then reflecting upon it. The course begins by introducing the predefined themes,
including the course topic and the destination of the related five-day excursion. This
prepares the ground for initiating the creative processes, during which the students create
concrete artefacts based on their interests, their self-defined individual design tasks and
means for achieving the desired outcomes.
From its inception in 2010, the eight-week DEE course has been arranged five times,
each consisting of approximately 12 students. The international groups of male and female
participants have represented different design fields, most of the students having their
educational background in industrial design. However, the course has also gathered
students from other design fields, such as textile, spatial and furniture design, as well as
from the field of fine arts. The students have been from early twenties to late thirties of
age and represented seventeen nationalities.
171
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
The course begins with the students presenting themselves and their take on the
selected course theme20 of the respective year. This gives the students some
understanding of the group that they are going to work with. Thereafter, the students are
divided into smaller groups to prepare presentations on the geographical and cultural
features of the location of the forthcoming excursion 21. The aim of the trip is to generate
inspiration around the selected theme, gather related information and also to create group
cohesion.
After the excursion, the course progresses following a repeated weekly structure. It
forms a supportive framework for individual creative processes: Mondays, Wednesdays
and Fridays are reserved for individual work, enabling the students to develop their ideas,
reflect on their process, and complete assignments; Tuesdays and Thursdays are for
collective activities: sharing and discussing the progress of the evolving creative process,
followed by feedback from peers and teachers. In addition, these days are reserved for
lectures and discussions as well as for visits to local museums and galleries. To enable
proper documentation and reflection, the students document their experimental processes
in three steps. Working diaries are kept throughout the course for working on emerging
experiences, ideas and thoughts. Weekly reflections are assignments through which the
students reflect on and describe their progress, problems, insights and other issues related
to their creative processes on a weekly basis. The reflection is a one-page compilation
based on the more thorough working diary. The final reflections conclude the students’
creative processes. Related insights and critical reflections on the entire learning process
are encouraged. The aim of the documentation and reflection is to make the creative
process visible, allowing the student to return to any part of the process afterwards (see
also Mäkelä & Nimkulrat, 2011; Pedgley, 2007).
At the beginning of each week, the students hand their weekly reflections over to the
teachers. This allows the teachers to keep track of the sometimes sensitive and fragile
creative processes, and offer suitable support when necessary. In weekly presentations,
students share the status of their individual processes with the whole group. After reading
the weekly reflections, the teachers are prepared to give relevant feedback to the students
in the discussions that follow the student presentations. The entire design of the DEE
platform supports a collective learning process. The course allows the participating
students to share their own and follow their peer’s creative processes, as well as to reflect
on their working approach and progress in relation to the others. Throughout the course,
there is also the possibility for personal tutoring or mentoring with the teachers.
Having now illustrated the background and overall structure of the platform, we move
on to describe the methodological approach of our study.
Methodological approach
This paper is based on teaching practice from 2010 to 2014 in the DEE course with five
different groups of design students. During this time, one of the authors, namely Maarit
Mäkelä, has been deeply engaged with the course. She also, with lecturer Simo Puintila,
initially designed the course and has taught in it in each year. The other author, Teija
20
The theme has changed each year, and thus far they have included The Roots of Culture (2010),
Identity (2011), Family (2012), Faith (2013) and Journey (2014).
21 The destination has changed yearly, varying from northern Finland (Sodankylä 2010, Luosto 2014),
to southern Finland (Espoo 2012) and eastern Finland (Karelia 2011, Heinävesi 2013).
172
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Löytönen, a teacher and scholar in university pedagogy in the arts at Aalto University,
joined the process of writing this paper by focusing on methodological issues and
theoretical discussions. Throughout the five DEE courses, Maarit Mäkelä made careful
observations of students by following their processes in shared discussions, and one-toone tutorials. The observations are supported by rich data from the courses, including
students’ working diaries, written weekly reflections, final reflections and visual
documentations of related exhibitions. This paper draws from the field-based
ethnographic data that was assembled throughout the years: it is thus an ethnographic
account of the relation of materiality to learning within the DEE course. Ethnography here
is understood as:
a process of creating and representing knowledge (about society, culture and
individuals) that is based on ethnographers’ own experiences. It does not claim to
produce an objective or truthful account of reality, but should aim to offer versions of
ethnographers’ experiences of reality that are as loyal as possible to the context,
negotiations and intersubjectivities through which the knowledge was produced. (Pink,
2009, p. 8; see also Pink, 2007, p. 22)
The ethnographic approach in this study can be specified as at-home ethnography
(Alvesson, 2009, 2003; see also Halstead et al., 2008; Löytönen, forthcoming) in the sense
that we describe a cultural setting to which we belong. As Mats Alvesson has noted (2009,
p. 160), at-home ethnography draws attention to one’s own cultural context, but, rather
than placing oneself and one’s experiences at the centre, it is concerned with what goes on
around oneself. In this sense, at-home ethnography differs from other ethnographical
approaches, such as autoethnography (e.g., see Holman Jones et al., 2013). At-home
ethnography, then, is ‘a study and a text in which the researcher-author describes a
cultural setting to which s/he has a ‘natural access’ and in which s/he is an active
participant, more or less on equal terms with other participants’ (Alvesson, 2009, p. 159).
Hence, our roles, in addition to those of teachers and scholars, include being ‘observing
participants’ (Alvesson, 2009, p. 159), and the observations concern the question of what
goes on during the Design Exploration and Experimentation process.
At-home ethnography can be approached in several empirical ways. One approach
follows a more traditional way of doing ethnographic fieldwork, which consists of planned
and systematic data collection, where the research interest is decided upon in advance. In
our study, we are following a less structured form of at-home ethnography, one that uses
an emergent-spontaneous study that begins when something interesting occurs. With such
an approach, the researcher explores something familiar in a new light: ‘The idea is that a
consistent, long-term scan of what one is experiencing produces a more extended set of
incidents or an especially rich and interesting event calling for analysis’ (Alvesson 2009, p.
165).
In our study, Maarit’s observations during the DEE course and our joint informal
ponderings around the question of learning in design education led us to go through the
students’ documentations and reflections in detail from the perspective of materiality in
relation to learning. Our ethnographic description explores something quite familiar yet
seen in a new light. Thus, some specific incidents – acts, actors, events, and situations –
that made us realise the specificities of the materiality within the learning processes are
brought into focus (Alvesson, 2009, p. 165). As Alvesson continues: ‘The trick is more a
173
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
matter of accomplishing a description and insightful, theoretically relevant ideas and
comments out of the material’ (p. 162). At-home ethnography in this study therefore
constitutes theoretical developments that are well grounded in experiences and
observations within and on the DEE process.
Materialising learning in design education
The overall purpose of the DEE course is to create a challenging environment for action
where the student has the courage to experiment with one’s ideas with a brave and openminded attitude. The learning outcomes of the course are not about specific artistic or
design skills or knowledge. Instead, they focus on the learning process, during which the
student is expected to: develop control over the creative process by documentation and
run it according to the schedule; combine a creative process and free expression in a way
that by the end of the course the student is capable of introducing concrete artefacts
related to the chosen topic; and be able to reflect on one’s own creative process in a
written form.
The core of the course, thus, is an open-ended process that supports material
experimentations and free expression around the given theme. The approach is
characteristic to artists, who aim to keep the creative process open, reframing it several
times, and letting it be influenced by surprises and insights that take place during the
process (Kosonen & Mäkelä, 2012, p. 230). In the course context, design experimentation
begins to make sense as the creative process proceeds and the students begin to
crystallise their ideas in visual and material formats. Towards the end of the course, the
focus switches from experimentation to careful planning and realisation of the selected
idea (ibid., p. 232-233). This results in the creation of the final artefact and its presentation
in the public exhibition (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Different steps in Linda’s food-related creative process from the DEE 2014 course:
showing material experiments in a group meeting (a); constructing the work from dyed
crackers (b); the exhibition in Design Forum Showroom Helsinki (c). Photos Maarit Mäkelä
(a) and Krista Kosonen (b and c).
In the following section, we will describe some specific incidents and phenomena to
illustrate how, through the diverse assignments and working sites, the material becomes
an integral element in the learning processes. Instead of specific learning outcomes, we
will focus on the learning process, since the course aims to enhance the handling of the
creative process by the various means described earlier. We also find it challenging to
174
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
depict learning through actual changes (or new understandings) in artistic or design
knowledge and skills within such a short period of time. However, it is possible to delineate
some specific incidents within the process, that is, in the ways the students actually
worked and in the encounters with the self-defined materials.
Physical environment matters
One of the most important components of the DEE platform is the five-day excursion to a
theme-related location. It consists of visits within the local surroundings and lectures
related to the theme of the platform as well as to the destination. During the excursion,
teachers and students share thoughts and ideas in informal settings, such as in the sauna
and during dinners (Kosonen & Mäkelä 2012, p. 231). The main purpose of the trip is to
provide an inspiring and safe environment that supports the students in initiating their
creative processes and, throughout the course, in discussing the emerging concerns
related to their diverse processes.
As an example of how the environment has an effect or agency in the learning process, we
will next provide a more detailed account from the excursion that took place in 2013. The
main reason for selecting the destination, Heinävesi, was that it is considered a site where
spirituality and religious monuments are a fundamental part of the local culture. Thus, this
particular eastern part of Finland offered suitable premises for the topic of the course,
which was Faith. During the excursion, we visited the New Valamo Orthodox monastery
and the Lintula Holy Trinity Convert.
The group was accommodated in an old primary school consisting of two big lecture rooms
and a kitchen. The building was situated in a small village and was surrounded by a
meadow, a sauna and a nearby lake. The place served as a base camp to explore the
surrounding cultural and natural environment. The surrounding environment also enabled
a diversity of informal outdoor activities (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Igloo (a); Part of the group enjoying outdoor activities in front of our basecamp building in
Heinävesi (b); Sauna (c). Photos Lewis Just (a) and Jaana Lönnroos (b) and Nina Chen c).
In her final reflection, Nina, a Canadian student, reported the significance of the
excursion, and particularly the sauna experience, in the following way:
What I found most interesting and valuable in this expedition were the opportunities to
bond with other classmates. We did a lot of activities together, building an igloo, building a
175
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
snowman, Saunaing, Avantoing22, Making Karjalanpiirakka23 and more… The most
memorable moment on this trip was our nightly saunas. It was a ritual where we… all
together in the sauna bathe, reflect on the day and converse about anything… I realized
that this significant event of being nude in front of the people that I barely know somewhat
allowed me to truly be myself. It was not until the very last night of the trip where we went
to the community sauna… that… I become aware of the liberation that the sauna
experience has given me.
Sauna was part of the course programme but, in addition, the surrounding
environment inspired students to get involved in initiative activities. In his final reflection,
Lewis, who came from Scotland, reports on how he became involved in building an igloo
(Figure 2a):
When in Heinävesi there was time to have for our own… With the help of another student…
we started constructing an igloo… The next day we finished building the igloo and the
locals who were hosting us generously offered a reindeers hide so that we could sleep in
the igloo and not get cold.
In Lewis’ case, the exciting experiment with nature gave direction to his entire project.
He decided to continue with the thoughts he encountered when seeing the extravagance
of the relics and artefacts in Valamo Monastery’s private museum. In his final reflection, he
reports that:
I wanted to take the relics of the Orthodox Church and recreate them to fit with the
teachings of the religion. My aim was to make the aesthetics fit with the philosophy. I
decided to redesign a cross, a chalice and an incense burner the way Jesus would have
made them.
During the course, Lewis spent many periods surrounded by nature for redesigning the
selected artefacts, first in the Helsinki region and finally three days in Nuuksio Park – a
natural park near Helsinki. The new artefacts were made from wood that he selected
directly from the forest (Figure 3). He crafted the wood using manual labour. In his final
reflection, he reports on the unique experience he encountered during the excursion: ‘It all
felt a bit surreal, being in the middle of a forest, alone, naked in a sauna ‘working’ on a
project’.
22
23
A hole in the ice for winter swimming.
A traditional Finnish pie from the region of Karelia.
176
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Figure 3
First carving experiments with wood in the Helsinki region (a); Crafting an incense burner
from wood found in Nuuksio forest (b); Redesigned artefacts in Aalto University’s Atski
Gallery (c). Photos Lewis Just.
Nina’s and Lewis’ reflective comments illustrate how the specific physical environment had
an effect not only on the theme of the course (Faith) and the chosen material (wood) but
also on the learning processes and ways of working. Lewis’ entire DEE project was based
on his encounters with the environment and the informal outdoor experiences in
Heinävesi. For Nina, the most valuable thing was bonding with other classmates in
informal settings, especially in the sauna. For her, this offered an opportunity to connect
with others within the learning community, and these intimate relations made her realise
herself as a person, ‘to truly be’ herself.
The experiences described above are not aimed at generalising the learning within the DEE
course. Instead, the students’ subtle descriptions made us aware of the significance that
the physical environments and the social arrangements might have within the course. In
fact, Na’ilah Suad Nasir and Jamal Cooks (2009), in their study on learning settings,
identified three core resources that influence learning: the material, relational and
ideational resources. By ‘material resources’, they refer to the physical environment where
an activity takes place, and by ‘relational resources’ to the positive relationships with
others within the activity. The ‘ideational resources’ refer to ‘the ideas about oneself and
one’s relationship to and place in the practice and the world, as well as ideas about what is
valued or good’ (ibid., p. 47).
Physical environments and spaces, then, have affordances to learning processes: they not
only create inclusions or exclusions but also open or limit the possibilities for new
practices, knowledge(s), networks and relationships to emerge (see also Fenwick et al.,
2011 p. 11). When students connect to each other within a specific physical environment,
space and/or practice, they come to define themselves as members of the learning
community and the practice itself – such as design. These connections may arise
spontaneously within the practice, but they can also be crafted, for example, by arranging
opportunities for informal activities – such as organising the course-related journey and
including the site specific features, such as the sauna.
Matter matters – Case Gabriela
Gabriela, whose background is in industrial design and whose roots are in Uruguay,
participated in the 2013 excursion as well. Not having tight connections to any religion, she
found the visits to the monastery and the nunnery uncomfortable. In her final reflection,
this issue was reported more explicitly:
… which was striking to me, is that everything was ruled and scheduled, from timetables to
ceremonies, silence time or amount of glasses of wine. There was no space for spontaneity,
and I saw the nunnery’s bee’s wax fabric as a materiality of it.
The experience reminded Gabriela of Paul Klee’s series of works Imperfect Angels, as
these angels had humane features and were thus imperfect in their nature. By following
this idea, Gabriela decided to create her own series of imperfect angels by utilising the
beeswax material she faced in the nunnery. In her final reflection, she writes that her work
177
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
had two approaches, one being emotional and the other more rational, that is, to ‘liberate
the bee’s wax and let the material be in a more free way that in the candle shape’. When
starting the material experimentation with the wax, Gabriela had only an initial idea for
the work. At the beginning of her working process, she felt frustrated, as she discovered
that she could not control the material, nor the evolving shape (Figure 4). In her fifth
weekly reflection, she writes:
The beeswax is not a docile material at all. I hated it in some moments and the results I
obtained were not what I was expecting. Anyway I found something interesting in it… I
would say that working with beeswax is easy to reach imperfection, and to lose the control.
This is a fact that I found important: going on from my comfort zone and realizing that I
was not able to control the material is quite disturbing but also fascinating. Assuming the
loss of control is a way of assuming imperfection.
After accepting the essence of this unfamiliar material and finding some new
techniques to cope with it, her attitude toward the working changed. In the sixth weekly
reflection, she writes that:
… accepting accidents as enhancer and not as limiting, allowed me to both develop the idea
I was working with and enjoy the process of materialising the idea. In a way I feel more free
moulding now, and instead of trying to force the material to achieve a predesigned shape, I
try to find a balanced dialog between the material where both guide each other.
She realised that when working with the material, she was able to better understand
the requisite ways of working that she was searching for. After finishing some bodies for
the angels with beeswax, she started material experimentation for finding suitable
material and technique for the wings. The most interesting results came out of porcelain,
and she decided to equip the entire ‘population of angels’ with porcelain wings. Her aim
was to develop a thin porcelain structure as it would allow her to play with the material’s
transparency. In her final reflection, she reports on how she combined a variety of
materials with porcelain to create a diversity of textures:
I have been challenging the porcelain in order to obtain very thin pieces allowing me to play
its transparency. At the beginning I tried different ‘traditional’ techniques but later I started
to explore whatever appeared in my mind. I decided to let spontaneous and ‘out of rules’
experiments take their own way, and they were endless.
Figure 4
Beeswax candles in the nunnery in Heinävesi (a); Moulding melted beeswax (b); Broken
angel with porcelain wings (c). Photos Lewis Just (a) and Gabriela Rubini (b and c).
178
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
It is evident that Gabriela’s working process enabled her to find, experiment and adopt
new ways of working that were based on accident and freedom. Furthermore, the courage
to adapt to the new attitude and the readiness to accept the unique results this approach
provides increased as her creative process proceeded. Based on Gabriela’s case example,
we suggest that the material experimentations are integrally entangled in her creative
process: starting from the very beginning, this entanglement proceeds via thinking and
sketching towards the final artefact (Figure 5). That is, the material formation does not
come after the ideation as a separate phase of giving form to the emergent idea. In fact,
the materiality is simultaneous with and intrinsic to the creative process itself: materiality
resists or imposes challenges and constraints on her ideas, ways of working and attitudes
(see also Gherardi & Perotta, 2013, p. 240).
Figure 5
Gabriela’s installation Imperfect Angels in Aalto University’s Atski Gallery. Photo Sami
Kiviharju.
In Gabriela’s experimentation, the shape was the consequence of the moulding experience
with the beeswax, and she discovered that the material gave her more than what she had
expected. The final work, then, emerges from the process of experimenting with
materiality, feeling the materials and allowing the material to guide the creative process
towards the final artefact. Thus, the material had an active role in Gabriela’s creative
process: it had a kind of agency. Tara Fenwick et al. (2011, p. 4), in fact, point out that
material things are performative and not inert – they are matter and they matter.
This thought is in line with the notion of vital materiality, a power that cannot be
separated from matter and where materiality is seen as the interface between human and
the (non-living) physical world (Bennett, 2010, p. 56). A craftsperson, or anyone who has
an intimate connection with matter, encounters a creative materiality with incipient
tendencies and propensities, which are variably enacted. The direction in which this power
179
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
takes the creator depends on what types of other powers, emotions and bodies are
present in the process. In Gabriela’s case, this means that while working in the studio, she
was able to develop a deep understanding of the ‘vitality’ of a material, and thus had a
productive ‘collaboration’ with it (see also ibid., p. 60).
Conclusions
The aim of this study has been to open up discussion on materiality within higher
education. By describing some critical elements within a specific design course, we have
given examples of the possible roles and relevancies that materiality might have within
learning processes, especially in design education. The key argument of this paper is that
pedagogical relationships go beyond the teacher and the curriculum, and that the agency
of materiality has a pedagogical effect. Thus, we propose that materiality teaches in its
own way, and the design of the learning setting has an important role.
One of the key elements in the learning setting is that the students find their material
experimentations meaningful. Laamanen and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen (2014, 150) in their
study on constraining an open-ended design task in the context of textile education
describe how the students experienced uncomfortable feelings related to crafting when
they had no end result or other clear goal in mind. The students taking part in the Design
Exploration and Experimentation course have not reported similar feelings; thus, we
believe that in our case the open-ended experimentation is conceived of as meaningful.
We propose that this is due to the fact that the students are expected to create an artefact
to be presented in the final exhibition. In this respect, we believe that even though the
timeline of the course is tight, the exhibition has a crucial role as it has acted as an
important driver for the individual processes.
During their learning processes, the students are in relation to other human
participants, that is students and teachers, as well as to the prescribed curricular contents
and assignments. In addition to these relationships, the students develop relations to the
nonhuman, wider material world. In our case, the most important material world consisted
of a variety of self-defined materials, such as beeswax, porcelain and wood. With the
above described case examples, we have demonstrated that matter can have an
unanticipated or unexpected contribution to the learning processes – and, as evident in
our case study, to the final artefacts.
In addition to the pedagogical agency of matter, we propose that physical environment
as part of the material world also has agency, thus creating a performative learning space.
We consider this space not ‘a static container into which teachers and students are
poured, or a backcloth against which action takes places, but a multiplicity that is
constantly being enacted by simultaneous practices-so-far’ (Fenwick et al., 2011, p. 11).
Hence, the performative learning space affects learning in its own right.
With this study, we want to challenge the current notions of learning and curriculum,
which often focus on predefined and prescribed learning outcomes with the emphasis on
specific subjects, contents, procedures or behaviours (Davis & Sumara, 2007; Osberg &
Biesta, 2008). We hope that with our study we have been able to offer insights for thinking
about learning through material sensibilities, that is, through becoming sensitive to diverse
material agencies within learning processes.
In this study, we have focused on the agencies particularly related to matter, space and
place. With such an understanding, learning becomes a more unpredictable and
180
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
experimental process, opening up to new, emergent possibilities beyond the already
known. Instead of contributing solely to transmitting knowledge and skills, the teacher’s
role then is to create conditions for the emergent and evolving learning – and to be
prepared to learn herself, alongside the students.
Acknowledgements: We thank all the DEE students, who kindly allowed their
diaries, drawings and written reflections to be examined in this study. We are
also grateful to Simo Puintila and Krista Kosonen for their valuable comments
that enabled us to better explicate the DEE learning environment. This
research was funded by the Academy of Finland (project numbers 266125 and
253589).
References
Alvesson, M. (2003). Methodology for close up studies – struggling with closeness and
closure. Higher Education, 46(2), 167–193.
Alvesson, M. (2009). At-home ethnography: Struggling with closeness and closure. In S.
Ybema, D. Yanow, H. Wels & F.H. Kamsteeg (Eds.), Organizational Ethnography:
Studying the complexity of Everyday Life (pp.156 –174). London: Sage.
Anning, A. (1997). Drawing Out Ideas: Graphicacy and Young Children. International
Journal of Technology and Design Education 7, 219-239.
Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant Matter: A political ecology of things. London: Duke University.
Davis, B. & Sumara, D. (2007). Complexity Science and Education: Reconceptualizing the
Teacher’s Role in Learning. Interchange, 38 (1), 53-67.
Dillon, P. & Howe, T. (2007). An Epistemology of Presence and Reconceptualisation in
Design Education. Interchange, Vol. 38/1, 69–88.
Fenwick, T.; Edwards, R.; Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging Approaches to Educational
Research. Tracing the sociomaterial. London: Routledge.
Fenwick, T. & Nerland, M. (2014). Introduction. Sociomaterial professional knowing, work
arrangements and responsibility. New times, new concepts? In Fenwick, T. & Erland, M.
(eds.) Reconceptualising Professional Learning. Sociomaterial knowledges, practices and
responsibilities. London: Routledge.
Gherardi, S. (2011). Organizational learning: The sociology of practice. In M. EasterbySmith and M.A. Lyles (eds.) Handbook of Organizational Learning and Knowledge
Management (2nd edn). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Gherardi, S. & Perrotta, M. (2013). Doing by Inventing the Way of Doing: Formativeness as
the Linkage of Meaning and Matter. In Carlile, Paul R.; Nicolini, Davide; Langley, Ann;
Tsoukas, Haridimos (eds.). How Matter Matters. Bjects, Artifacts and Materiality in
Organization Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gherardi, S. & Stati, A. (2013). Learning and Knowing in Practice-based Studies. Surrey, UK:
Edward Elgar Publishing.
Groth, C. & Mäkelä, M. (2014). The knowing body in material exploration. The 5th Art of
Research Conference, 26 – 27 November. Helsinki, Aalto University.
Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S. & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked
expertise: Professional and educational 23 perspectives. Advances in Learning and
Instruction Series. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
181
MAARIT MÄKELÄ & TEIJA LÖYTÖNEN
Halstead, N., Hirsch, E., & Okely, J. (2008). Knowing How to Know. Fieldwork and the
Ethnographic Present. New York: Bergham Books.
Holman Jones, S., Adams, T. E., & Ellis, C. (Eds.). (2013). Handbook of Autoethnography.
Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Kosonen, K. & Mäkelä, M. (2012). Designing Platform for Exploring and Reflecting on
Creative Process. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 45, 227-238.
Laamanen, T-K. & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2014). Constraining an open-ended design
task by interpreting sources of inspiration. Art, Design & Communication in Higher
Education 13 (2), 135-156.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Löytönen, T. (forthcoming). Collaborative Inquiry in a Socially Shared Contextual Frame,
Striving Towards Sensible Knowledge Creation on Dance Education. Teachers College
Record.
MacDonald, D.l. & Gustafson, B. & Gentilini, S. (2007). Enhancing children’s drawing in
design technology planning and making. Research in Science & Technological Education
25 (1), 59-75.
McDonnell, J. (2011). Imposition of order: A comparison between design and fine art
practices. Design Studies, 32 (6), 557-572.
Mäkelä, M. (2003). Saveen piirtyviä muistoja. Subjektiivisen luomisprosessin ja sukupuolen
representaatioita. [Memories on Clay: Representations of Subjective Creation Process
and Gender] Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki.
Mäkelä, M. & Nimkulrat, N. (2011). Reflection and Documentation in Practiceled Design
Research. In Koskinen, I. & Härkäsalmi, T. & Mazé, R., & Matthews, B. & Lee, J.-J. (Eds.)
Making Design Matter!, Proceeding of The 4th Nordic Design Research Conference, 29 –
31 May 2011, NORDES, 120-128.
Nicolini, D. (2012). Practice Theory, Work and Organization. An Introduction. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Nimkulrat, N. (2009). Paperness. Expressive material in textile art from artist’s viewpoint.
Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki.
Osberg, D & Biesta, G. (2008). The emergent curriculum: navigating a complex course
between unguided learning and planned enculturation. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
40 (3), 313-328.
Paavola, S & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). The knowledge creation metaphor – An emergent
epistemological approach to learning. Science & Education 14, 537-557.
Pedgley, O. (2007). Capturing and analysing own design activity. Design Studies 28(5), 463483.
Pink, S. (2007). Doing Visual Ethnography (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Pink, S. (2009). Doing Sensory Ethnography. London: Sage.
Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one.
Educational Researcher, 27, 4–13.
Suad Nasir, N. & Cooks, J. (2009). Becoming a Hurdler: How Learning Settings Afford
Identities. Anthropology & Education Quarterly 40, 41-61.
Turpeinen, O. (2005). Merkityksellinen museoesine. Visuaalinen kriittisyys
kulttuurihistoriallisen museon näyttelysuunnittelussa. A meaningful museum object.
182
Enhancing Material Experimentation In Design Education
Critical visuality in cultural history museum exhibitions. Helsinki: University of Art and
Design Helsinki.
Welch, M. & Barlex, D. & Sook Lim, L (2000). Sketching: Friend or Foe to the Novice
Designer? International Journal of Technology and Design Education 10, 125-148.
183
This page is intentionally left blank.
— Chapter 2. —
Design Thinking, Management
and Design Education
This page is intentionally left blank.
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product
Development For School Age Children
Aija FREIMANE
Art Academy of Latvia
aija.freimane@lma.lv
Abstract: Design thinking is determined as one of the must have abilities for
every profession in the XXI century. New product development is a prerogative of
professional designers and engineers, trained to use design thinking, design
research and new product development methods to solve problems, to create
solutions or to face challenges. Research testifies application of professional
designers’ design thinking and new product development training methods in
school age children informal education. Case study analyses problem based
design brief and sustainability personification assignment performance,
effectiveness of applied methods’, process and results in two audiences - 12-14
years old primary school age children and professional design students to find
out the effectiveness and applicability of design thinking, new product
development and design process teaching methods in dissimilar groups.
Results of the case study validate that professional designers’ design thinking,
new product development and design process training methods can be
successfully applied in primary school age education as creative problem solving
and design thinking methods to educate pupils. The paper proposes a question:
what are the future of professional design education and the role of professional
designers, when all professions will be trained to use design thinking as a critical
method?
Keywords: design thinking, design methods, school age children
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
AIJA FREIMANE
Introduction
This study has been driven by the concern to verify feasibility of professional design
training, design thinking and new product development methods effectiveness in
nonprofessional – school age children audience informal education. Could the best
practice of informal education be implemented in the general education of home
economics and technology curriculum as skill and crafts based learning process based on
design thinking and new product development? Could the training of school age children in
design be the possibility to shape knowledgeable user and design audience in the future?
Case study reflects and testifies design thinking and problem based new product
development methods in primary school age children informal education. It verifies
capability of children to innovate new products, as well as systemically perceive and
empirically experience design thinking. This paper questions design concepts as solutions
by school age children and design students performing the same briefs as the case studies.
Methodology
The paper reflects two action research design development case studies based on
design thinking, design process and design methods’ analysis. Action research design
development case studies were performed in years 2012-2015 as:
‘Sustainability personification assignment applying empirical experience’;
‘Problem based new product development’ assignment describing applied methods’
and process (Abbing & van Gessel, 2010).
Both identical case studies as design brief assignments were assigned in two audiences:
The brief ‘Sustainability personification assignment applying empirical experience’
was assigned to the 1st year design master students, whereas ‘Problem based new
product development’ brief was assigned to the 1st year design bachelor students
(age between 21-25 years). Briefs were assigned in the study process;
Primary school age children (age between 11-14 years) without special art and design
education. Both briefs were assigned at informal education during children summer
creativity workshops. Children in these workshops participate annually but for the
first time were doing design thinking and new product development assignments.
Design thinking and problem based design process were used in two design briefs. The
study reflects design process and designed results of both, completely dissimilar
audiences. Innovativeness and the use of technology in new product development by
children were correlated to professional design students and products designed by design
engineers.
Is design thinking a prerogative of design
professionals?
Design is an action - the process, plan and the result - a man-made object or service
(artefact). In design both the 'thinking' and 'doing' are important. If doing as a process of
planning and starting something new, is the design, and, design thinking as a curiosity of
188
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
people have been inherited (Cross, 2011, p. 3), then every day we create a number of
designs for daily and future activities. Planning is systemic thinking and acting process.
Design thinking as creation of personal experience (Lockwood, 2010), is empathetic and
human centered activity, based on co-designing and participation (Mootee, 2013, p. 32). It
forms us not only as human beings, but also creates a framework and system for our lives.
Current political-economic-social system has strengthened not only resource-intensive
production-consumption system but also created enormous poverty where 3.5 million of
the world’s poorest are as wealthy as the world's 67 richest people (Moreno , 2014).
Hence opposite to the competitiveness, pressure individualism and discrimination, design
thinking becomes as one of the must-have abilities for every profession in the XXI century.
Although design thinking is characterized as a set of human qualities and skills, which,
applied professionally, allows better and more strategically designing human-centered
products, services and strategies. Though design thinking as a professional designers’ term
has developed in the Western world, the basic principles of design thinking can be found in
the folklore of national cultures. Empathy and thinking of the consequences of one’s
action, not only in the short term but in the long term, are wisdom of many nations. Wellknown proverbs say: ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you’ and ‘Do what
you do, ponder tip’ - think about the consequences of your actions. These two examples
shows that empathy and human-centered principles as cultural and traditional values have
long been formulated before design thinking was formulated in the last century. Oral
histories of nations are evidence of an ancient practice which was forgotten in the era of
industrialization, urbanization and individualism. Renaissance of local and national
identities as new vernacular design contradicts to global unification. Nation, that is aware
of its cultural and spiritual values, is practicing it and teaching it to the younger generation,
is design thinking nation.
‘Design thinking develops creativity, sensitivity, refines and strengthens social ties’
(Mootee, 2013, p. 64). Curiosity, early manifestation of creativity, sensibility and
friendliness are natural learning and socialization process of a child. Children’s inborn
ability and desire to explore the world is ‘an action-oriented interdisciplinary 'learning by
doing approach' and challenging problem-solving activity’ (Mootee, 2013, p. 54). Design
thinking as cognition and expression of human, team spirit and empathy, has become a
term created by one profession as designer’s apriori skill and ability.
Problem-based new product development and
design process – the basis for an action research
methodology
The view, that ‘new product development is a prerogative of professional designers
and engineers, trained to use design thinking, design research and new product
development methods to solve problems, to create solutions or to face challenges’ (Cross,
2011), it is not correct. The statement defines that design thinking is capability of
professional designers. It contradicts to the view that design thinking as human and
cognitive activity is congenital. There are countless examples that new and innovative
products have been designed by developers without professional design education. It is
189
AIJA FREIMANE
explicit that new product development is not a prerogative of professional designers and
engineers.
New product development is described as a process by which new products are
brought to the market (Ulrich & Epinger, 2004). Product development is more driven by
business, than fulfill the needs of people. The primary goal of product development is
diversification of markets and creation of competitiveness. It is witnessed by the fact that
‘many international Management Programs have capitalized the value of design upon
potential business solutions and strategies’ (Wrigley & Bucolo, 2013).
New product development can be implemented in several ways:
As design process applying creative design thinking, idea generation, product concept
development, modeling and detailing;
Marketing analysis and market research.
The analysis of new product concepts developed by children and students
demonstrates that innovation also occur in the new product development if based on
human needs, not only business or market diversification. It is proven, that ‘Necessity is
the mother of invention’.
Although the simplest design process is described as a three-step system – ‘breaking
problem into pieces, putting the pieces together in a new way and testing to discover the
consequences of putting the new arrangement into practice ‘ (Jones, 1992, p. 63),
designers apply several design and social science methods in new product or service
development, creating solutions of strong or weak defined design problems (Buchanan,
1989). Design that solves the problem partially or incompletely is described as ill-defined,
tame or wicked problems (Rittel, 1972). ‘Wicked problems cannot be simulated in a
laboratory settings’ and fundamentally it is designed so that the problem description
‘correspond to a statement of a solution’ (Rittel, 1972). From the one side the wicked
problem brief leaves the space for creative design expression, from the other – it is opened
to the misleading interpretation.
Design process is prescribed into define, develop and deliver phases. In the first phase
design is specified, in the second - ideation and product development, and the third phase
is linked with product promotion to the market and user. Extensive product development
process outlines preliminary phase, design phase, embodiment and detailing phase and
implementation phase (Eger, Bonnema, Maarten, Lutters, & Van der Voort, 2013, p. 21).
The first two phases are described as a product development to design a model. Detailed
design brief is described by design process, limited to a specific goal of new product
development and identified with external conditions with which the design must be
compatible.
190
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Case studies: Design thinking and new product
development for school age children
Design thinking as empirical experience of sustainable
development – ‘Sustainability personification assignment
applying empirical experience’
Empirical experience assignment of sustainable development reflects sustainability
triple bottom line. Social, environmental and economic (The Economist, 2009) aspects
were supplemented with the political aspect as a powerful of forming global and local
system. Correlation of four complex factors was introduced in empathetic role play by
becoming representative of social, economic, environmental and political groups.
Design students and children where divided into 4 groups of 4-5 persons. The roles –
society, environmentalists, businessmen and politicians were appointed to the each group.
The society, representing social factor of the triple bottom line, was presented as local
community of three generations. Ecological aspects of the triple bottom line were
represented by the group of environmentalists; economy was represented by the group of
businessmen, and political decision making was represented by the group of politicians.
Every participant as an individual, becoming the representative of the group, was asked
to act according to the assigned group role. Businessmen had to visualize the preferred
world from the point of the most profitable ‘lord’ and global business development. The
business person had to think only about its main goal – to enhance profit. The group
representing the society visualizes and creates the world that best suit to the needs for at
least three generations. For this group it is important to fulfill social values, educational
opportunities, recreation and quality of life in balance of job opportunities. The group of
environmentalists visualizes and plans the world from the environmental protection and
ecological conservation aspects, by thinking how to keep unpolluted air and environment,
wild flora and fauna, and safeguarding natural capital. Those, who represent politicians,
visualize the world from the view point of political ideology, its aims, rules and sustained
system.
In the empathetic role-play assignment there was possible to identify the values of an
individual as a micro in relation to the group as a macro view point.
Results of ‘Sustainability personification assignment applying
empirical experience’ brief
Sustainable development personification assignment for four years led to the
conclusion that, both social and environmental activist groups and politician and
businessmen groups have common values, objectives, needs and feasible behavior that
unites these groups ideologically. The assignment affirms that the world in existing
sustainable development definition is assumed from two opposite poles. The
representatives of the society and environmental activists visualize and plan the future
from human – micro view point as ‘bottom-up’ perspective, the politicians and business
group representatives visualize and see people and ecology as resources for profit, using
macro or ‘top-down’ approach. Politicians and business people perceive sustainable
development as an opportunity to ‘get more’ from close political-economic ties as short
term benefit. Society and environmental activists recognize sustainable development as
191
AIJA FREIMANE
'sufficient' model led by empathy and altruism. These two opposite views are personalized
by adults, students and children. It is reflected in Figure 1.
Figure 1 Sustainable development personification; Design master students (age 25) of the Art
Academy of Latvia, 2012, assistant prof. A.Freimane
Exception of sustainable development personification was the only one reflected by
children group who created the world from principles of social entrepreneurship. They
believed that business should share the profit with people. It is reflected in Figure 2.
Figure 2 Sustainable development personification: 11-12 years old children, visualised in Children’s
Creativity camp, 2013, led by A.Freimane
By practicing sustainable development personification assignment, both, young
designers and children, understood that continual life quality and well-being depends on
balancing all interests, values and needs of involved parties. Interests and needs of the
dominator in short-term cannot be superior to long-term interests of the society.
192
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Sustainable development personification assignment enabled young people to
understand mutuality of political-economic and social-environmental aspects in the
formation of present and future sustainable development. Subsequently this assignment
should be performed in the real political and business audiences, asking them to visualize
sustainable development of a desired world and future from the point of view of society
and environmentalists by using empathy and design thinking approach.
‘Problem based new product development’
Design brief ‘Problem based new product development’:
Dental caries is breakdown of teeth. It is caused by demineralization of tooth hard
tissue as a result of bacterial fermentation of organic acids, accumulated on the tooth
surface exposure by produced food residues. When demineralization exceeds potency of
saliva and other factors of re-mineralization, dental caries is initiated. The study of US
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research in 2014, draw to a conclusion that
there are 92% percent of adults with caries in permanent teeth in the age group of 20-64
years, regardless of educational background (http://www.nidcr.nih.gov, 2014). It indicates
that diversity of products developed as a market diversification or the business goals
create the fluxion of products rather than solutions of problem - reducing causes of tooth
decay. Therefore there is a need to design a solution of increasing dental caries and
preventive oral hygiene.
The goal of problem based new product development was defined as wicked problem
design brief. External conditions were glossed in order to be able to analyze the work
progress. Both audiences, in the second - develop or design phase, were asked to think and
to act behind prescribed design brief and to include in the product development
technologies. External conditions had to be revealed for the sake of innovativeness.
The same brief was performed in two audiences, in groups of 3-4, using specifically
prescribed methods: expert interviews to become familiar with the sector; brainstorming
as part of creative design development and stimulates to produce many ideas as quickly as
possible (Jones, 1992). The methods did not include research of user needs. The
assignment was performed in five hours, followed by the product concept presentation.
In the first - 'define' or 'preliminary phase', children and students analyzed their
personal experiences and performed express telephone interviews with experts -dentists
or dental hygienists in order to learn about dental problems, causes that creates caries and
current opportunities to avoid them both preventively or medically. In the second - 'define'
or 'design phase' groups performed conceptualization of ideas and modulation of selected
product. Both audiences were encouraged to apply technologies in the new product
concept development process. Without this children and students designed product
concepts were more traditional. Although the wicked design brief leaves the space for
creative imagination, it does not encourage directly thinking outside of the box.
The results of children and student designed new product concepts are presented in
this paper as cases numbered 1-5. Since the children audience performed particular
assignment beforehand, they did not know anything about students designed new product
concepts. Unlike children, students, shortly before product concept presentations, got to
know children developed product concepts. It crucially changed the final performance of
the product case 5 that was inspired by children's futuristic nanotechnology in case 4.
193
AIJA FREIMANE
Results of ‘Problem based new product development’ brief
Case 1 (product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative
workshops organised by NGO ‘Creative partnership’, year 2014) – figure nr.3:
Scanner defines the level and composition of bacteria in the mouth, dental plaque and
formation of dental caries by the content of saliva and tooth. The scanner reports on the
necessity to visit dentist or hygienist timely and have an option to treat teeth with rays to
prevent and to reduce tooth cavity. The function of the scanner is powered by a renewable
energy and smart technologies.
Figure 3 Scanner, product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative workshops
organised by A.Freimane, year 2014
Case 2 (product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor students of the
Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015) – figures nr.4,5,6:
A scanner - pH calculator by quantum flow controls pH level of the mouth. The scanner
normalizes and balances the acid level after meals, snacks, sweets, coffee, sweetened
beverages and prevents tooth enamel decay during the day. Scanner conserves and
preserves an adequate microflora and oral microbial system.
The scanner - pH calculator is powered by ambient thermal energy, making the device
economic, human-centered and eco-friendly. Device is compatible with a smartphone and
special application, offering user-interactive and self-control option of the oral hygiene.
Figure 4 Scanner - pH calculator, product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor
students Emils and Ilva of the Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015, assitant prof. A.Freimane
Case 3 (product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative
workshops organised by NGO ‘Creative partnership’, year 2014) – figure nr.7:
194
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Toothbrush notifies the time with the built-in timer of how long the teeth are needed
to be brushed. Listening to the music ensures that teeth brushing process is fun and
excited. Toothbrush electronics is provided by rechargeable accumulator that collects
energy from the electrical devices in the surrounding.
Figure 5 Product developed by 13-14-year old children in the Children Creative workshops organised
by A.Freimane, year 2014
Case 4 (product developed by 9-year old children in the Children Creative workshops
organised by NGO ‘Creative partnership’, year 2014) – figure nr.8:
An inhaler is a product, (space or area) where 'good' bacteria that destroys the 'bad'
bacteria can be breathed in to prevent oral cavity and to provide oral hygiene. The flow of
‘good’ bacteria will be provided by nanotechnology. Small molecules can be inhaled for the
specific oral care purpose. In the model children visualized the fight between ‘good’ and
‘bad’ bacteria.
Solution of the problem was developed after oral hygiene products’ commercials on
the TV, where ‘good’ bacteria are fighting with the ‘bad’ ones. This topic is explored
already since 1960, for example, Colgate video adverts (https://www.youtube.com).
Figure 6 Bacteria fight, concept developed by 9-year old children in the Children Creative workshops
organised by A.Freimane, year 2014
Case 5 (product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor students of the
Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015) – figure 9, 10:
Dental decoration ensures oral pH stabilization by exploring nanotechnology.
195
AIJA FREIMANE
Figure 7 Dental decoration, product developed by 20-22-year old 1st year Design bachelor students
Elina, Signe and Didzis of the Art Academy of Latvia, year 2015, assistant prof. A.Freimane
A particular product concept was developed after group presentations inspiring by the
product concept in case 4. In a short time the tooth ornament was conceptualized with
nanotechnologies.
Wearable technologies as products developed by
professional designers and design engineers
New product development concepts of both audiences are related to use of
technology. Wearable technologies designed by professional designers and design
engineers present the measure of innovativeness in children's developed new product
concepts. Google glasses (http://www.healthcare.philips.com, 2014) and Google’s smart
contact lenses (Gownder, 2014) that monitor the blood glucose level (Figure No. 11, 12,
13) are the products characterized by high innovation and technology impact on human
healthcare. If children designed product concepts are developed further, the final artefact
would be close to the professional ones. It is possible to assure, that innovative new
product development process as conceptualization and modulation can be performed by
school age children.
Figure 8 Google glasses and Google’s smart contact lenses, 2014. Source: http://blogs.forrester.com;
http://www.healthcare.philips.com
Conclusion about applied methods and case study
results
Design thinking and new product development methods applied in the training of
professional designers can be implemented in the informal education process for training
non-professionals i.e. school age children.
196
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
The study confirms that children are able to create new and innovative product
concepts and to understand the systemic approach to design thinking. There were no
sharp differences between children's and student-designed solutions performing the same
design briefs.
Both audiences were able to perceive assignments, to apply assigned methods and to
innovate with no significant differences. However, school-age children in the work process
were more playful, opened and futuristic. They perceived the task without tension of being
evaluated or assessed. The new product development process of children is characterized
by experimentation and adoption of mistakes. In contrary, students thought more about
appropriate result and how the result will look like. Most probably students’ creativity was
limited by sense of being assessed as the new product development assignment was
performed in the study process.
In both audiences design thinking and new product development methods were
combined with creative thinking methods. Discussions were important in the working
process to create informal atmosphere, playfulness, a personal and empathic approach by
asking questions e.g. how the product will be used, what kind of feelings, emotions and
experiences it should create, what problem the product solves. For personalization of
children design thinking acting in the other`s role was a moment of natural imagination
and role-playing. Co-working and collective motivation in children’s auditorium was
natural, common and sincere.
Design thinking and new product development methods can diversify the curriculum of
informal school age children education. As informal education is much more flexible, there
is only professional design initiative needed to start design thinking and new product
development training modules.
The curriculum of formal or general educational is determined by the governmental
bodies. National Centre for Education is responsible for state general education standards
as well as interest-related education, including performing arts and technical leisure time
education as ‘formation of national identity and national awareness, maintenance and
inheritance of traditions and cultural values, creative self-expression, talent and selfdevelopment, socialization and improvement of knowledge and skills acquired in formal
education’ (http://visc.gov.lv/en, 2015). However, since the design historically is close to
the arts and crafts movement, its implementation into ‘home economics and technology’
standard would be meaningful. Learning of handicrafts and crafts techniques as basic
product modelling skills could be trained on the basis of design thinking as solving
problems, creating solutions or facing challenges. In such way schools would help to
educate a knowledgeable design audience and user.
The study reflects that design thinking is not only the prerogative of designers. Design
thinking can be successfully practiced by school-age children. The innovation process
happens when the new product development is based on finding problem solutions or
fulfilling human needs, not only on business or market diversification goals, even in the
school-age children audience. Natural creativity, curiosity, openness to the new and the
ability to work together is what allows children to experience design thinking and create
innovative solutions close to professional ones.
The paradigm shift of thinking and action is needed to increase innovativeness capacity
of the young generation and to sustain coherent planning system. If the new generation
were educated in design thinking now, in 20-30 years it would be possible to assess impact
197
AIJA FREIMANE
of design thinking on the society, business and politics towards more sustainable socioeconomic model.
The study confirms that wicked problem design brief, is also incomplete, and leaves the
space for interpretation and creative expression. For better results, external factors should
be clearly articulated in the formulation of design brief. Therefore wicked problem new
product development brief is not the best one in the training of non-professionals or
school-age children.
Results of the case study validates that professional designers’ design thinking, new
product development and design process training methods can be successfully applied in
primary school age education as creative problem solving method to educate pupils in
design. It is necessary to exercise empathy, systemic thinking, behaving according to the
purpose, visual imagery and associative thinking skills, performance modeling, as well as
skills of crafting, future casting and the impact of technology in order to democratize
design thinking.
A good practice of design democratization experience in informal education should be
implemented in standards of formal or general education. By educating new generation in
design thinking we shape a future society as we see it today. However, it should be
researched further whether the present design thinking methods will reach the goals and
needs of future society. What are the future of professional design education and the role
of professional designers, when all professions will be trained to use design thinking as a
critical method?
Design thinking, design research and new product development methods as tools to
solve problems, to create solutions or to face challenges could be included in a paradigm
shift of educational and behavioural system. Various culture and nation wisdom
accumulated for centuries can be the basis for design thinking and responsible user
education in the XXI century.
References
Abbing, E. R., & van Gessel, C. (2010). Brand-Drivven Innovation. In T. Lockwood, Design
Thinking (pp. 131-143). New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Buchanan, R. (1989). Declaration by Design: Rhetoric, Argument and Demonstration in
design Practice. In V. Margolin, design Discourse. History, Theory, Criticism (pp. 91-109).
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking. Oxford: Berg.
Eger, A., Bonnema, Maarten, Lutters, E., & Van der Voort, M. (2013). Product Design. The
Hague: eleven, international publishing.
Gownder, J. (2014, Januar 17). http://blogs.forrester.com. Retrieved from
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables:
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables
http://visc.gov.lv/en. (2015, January 28). Retrieved from http://visc.gov.lv/en/hobby/:
http://visc.gov.lv
198
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
http://www.healthcare.philips.com. (2014). Retrieved from
http://www.healthcare.philips.com/main/about/future-of-healthcare/:
http://www.healthcare.philips.com
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov. (2014, September 5). Retrieved from
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/DataStatistics/FindDataByTopic/DentalCaries/DentalCariesAd
ults20to64.htm: http://www.nidcr.nih.gov
https://www.youtube.com. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFydzXFcA-Y: https://www.youtube.com
Jones, J. C. (1992). Design methods. New York: John Wley&Sons, inc.
Lockwood, T. (2010). Design Thinking. New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Mootee, I. (2013). Design Thinking for Strategic Innovation. New Jersey: Wiley.
Moreno , K. (2014. gada 3. March). http://www.forbes.com. Ielādēts no
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/
Rittel, H. (1972). On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the first and second generation.
Bedriftsokonomen, 390-396.
The Economist. (2009, November 17). Triple bottom line. It consists of three ps: profit,
people, planet. The Economist, p. http://www.economist.com/node/14301663.
Ulrich, K., & Epinger, S. (2004). Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wrigley, C., & Bucolo, S. (2013). Teaching New Product Development to Design Led
Innovation. DRS//CUMULUS 2013, 2nd International Conference for Design Education
Researchers (pp. 1843-1855). Oslo: DRS//Cumulus.
199
From Design Thinking to Art Thinking
Jessica JACOBS
Columbia College Chicago
jjacobs@colum.edu
Abstract: As the problem-solving methodology of design thinking has gained
legitimacy in business and educational environments, I suggest we also think
about incorporating ‘art thinking’ into approaches in the classroom and the
workplace. To study what skills and techniques can be useful in other disciplines,
we can first review the stages of the creative process which are centered around
preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. Within those stages, we
can tease out specific elements unique to the artistic process that can be
particularly useful, including research and planning, problem creation, intuition,
frameworks, production, switching between modes of thinking, critique and
acceptance of failure and ambiguity. Thinking about incorporating these
elements and strategies in business environments and other disciplines can
expand possibilities for creativity and innovation.
Keywords: design thinking, creativity, management, business, paradigm
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Introduction
Recent studies indicate that employers are increasingly concerned about a perceived
lack of creativity in the workplace. In an American Association of Colleges & Universities
survey (2013) of employers, 92% felt that innovation is essential to their company’s
continued success, and 71% felt that more curricular emphasis should be placed on
innovation and creativity (p. 4). According to an IBM study (2010) of CEOs, more than 60%
said that the top quality that they were looking for in employees is creativity. The
movement to emphasize creative skills is strong enough that schools such as Buffalo State
College and Eastern Kentucky University are offering more courses and degrees in creative
studies (Pappano, 2014). As hiring managers are more focused on creativity and
innovation, we should continually look for ways to expand these approaches to all
curricula in our varied educational disciplines and environments.
With the problem-solving methodology of design thinking being implemented in some
business and educational environments, I suggest we also think about incorporating art
thinking into approaches in the classroom and the workplace. The classic stereotype of the
artist is an undisciplined, intoxicated savant who works only when the muse strikes. On the
contrary, an analysis of the work processes of artists demonstrates that most are highly
disciplined workers with a unique ability to create and focus on problems and develop
successful solutions. Art thinking overlaps with design thinking in several areas, but has a
special emphasis on intuition, problem creation, metacognition, critique, and reflection.
The cognitive skills of artists can be framed within a methodology that can be successfully
utilized in non-art disciplines and environments.
Current discourses in design thinking
While design thinking has been popularized in business articles and books, its definition
lacks consensus. The worlds of academia and business often don’t connect on this issue as
well (Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla, & Çetinkaya, 2013, p. 122). Design thinking related to
a designer’s process has been discussed in academic circles for decades while design
thinking as applied to management has only been discussed for about fifteen years (Hassi
& Laakso, 2011, p. 3). In their comprehensive review (2013) on the literature to date on
design thinking, Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla and Çetinkaya posited that design thinking
means different things in different contexts, often divided by theory (academia) and
practice (management) (p. 123). Also, there are different ways to describe the process and
its components, but they are not necessarily in conflict. Design thinking can be thought to
embody two categories of distinction: ‘designerly way of thinking’ and ‘design thinking’
(Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013, p. 122). The authors labeled ‘designerly thinking’ as the
more academic discussion of the professional designer’s practice and non-verbal
processes. The second category of ‘design thinking’ takes place in mainstream
management literature outside a design context. It is basically a simplified version of the
‘designerly way of thinking’ (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013, p. 123). Within the
academic or ‘designerly way of knowing’ discussion, the authors identified five subdiscourses of theory that examine designers and designerly thinking as the creation of
artifacts, reflexive practice, problem-solving activity, way of reasoning/making sense of
things, and creation of meaning (Johansson-Sköldberg et al., 2013, p. 124).
201
AIJA FREIMANE
Design thinking practices utilize activities such as iterating, visualizing, thinking by
doing, using a human-centered approach, using convergent and divergent modes of
thinking, and collaboration (Hassi & Laakso, 2011, p. 5). The thinking styles of design
thinking include abductive reasoning, reflective reframing, utilizing a holistic view of the
problem, and practicing integrative thinking (Hassi & Laakso, 2011, p. 6). Finally, the
mentality or mindset of the design thinking framework includes being experimental,
tolerant of ambiguity, optimistic and future-oriented (Hassi & Laakso, 2011, p. 6).
From the management perspective, the design thinking paradigm coalesced with the
publication of Peter Rowe’s Design Thinking in 1987 and was subsequently refined and
popularized through the rise of IDEO and Tim Brown’s article on design thinking published
in the Harvard Business Review in 2008. Since that time, the discussion of design thinking
metholodies and how they can be applied to management has grown steadily. In this
paradigm, design thinking is a problem-solving methodology for developing innovative
solutions. Innovation is ‘the result of hard work augmented by a creative human-centered
discovery process and followed by iterative cycles of prototyping, testing, and refinement’
(Brown, 2008, p. 89).
In The Design of Business, Roger Martin helped to further clarify the design thinking
process and approach as applied to management. Martin’s premise is that design thinking
attempts to bridge the gap between purely analytical and intuitive thinking. It is meant to
help refine and focus knowledge while still generating innovation (Martin, 2009, p. 24).
‘Design thinking is the application of integrative thinking to the task of resolving the
conflict between reliability and validity, between exploitation and exploration, and
between analytical thinking and intuitive thinking. Both ways of thinking require a balance
of mastery and originality’ (Martin, 2009, p. 166).
As some non-design disciplines have become familiar with the design thinking
metholodogy, applying it in business and in classrooms, I suggest we broaden our view to
include art thinking. Artists and designers can see patterns in complex information (such as
‘big data’) and connect it to the human experience. John Maeda spoke of this inclusion of
artists when he said:
I am encouraged by the potential that artists and designers have to make real changes
in the world. Artists and designers have a powerful role in this expansive universe—to
take all the complexity and make sense of it on a human scale. (Martin, 2009, p. 153)
Maeda takes care to include artists in the pattern seers. How can an artist’s creative
process augment the design thinking metholodogy? We can begin this inquiry with a
review the analyses on the creative processes of artists.
Creative process analysis
There has been considerable investigation of the creative process of artists, notably
The Art of Thought by Graham Wallas (1926), Applied Imagination by Alex Osborn (1963),
The Universal Traveler by Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall (1974), Notebooks of the Mind by
Vera John-Steiner (1985), Creating Minds by Howard Gardner (1993), Creativity by Mihaly
Csikszentmihalyi (1996), and more recently, The Rise by Sarah Lewis (2014). Most of these
inquiries focus on elucidating working models of the creative process which have many
similarities to the design process.
202
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Defining stages
Graham Wallas was one of the first to describe the stages of the creative process which
he labeled preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification (Wallas, 1926).
Throughout these stages, he highlights the interaction between rational thought and the
imaginative subconsious.
In the preparation stage of the process, artists are developing the skills and experiences
that will inform their ideation. In addition to developing technical skills, successful artists
hone their conceptual skills while immersing themselves in the domain of both their field
and the world around them. ‘Artists agree that a painter cannot make a creative
contribution without looking, and looking, and looking at previous art, and without
knowing what other artists and critics consider good and bad art’ (Cziksentmihaly, 1996, p.
47). In addition, many artists undertake extensive research, either as part of an ongoing
practice or deducated to a specific project.
In the incubation stage, artists begin to synthesize their research and domain
knowledge. As artists develop ideas, they undertake ‘efforts at selection, condensation,
and interpretation—which characterize the work of visually talented individuals as they
link their impressions into a landscape’ (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 24). Moments of inspiration
are often described in magical, mysterious terms; however, they are actually the product
of creating the space to allow the mind to make connections between various inputs.
In the illumination stage of the process, conceptual development coalesces for the
artist as he or she synthesizes diverse source material to make connections and develop
concepts. The artist calls upon domain knowledge and an inner catalog of references to
build a new understanding. Memory, experience, emotion and creative effort interact as a
new idea is developed (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 73). Edward Weston wrote eloquently of this
process in his own work:
One does not think during creative work, any more than one thinks when driving a car.
But one has a background of years – learning, unlearning, success, failure, dreaming,
thinking, experience, all this – then the moment of creation, the focusing of all into the
moment. So I can make 'without thought,' fifteen carefully considered negatives, one
every fifteen minutes, given material with as many possibilities. But there is all the eyes
have seen in this life to influence me. (Fondiller, 1980, p. 280)
Finally, in the verification stage of Wallas’ process, an artist must put his or her work
out into the world. Artist John Baldessari referenced this stage when he said, ‘Art comes
out of failure. You have to try things out. You can’t sit around, terrified of being incorrect,
saying, ‘I won’t do anything until I do a masterpiece’ ‘ (Thornton, 2008, p. 52).
In his 1953 book Applied Imagination, Alex Osborn elaborated on Wallas’ four stages by
adding an orientation stage at the beginning as well as stages for analysis and ideation. The
orientation stage is to become aware of the problem and highlight it. Osborn’s additional
analysis stage allows for assessing existing material to determine useful information.
Osborn ends with evaluation, which is quite similar to Wallas’ verification stage. Thus, his
seven stages include orientation, preparation, analysis, ideation, incubation, synthesis and
evalution (Osborn, 1953).
As outlined in The Universal Traveler, Don Koberg and Jim Bagnall’s model is similar to
the previous models but takes it a step further by creating a prescriptive process that can
be applied as a process to other problems and disciplines. In their model, the preparation
203
AIJA FREIMANE
phase becomes ‘Accept the situation (as a challenge)’ and then ‘Analyze (to discover the
‘world of the problem’)’. The incubation phase asks users to ‘Define (the main issues and
goals)’. The illumuniation phase becomes ‘Ideate (to generate options)’, ‘Select (to choose
among options)’ and ‘Implement (to give physical form to the idea)’. As in the previous
models, the evaluation phase is also described as ‘Evaluate (to review and plan again)’
(Koberg & Bagnall, 1974).
In Notebooks of the Mind (1985), John-Steiner’s research used first-hand interviews
with artists to develop a list of common traits and approaches to the creative process. In
her analysis, she is less prescriptive than Koberg and Bagnall. Instead, she described two
broad stages. The first stage is more intuitive and instinctual in which the artist is just
getting ideas out on paper. The second stage is one of reflection, categorization, analysis
and interpretation (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 23). In some ways, this reflects the ‘leftbrain/right-brain’ approach to the creative process.
In Creativity (1996), Czikszentmihalyi summarizes the steps of the creative process
using similar terminology of preparation, incubation, insight and evaluation. Then he adds
a fifth step of elaboration—the translation of the idea into reality, where the artists does
the work. He makes a key distinction that not all of these stages occur in order, and some
will overlap. In Czikszentmihalyi’s description, the creative process has traditionally been
described as taking five steps: preparation, incubation, insight, evaluation, and elaboration
(Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 78-79).
In The Rise, Sarah Lewis (2014) takes a more philosophical approach to the creative
process, focusing on individual stories of passion, naïveté, failure, and accepting the
unknown. Lewis emphasizes the work ethic involved in an ongoing creative practice. Artists
are comfortable with the constant push forward and the lifelong struggle towards a further
goal (Lewis, 2014, p. 23). Lewis also examines how artists sometimes strategically take a
naïve stance towards their work. Artists consciously try to adopt the mindset of the
amateur in order to see things fresh and avoid getting locked into a routine (Lewis, 2014,
p. 151).
Common themes run through these analyses, specifically the idea that the creative act
is a constant interplay between process and product. In the creative process, the stages
are not finite—one can expect interplay between all of them. Art thinking is a multi-stage
process that begins with bursts and fits of ideas and ends with analysis, interpretation and
communication of a cohesive whole.
From design thinking to art thinking
In recent years, we have seen a increasing pedagogical emphasis on creativity and its
elevation to a level equal to or beyond critical thinking in its importance in learning
outcomes. In 2001, Bloom’s taxonomy was revised to situate ‘create’ as the highest of
higher-order learning skills (Krathwohl, 2002, p. 215). The need for creative thinking has
also been championed in popularized business best-sellers such as Daniel Pink’s A Whole
New Mind in which he states that the ‘MFA is the new MBA’ (Pink, 2005, p. 74). There are
clear overlaps in the creative processes of both designers and artists. If we use a working
model of design thinking as formulation (understanding and observation), representation
(definition), moving (ideation and prototyping), evaluating (testing) and managing, we can
204
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
observe the close parallels with the artistic process of preparation, ideation, illumination,
implementation and evaluation.
How might we propose ways in which the process components of artistic thinking can
be extrapolated into strategies applicable in other disciplines? If we take the same
approach as efforts to systematize design thinking processes, we can strategize about ways
to bring the creative processes of artists, or art thinking, into other environments. Beyond
the variations of describing the process, there are common components within each phase
that deserve special attention. For both design and art processes, there is a strong
emphasis on immersion, iteration and reframing of the problem. I propose that art
thinking doesn’t necessarily diverge from design thinking, but the process lingers at a few
key stages in the process, including research, problem creation/analysis, intuitive ideation,
making descriptive to depictive analogies, switching between modes of thinking (metacognition), critique, failure and reflection.
Preparation stage
Within the various descriptions of the preparation stage (which includes orientation,
incubation, definition and analysis), the elements of research, planning, and problem
creation can be singled out as possessing transferrable potential to other disciplines.
RESEARCH AND PLANNING
Both Czikszentmihalyi (1996) and Gardner (1993) emphasize the importance of
understanding the domain in which one is operating. The artist comes to know their own
domain and become expert with it, both in its traditions and areas for possible problems or
new explorations. Artists are then willing to cast out in new directions while less creative
types are content to adhere to what is already known (Gardner, 1993, p. 33). Diving deeply
into a new domain is essential for truly creative growth and innovation. Artists are
continually scaffolding onto previous art forms and paradigms of artmaking (Turner, 2006,
p. 19).
Design thinking incorporates this domain immersion as well. From the management
perspective, Brown (2009) calls this this inspiration phase, while from the academic
perspective, Dorst (2004) labels it the formulation phase. Research is a standard of
learning to thinking critically within a discipline and immersion, and planning is a key
component of the design process. However, artists are more likely than designers to linger
in this phase, thinking about the domain and the problem before jumping to the solution
(Cross, Dorst, & and Roozenburg, 1992, p. 8). Applying art thinking to the research process
can call for less goal-oriented work and more room to explore paths that might not lead to
fruition. It can also allow for different methods of recording research, such as visual
notetaking, scrapbooking, online journaling or blogging. In an educational or business
environment, a student or worker could be allowed to spend time in this stage to assess
what information is valuable and worth pursuing, an important component of learning to
think critically and creatively.
PROBLEM CREATING
The designer’s ability to continually frame and reframe a problem is a central
component of the design process and design thinking (Dorst, 2004, p. 133). While
designers search for new problems, the search is usually within the context of the design
205
AIJA FREIMANE
brief. Artists, on the other hand, are unique in their driving force of self-generating their
‘problems’ (Cross, 2001, p. 5).
Research indicates that designers jump quickly into developing a solution without
examining the problem thoroughly. In fact, it may be that the problem or proposal needs
to be reframed (Cross, 2001, p. 8). Studies also demonstrate that designers generate more
varied solutions when the problem is precisely defined. So while a designer’s tendencies
are to immediately begin iterating and developing solutions, they may be better off
examining the problem further before moving into the solution phase of the process
(Cross, 2001, p. 9).
Unlike design thinking, the artist is more comfortable creating and reframing the
original problem and less focused on a solution (Cross, 2001, p. 5). This can be valuable
when inventive thought is needed. Artists are adept at creating challenges for themselves,
asking new questions of their work and applying new constraints to it. Rather than
immediately focus on solving a problem as quickly as possible (which can often lead to
traditional, non-innovative solutions), art thinking can encourage people to take the time
to think more deeply about the problem at hand. Artist Chuck Close said:
See, I think our whole society is much too problem-solving oriented. It is far more
interesting to [participate in] ‘problem creation’—it’s more interesting than problem
solving. You know, ask yourself an interesting enough question and your attempt to
find a tailor-made solution to that question will push you to a place where, pretty soon,
you’ll find yourself all by your lonesome—which I think is a more interesting place to
be. (Fig, 2009, p. 43)
Gardner notes that cognitive researchers have described creative individuals as those
who ‘identify and solution ‘spaces’ that appear promising; search within these spaces for
approaches appropriate to the problem at hand and for leads that may pay off; evaluate
alternative solutions to problems; deploy resources of energy and time to advance their
program of investigation in an efficient manner; and determine when to probe further and
when to cut losses and move on, and more generally, reflect on their own creating
processes’ (Gardner, 1993, p. 22). Along the same lines, both John-Steiner (1985) and
Lewis (2014) discuss the visual thinking process of artists and how artists use it to generate
challenges and goals for their work. ‘Reframing our projects as a problem to solve happens
through creating a series of amended pictures. This inner pictorial process helps us adjust
our goals. It occurs not just with artistic practice, but also through visual thinking’ (Lewis,
2014, p. 189). Being open to a new approach to viewing and constructing a problem is a
transferrable skill to a variety of disciplines and business applications which can lead to
increased creativity and innovation.
Ideation stage
Following the preparation stage, the ideation stage includes intuition, making
connections, association, holistic thinking, conceptualizing, developing frameworks, and
switching between modes of thinking. When assessing strategies that may be easily
transferrable, we can focus on intuition and conceptualization using analogical thinking.
206
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
I NTUITION
The ideation stage is the area that people most associate with artistic thought and how
it can be used to generate creative ideas. Most successful artists are in touch with their
intuition. Ideas don’t always come from a brief or an assignment, but they spring internally
from combined experiences and domain knowledge. While one may think of creatives as
having an ‘aha!’ moment, it is more often the case that they are making connections and
associations between embedded knowledge. In fact, the idea of a creative leap is better
described as a key moment of bridging between problem and solution (Cross, 2001, p. 10).
This bridge also be thought of as a two-stage process with an initial intuitive, emotive
phase as well as a more analytical, iterative second phase (John-Steiner, 1985). In other
discipline settings, we should allow for these stages and respect that not everything that
arises from these processes will lead to fruition. Techniques and strategies can be
employed to foster intuitive and associative thinking. Projects should be facilitated in a
way that allows for increased room for exploration prior to evaluation.
Sketching is a means of tapping into intuition and is an area that can be further
explored in other fields and disciplines, even in business and science. Artists use the
process of sketching to refine existing ideas and develop new ideas, helping them to make
connections and relationships that are otherwise not evident verbally or through other
explorations (Fish & Scrivener, 1990, p. 118). In creating a body-to-mind connection,
sketches allow the artist to translate descriptive information into depiction. These
depictions can then be analyzed at a higher cognitive level and lead to more depictions.
‘This descriptive-to-depictive translation process is a one-to-many mapping instrinsic to
inventive thought’ (Fish & Scrivener, 1990, p. 118).
/ NEW LANGUAGES
With their skill in translating abstract ideas and forms into concrete communications,
artists give shape to how we view the world (Turner, 2006, p. 5). As the goal of many
artists is to probe the nature of the human condition, they are continually translating their
ideas to metaphor and analogy in order to communicate their ideas or ‘problems’. Our
most successful artists often develop new symbol systems or languages of expression
(Gardner, 1993). While designers also develop symbol systems and work in metaphor, this
is a particular point of emphasis for artists. As applied to other disciplines, it may be
worthwhile to dive deeper within this phase of ideation. The act of mapping of knowledge
from one domain to another can be systematized as a strategy that can be central to
innovative developments in business and entrepreneurship as well (Ward, 2004, p. 174).
In his article ‘The Associative Basis of the Creative Process’, Mednick (1962) focuses on
the ideation and illumination stages of the creative process and posits that ideas take
shape through associative processes. He outlines three ways of achieving a creative
solution including serendipity (in which the contiguous, sometimes accidental appearance
of stimuli which elicit these associative elements), similarity (in which the similarity of the
associative elements or the similarity of the stimuli elicits these associative elements), and
mediation (the means of bringing the associative elements into contiguity with each other
along with the prevalent use of symbols) (p. 221-222). Like John-Steiner, Mednick’s
emphasis is on the process by which disparate elements become connected in moments of
creative enlightenment. These associative processes can be taught and fostered in other
disciplines as well.
TRANSLATING ABSTRACTION
207
AIJA FREIMANE
Illumination stage
Following the developments of the incubation stage, there is an illumination stage of
the creative process where the artist has an insight, refines his or her concept, takes action
and categorizes potential solutions. When applied to other disciplines, it can be especially
valuable to focus on prolific production, meta-cognition and flow.
PROLIFIC PRODUCTION
As with design thinking, the illumination stage of art thinking allows for prototyping
and iterating ideas. This can be useful in other disciplines, fostering the acceptance of
failure as an option that may in fact lead to better solutions. In studying the working
process of successful artists, a continual theme is constant, routine, and prolific
production, sometimes without a finite goal. With that production must come a healthy
acceptance of failure. Not every piece will be successful, but it will lead to another piece
that might move closer to the goal of solving the problem that the artist created.
Prolifically creative people have been shown to produce more bad works that are not
revered. Their output is greater overall, producing more works of greater quality as well as
works of lesser quality (Gardner, 1993, p. 27). Within other disciplines, we might allow for
more opportunities for this kind of prolific production.
& META - COGNITION
All studies of the creative process highlights the artist’s ability to move between
different modes of thinking within a given situation. The creative mind can quickly switch
between modalities of thought such as visual, verbal and aural (John-Steiner, 1985, p. ix).
Artists use different types of mental abilities to be creative and generate ideas and then to
refine and execute those ideas (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 213). Designers also shift often
and rapidly between different modes of activity and thinking during creative periods
(Cross, 2001, p. 13). ‘Six out of a total of eight times a novel design decision was made, we
found the subject alternating between these three activity modes (examining-drawingthinking) in rapid succession’ (Cross, 2001, p. 13). In addition, strategically taking a naïve
stance is an important mode for artists that can be useful in other disciplines. Artists
consciously try to adopt the mindset of the amateur in order to see things fresh and avoid
becoming locked into a routine (Lewis, 2014, p. 151). In other disciplines, we should
structure projects to allow for multiple modes of thinking that are by various turns lateral,
strategic, holistic, creative, reflective, reactive, analytical, and naïve.
Embedded within these different stances and modes of thinking is the ability to view
one’s own work in a meta-cognitive fashion. This is a skill of designers, but it is especially
acute for artists as their problems are self-generated and can only be assessed against the
artist’s conception of the problem. Through meta-cognitive thinking, the artist has
knowledge and control over his or her cognitive processes. He or she must constantly be
aware of what is known and unknown while developing a strategy for further inquiry.
Rather than continually focusing on a solution (as a designer might), the artist has the
incentive to reflect on the problem for a more prolonged period of time.
MODES OF THINKING
F LOW
Czikszentmihalyi has written extensively on the ideal state of ‘flow’ for artistic creation.
‘The optimal experience is what I have called flow, because many of the respondents
208
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
described the feeling when things were going well as an almost automatic, effortless, yet
highly focused state of consciousness’ (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 110). This state is
achieved by finding an optimal balance of familiarity and expertise with challenge and the
unknown. Not only are artists and others more productive in these states of flow, they are
happier while performing their work. To achieve the proper level of challenge, artists are
comfortable with pushing themselves to this ‘edge’ of the unknown, or just beyond what is
comfortable in order to generate new ideas (Austin & Devin, 2003, p. 123). A track for
future research might be to explore how other disciplines or business environments be
more cognizant and encouraging of these creative flow states.
Implementation stage
The implementation stage involves synthesis, adjustment, and further learning,
refinement and interpretation. When thinking about valuable new applications to other
fields, we can focus on an acceptance of ambiguity and failure.
AMBIGUITY
An important difference between artists and management models is that artists are
generally more comfortable with ambiguity. This is something that can be useful
throughout the developmental stages in the classroom and increasingly data-driven
business environments. Indeed, Loevinger’s most mature stage of ego development is a
tolerance for ambiguity (Loevinger, 1987). Both designers and artists are comfortable with
ambiguity, which can be evident in the sketching process. In writing about Goel’s work on
designers’ processes of conceptual transformations, Cross (2001) notes the ambiguity
inherent in sketches as a positive feature of sketching as a tool (p. 11).
When one is immersed in the development of ideas and concepts, there are some
things that cannot be known. Without a client to serve or a finite ‘problem’ to solve, artists
may be more tolerant of ambiguous solutions and non-productive explorations. Becoming
comfortable with that reality is a skill that will translate to other disciplines and in the
workplace. Students who are uncomfortable with this are often reluctant to move forward
and test an idea, restricting their capacity for learning. In a business setting, a company
may be too late to market with a possible innovation because their tolerance for ambiguity
was too low, making them risk-averse to an extent that it hinders their growth. On the
contrary, artists are more tolerant of ambiguity which allows them step back and make
connections between and assessments of ideas (Lewis, 2014, p. 183).
FAILURE
Another key area in which the creative process of artists can prove valuable in other
fields is the acceptance of failure. As an integral part of their process, artists are
accustomed to trying an idea and failing. One doesn’t know how the problem he or she
created can be solved, so trial and error is vital. As Gardner (1993) demonstrated, great
artists produce a prolific amount of good work as well as bad work (p. 27). While designers
are comfortable with iteration and failure within the context of the larger project or design
brief, artists operate in an uncertain and limited marketplace, often attempting problems
and solutions for which there is no audience or acceptance. ‘In this pursuit there are no
guarantees or even reliable guides; the creator must trust his or her own intution and must
be braced for repeated and unrequited failures’ (Gardner, 1993, p. 34).
209
AIJA FREIMANE
Recent research shows that an embrace of failure and the growth mindset is the key to
growing and innovating. In a fixed mindset, the student or worker believes that talent is
innate, and failure such as getting a bad grade is to be avoided. This failure represents an
insurmountable setback that means one is not talented enough. On the other hand, with a
growth mindset, the only failure is not growing and fulfilling your potential. Those that
exhibit the growth mindset are more likely to improve their performance over time
(Dweck, 2006).
Evaluation stage
The evaluation stage involves critique, failure, adjustment, verification, adjustment,
evaluation and reflection. When translating this to other environments, it can be most
useful to implement more critique and reflection.
C RITIQUE
Perhaps the most important component of the creative process that is sorely needed in
other fields is the power of the critique. This applies to both giving criticism and receiving
criticism. Artists work in solitary modes but then seek feedback and collaboration. Through
critiques or collaborative circles, artists are trained in seeking feedback on their work in
progress (Czikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 105). Critiques help artists learn to receive all different
types of feedback, figuring out what to accept and what to reject. As artists listen and
respond to opinions, they build their own internal sense of what guides them and how to
grow (Lewis, 2014, p. 186).
In the ideal setting, the critique serves as a valuable tool within the continuity of an
artist’s practice (Buster & Crawford, 2009). Research indicates that challenging criticism
and spirited debate stimulate creativity and lead to more innovative solutions (Nemeth,
Personnaz, Personnaz, & Goncalo, 2004). The critique functions as a collaborative tool to
test ideas, helping an artist to refine a concept and determine execution. Through critique,
artists learn to articulate and express concepts, test new ideas, receive feedback, and
iterate again. ‘Many of us need to rebuild a safe place where we can display our work to a
small group of trusted colleagues, get feedback, and refine…or abandon as needed’
(Burkus, 2014). Art critiques are different from design critiques in that the conversation is
so closely tied to the artist’s internally driven intentions rather than an external client
brief.
Related to the critique and potential for failure, it is important for people to feel safe in
these environments. Having safe spaces to take risks and fail are important for innovation.
Ill-timed or negative feedback could send things awry (Lewis, 2014, p. 49). Critiques in the
classroom and workplace must be constructed and taught with care and respect. In
addition, working as part of a group requires a strong sense of self, strong enough to be
able to be selfless and see the group’s needs as greater than your own. Artists who work
collaboratively must work this way on a daily basis in order to develop a functional product
(Austin & Devin, 2003, p. 127).
REFLECTION
Creatives are continually reflecting back on what they are producing and using those
assessments to move forward with their work. This is often built into their daily working
process and speaks to the dialogue between process and product (John-Steiner, 1985, p.
210
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
5). As designers are continually framing and reframing their work, so too, are artists.
Beyond the completion of a finite project, an artist must continually reflect on their body
of work within the arc of a career. Artists are expert in self-reflection on what they have
done, seeing it from a higher-order cognitive perspective (Turner, 2006, p. 5). As an artist
develops a body of work and assesses it, so too should a student or worker be given the
opportunity and tools to assess their own work on the path towards improving it.
Reflection is another area in which meta-cognition skills come to the fore. Artists
understand the need to step back from a project, regroup, and reassess from an objective
point of view (John-Steiner, 1985, p. 156). During the sometimes painful verification phase,
artists can be thought two employ two types of meta-cognition, both internal and external.
‘The first type involves verifying or measuring the product against an internal standard—
the original purpose of the creative enterprise and the mental image formed during
illumination. The second type of metacognition involves verifying the product against an
anticipated external standard—a would-be audience’ (Armbruster 1989, p. 180). This
meta-congition skill can be learned and perfected with more practice and experience.
Artists become especially attuned to responding to both internal and external standards,
and this awareness could be useful in other disciplines (Armbruster 1989, p. 180).
Conclusion
In conclusion, a comparison of the creative process of designers and artists illustrates
key areas of overlap and distinction. Both use key methodologies that allow for stages of
preparation, incubation, illumination, implementation and verification. Just as there are
clear, convincing examples that demonstrate the applicability of design thinking in the
classroom and workplace, we can expand our methodologies to include art thinking. There
are some key points of emphasis unique to artists that may be especially transferrable to
other disciplines. Artists are expert at self-generating and solving problems that may have
been previously undetected. They are comfortable with ambuiguity and failure and
continue to pursue their creations. They are adept at critiquing each other’s work and
possess the ability to reflect on the arc of their own work from a meta-cognitive
perspective. Utilizing some of these approaches and applying them alone or as an
extension of design thinking has the potential to expand learning in various disciplines as
well as innovation in business environments.
Future research might then strategize how to expand upon apply these processes in
specific disciplines. In an educational environment, all of these elements and strategies can
help students mature developmentally and engage with subject matter from a more
critical, creative, and engaged perspective. The creative process could be pulled out into
individual components in the classroom, or more effectively, used as an arc for a project or
an entire class. Projects can be constructed to allow for more freedom to discover
connections and iterate new ideas. Just as in the classroom, the ability to critique ideas in
the workplace would be invaluable to developing innovative new solutions. As businesses
look to hire more employees are creative, we have a responsibility to infuse some of these
techniques into all of the disciplines in which we teach. Creativity is a skill that can be
developed, practiced and improved upon over time.
211
AIJA FREIMANE
References
American Association of Colleges & Universities. (2013). It takes more than a major:
Employer priorities for college learning and student success [Survey]. American
Association of Colleges & Universities. Retrieved from
https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2013_EmployerSurvey.pdf
Armbruster, B. (1989). Metacognition in creativity. In J. Glover, R. Ronning, & C. R.
Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity, (pp. 177-182). New York: Plenum.
Austin, R., & Devin, L. (2003). Artful making: What managers need to know about how
artists work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, R. (2009). The design of business. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.
Burkus, D. (2014). How your friends affect tour Cceative work. 99U by Behance. Retrieved
from http://99u.com/articles/21521/in-praise-of-the-creative-support-group
Buster, K. & Crawford, P. (2009). The critique handbook. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: Results from protocol and other empirical studies of
design activity. In C. Eastman, W. Newstatter, & M. McCracken (Eds.), Design knowing
and learning: Cognition in design education. Oxford, UK: Elsevier, pp. 79–103.
Cross, N., Dorst, K. and Roozenburg, N. (Eds.). (1992). Research in design thinking. The
Netherlands: Delft University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
Dorst, C. H. (2004). Investigating the nature of design thinking. Proceedings
from Futureground: Design Research Society, International Conference 2004. Australia:
Monash University.
Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Ballantine Books
Fig, J. (2009). Inside the Painter’s Studio. New York : Princeton Architectural Press.
Fish, J. & Scrivener, S. (1990). Amplifying the mind’s eye: Sketching and visual cognition.
Leonardo, 23(1), 117-126.
Fondiller, H. (1980). The Best of Popular Photography. Watson-Guptill Publications.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating Minds. New York: Basic Books.
Hassi, L. & Laakso, M. (2011). Conceptions in design thinking in the design and
management discourses. In the proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Design
Research, IASDR 2011, Delft, Netherlands.
IBM (2010, 03 Feb 2015). IBM 2010 Global CEO Study: Creativity Selected as Most Crucial
Factor for Future Success [Survey]. Retrieved 03 Feb, 2015, from https://www03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/31670.wss
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J. & Çetinkaya, M. (2013, June). Design thinking: Past,
present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.
John-Steiner, V. (1985). Notebooks of the mind. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico
Press.
Koberg, D., & Bagnall, J. (1974). The universal traveler: A soft-systems guide to creativity,
problem-solving, and the process of reaching goals. Los Altos, California: W. Kaufmann.
Krathwohl, D. (2002, Autumn). A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into
Practice, 41(4), 212-264.
Lewis, S. (2014). The Rise. New York: Simon & Shuster.
Loevinger, J. (1987). Paradigms of personality. New York: Freeman.
212
Case Study: Design Thinking and New Product Development for School Age Children
Mednick, S. (1962, May). The Associative Basis of the Creative Process. Psychological
Review, 69(3), 220-232.
Nemeth, C., Personnaz, B., Personnaz, M., & Goncalo, J. (2004). The liberating role of
conflict in group creativity: A study in two countries. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 34, 365–374.
Osborn, A. (1963). Applied Imagination: Principles and Procedures of Creative Problem
Solving. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Pappano, L. (2014, Feb 5). Learning to Think Outside the Box: Creativity Becomes an
Academic Discipline. The New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/education/edlife/creativity-becomes-anacademic-discipline.html
Pink, D. (2005). A Whole New Mind: Why Right-brainers Will Rule the Future. New York:
Penguin Group.
Turner, M. (Ed.) (2006). The Artful Mind: Cognitive Science and the Riddle of Human
Creativity. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wallas, G. (1926). The Art of Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Ward, T. (2004). Cognition, Creativity and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing,
19, 173-188.
213
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Ying HU*, Yinman GUO and Renke HE
Hunan University, People's Republic of China
*whoing@gmail.com
Abstract: Since people pay more attention to intangible services, service design
has emerged as an approach to creating compelling and valuable user
experiences. In order to understand the service design process and find out more
efficient way for education, this paper presents an observational study of the
ideation process in team-based service design. Eighteen participants undertook a
creative design on a new reading service. Through protocol study and data
visualization, their design process and interaction have been analysed
quantitatively and qualitatively. As a result, difference mechanism of solving
design problems between novice and expert has been identified. And evidence of
team-based ideation in service design has been discovered. For education, the
results provide guidance for how to train novices’ thinking and reflecting
towards an expert and how to set up team to achieve a high-quality outcome.
Keywords: service design ideation; mutual triggers effects; novice and expert;
reflective practice
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Introduction
This study focuses on the ideation period of service design - the initial stage of
structuring a complete design concept. Service design is particularly interesting as the
rapid development of the information industry has resulted in objects in design field
gradually changing from tangible products into intangible service. During this conversion,
the concept of service design has emerged. Service design that beneficially creates new
services or promotes existing services is a new cross-disciplinary and comprehensive field,
which facilitates customer satisfaction through a more useful and familiar experience, and
is also effective for the organizations (Moritz, 2005) . In contrast to other design areas,
which produce tangible media (e.g. industrial design), service design relies on both tangible
and intangible media to create more brilliant concepts. The service design process is
always iterative, and starts from a holistic view of the system and its processes (Vinay &
Simona, 2014). To conclude, nowadays, people endeavour to develop the design from
‘products’ to ‘things’, from elements of individual systems to integration of system
relationship comprehensively, and more significantly, from internal factors of system to
integration of external factors. Therefore, service design not only provides tangible
products but also enhances the values through emphasizing improvements of the service
concept. Without focusing on the beauty of, for example, a sketch or a 3-D model, the
evaluation of a service concentrates wholly on the novelty of the concept itself.
Design education, compared with commercial design activities, is mainly propelled with a
purpose of helping students to grow from novices to experts. The creativity in such a
setting has been divided into two types according to Kirton: adaptor and innovator (Li, Hu
and Galli, 2012). The latter is inclined to ignore present norms and rules and raise
audacious ideas, since the former one is focused on improving current situation. In this
sense, a design educator is closer to cultivate the innovator type of creativity.
Consequently, the research here discusses service design in the field of education, focusing
on the most mysterious process in designing - the generation of concepts. We have kept
using protocol study to analyse this process in a two-person team. In the previous work,
seven design patterns are concluded which is in the team level (Hu Y. Guo Y., Ji T., He R. &
Galli F., 2014). In this paper, we go deeper into the interaction in the pair to see how they
stimulate each other and push the design work forward.
Background and context
Service design and physical products design
Services are different from physical products. Service design is the activity of planning
and organizing people, infrastructure, communication and material components of a
service in order to improve its quality and the interaction between service provider and
customers. The purpose of service design is to meet the needs of customers or
participants, so that the service is user-friendly, competitive and relevant to the
customers. The nature of services means that they are intangible and complex
experiences. There is a wide range of definitions for services (Moreno, Hernandez, Yang, et
al, 2014 ; Cook, Goh, & Chung, 1999 ;DISR, 1999 ; Gadrey, Gallouj, & Weinstein, 1995 ),
which broadly speaking consist of the overall interface and experience which is a
215
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
combination of the experiences of all touch points (Moritz, 2005) . It could be a
mechanism, a policy, a website, or an APP, which has no boundaries and can exist
everywhere. Furthermore, the task of service design is always open and without limits.
Team-based design activity research
Group design is very common in the practice of experienced designers, but most
studies to date have focused on individual designer’s activity. Valkenburg and Dorst (1998)
explored design teamwork based on Schön’s paradigm (Schön, 1983). But Lawson still
called for studying it in a real design environment, in which the task is studied in the
context of a diversity of real backgrounds. Team based design activity research focuses on
information seeking, ideation and design review, in which designers are empirically
assessed on global and discipline-specific concept development.
Novice and expert
Many studies on the structure of the design process demonstrate that it does not
follow strict rules. Due to the complexity of the service design process, there do not exist
any precise and fixed formulas. Educators of design are very clear about this fact. What
makes them interesting are the keys to successful generation of a creative concept and
excavation of design strategies of experts. Design experts use heuristics highly efficiently in
service design process and this is a significant difference that distinguishes them from
novices. By observing and studying expert patterns, heuristic teaching methods targeted at
novices could be practically developed, which help them to create diverse and innovative
concepts when confronted with different design problems and situations.
Similarities and differences between novice and expert designers are conceptual in
early stages of the design process and how they take advantage of the overview of
strategic knowledge. From individual learning strategies of design to their skillful mastering
of design knowledge, they eventually form their own modes of application of various
heuristics.
Experimental approaches
The thinking process of design cannot easily be captured; likewise, design knowledge
and innovative methods are always tacit. The study of design process is usually
accomplished by protocol study. Through the method of think aloud, participants are
required to speak out while he/she is doing a specific task. First rigorously proposed by
(Simon, Ericsson, 1984), protocol analysis has been widely used in social sciences, including
psychology and sociology. In the domain of design, protocol analysis is used in usability
test and design education to know person’s thinking. After doing semantic analysis of
recorded utterance, the thinking process of designers would be perceived.
For example, Gero and Neill (1998) presented a detailed approach to design protocols
and introduced their coding scheme and coding method. To explore reflective practice of
the teams, Valkenburg and Dorst (1998) surveyed two design teams’ activities by coding
captured video of the Philips Design Competition in Delft University. Atman, Chimka, Bursic
and Nachtmann (1999) used protocol analysis to assess the various methods to teach
design, and to understand the differences between freshman and senior engineering
students. All these studies above discussed the concrete practical procedure of applying
216
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
protocols, and described the distinctions between novice and expert by visualizing the
abstract designing process and the design activity of a team.
Introduction of experiment
We invited 18 designers to take our Protocol analysis (Table 1). Participants were given
120 minutes to finish a design task, which was designing a reading service. A reading
service could be an intangible service, like book exchange system, or services with tangible
touchpoint, like App related to reading. After the preliminary screening questionnaire, we
ensure that each subject has a certain reading experience, but did not have experience to
design reading service, which would ensure the fairness and consistency in this design task.
Their design activities were videotaped.
Table 1 Experimental approaches
Content
Data Collection
Data processing
Coding System
Data Analysis
Data Output
Design stages& steps/
Mutual trigger effect
Verbal protocol experiment, ‘think aloud’
Individual video, Segments
Design stages and steps
ATLAS.ti,
C++ Statistical calculations,
Data visualization
Design stages& steps cluster characteristics/
Mutual trigger effect mechanism
Participants
The 18 designers are from college or companies, they are students, teachers and
professionals. No matter how professional they are in service design, all of them have
some experience in service design (at least in design), from courses or the real project.
According to the amount of time they spent on design, the 18 designers were split up into
9 pairs (Table 2), to achieve the diversity of pairing. Through our test before the formal
experiment, we found out that if two designers had a huge gap on knowledge and
experience, like a senior in company and a junior student in college, the design process
would be wholly dominated by the senior designer, with little participant from the junior
student. Thus, although our goal is to achieve the most diverse mix when we paired them,
we avoid a wide difference between them.
Table 2
P1
P2
Participants of the protocol analysis.
Designer
Grade
Duration Time on
service design
F/M
D1
3rd year graduate
5 years
M
D2
1st year graduate
3 years
F
D3
1st year graduate
3 years
F
D4
1st year graduate
3 years
M
217
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
D5
1st year graduate
1month
F
D6
4th year undergraduate
2 years
F
D7
2nd year undergraduate
—
F
D8
3th year undergraduate
1 year
M
D9
3rd year graduate
3 years
F
D10
4rd year undergraduate
2 years
M
D11
Senior designer
7 years
F
D12
Manager of UX
10 years
M
D13
Founder
9 years
M
D14
2nd year graduate
3 years
F
D15
3rd year graduate
5 year
F
D16
1st year graduate
1 year
F
D17
Designer
6 years
M
D18
Senior researcher
10 years
F
Coding system
There are two famous paradigms in design research, which are rational problem solving
theory (Simon’s) and reflective practice (Schön’s). The rational problem solving approach
considers problems to be solvable by ‘rigorously applying general principles, standardized
knowledge (based on rigorous scientific research) to concrete problems’ (Schön, 1983),
(dorst , thesis 1997). ‘Schön’s theory is based on a constructionist view of human
perception and thought processes: through the execution of ‘move-testing experiments’
(involving action and reflection), a designer is actively constructing a view of the world
based on his/her experiences.’(Valkenburg & Dorst, 1998) Overall, rational problem solving
is good at studying a rational and clearly defined and structured problem, analysing the
rational search process, discovering the knowledge of design procedures, which usually
used as in the field of optimization theory and the natural sciences. However, reflective
practice is good for studying ill-defined problems – the design process that is analysed is
always described as a reflective conversation. Reflective practice studies what designers
do, when, and how, so it usually used in the field of the social sciences. Due to the
attributes of service design problems and the features of concept design process, we
finally chose the latter.
Based on reflective practice (Schön, 1983) , we adopt the fundamental coding scheme
from Valkenburg and Dorst’s protocol study (1998), which was upon Schön’s theory as
well. However, the three design stages-’Naming’, ‘Moving’ and ‘Reflecting’- reflect
different models of designers’ thinking at a macro level. Subdivisions of the three may
promote the deeper exploration of each activity. Hence, we draw more detailed subclasses
218
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
from Atman & Turns (2001) and Finke, Ward & Smith (1992), building up a two-layered
subclass.
In order to get more detailed information, we code the protocol by using the deepest
subclass on coding scheme, such as Problem Definition, instead of Naming, and Generating
Analogy, rather than Generating Ideas. Since we have two coders to code protocols,
segments have been tested for Kappa coefficient to reach good agreement on the coding
scheme. The two coders were tested three times. Each time, we chose a segment that had
a wide variety of attached codes. The results of the three tests are 0.21 (fair agreement),
0.58 (moderate agreement) and 0.86 (very good agreement) in sequence. We adjusted the
coding scheme when every result had been obtained. We kept those codes that have High
coefficient (0.61-1.00). For those codes that have moderate coefficient (0.41-0.60), we
defined the meaning of them more clearly and combined them where appropriate. For
those codes that have Low coefficient (0.00-0.40), we considered that they are improper
and need revision. In this process, we merged GS and GL to GSL, redefined DEC, clarified
the scope of RS, RF and RA, and regulated that where there was ID/RND, there was
PD/RDP. And the final coding scheme is presented above (Table 3).
Table 3 Coding system
Design Activity
Code
Description
Example of dialog
Stages
Naming
NA
Look for relevant targets in
design tasks.
Identification
ID
Identify the design goal and ‘It’s for young people to
of Need
driver.
kill time during the
commute.’
Problem
PD
Define design issue; confirm ‘Now we are designing
Definition
limit, principle, and
a service which only
rereading design
uses words, and it
requirement.
should be fun.’
Moving
MV
Not only try to solve
problem, but also try to
explore the appropriateness
of construction.
Gathering
GATH Seek for the information,
‘I forgot the name of
Information
which is required but has
that App, let’s find it.’
not been provided.
Generating
GEN Generate possible
Ideas
solutions, and list all kinds
of alternative.
Generating GA
Refer to existing case study ‘There is another way
Analogy
(such as user’s needs,
we can use, which is like
technology platform,
the pop-up comments
business model and so on), on the online video.’
proposing new solutions.
Generating GSL
Look for the information
‘I prefer Netease
Searching
you need in the existing
Newsreader because it
and Relation
databases and interrelate allows users to
219
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
Generating GC
Compound
Generating GM
Mutation
Generating GP
Principle
Modeling
MOD
Decision
DEC
Communication
COM
Implementation
IMP
Reflecting
REF
Reflecting
Need
RND
Reflecting
Design
Problem
RDP
Feasibility
Analysis
FEAS
Reflecting
Scenario
RS
Reflecting
Function
RF
them.
subscribe, as well as
Xianguo.’
Compound some existing
concepts into a new
concept.
Discard all references,
generate completely new
concept.
‘Let add some social
things in it.’
‘How about there is a
pool, in the pool, there
are readings which fit
your situation.’
Depend on core design
‘I would like to make
principles which themselves things as simple as
adhere to.
possible, because this is
the trend.’
Describe how to model
‘When you open the
concepts, and how to
App, it will get your
realize them.
location automatically,
but users need to add
tags which they are
interested in.’
Make decision during the
‘Let’s go this direction.’
design process.
Define design solutions to
others, and write down
design brief.
Produce a physical product Draw low-fidelity
or prototype.
interface, make
prototype, etc.
Reflect the moving before,
in order to know how to do
next
Reflect user’s need.
‘How about go back to
the user part? Let’s
think again about their
true needs.’
Reflect design problem, its ‘But I feel we tend to
definition and range.
‘share’ function again
while we develop this
idea.’
Feasibility analysis: whether
it meet the limits and
design principles?
Reflect concepts by
‘I’m afraid that user
transferring scenario.
can’t finish all the
contents.’
Reflect its function and
‘If it can be searched by
logic.
picture, thus, it
definitely can … ‘
220
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Reflecting RA
Assumption
Evaluation
EVAL
Reflect program’s
realization on market,
business model and
technology.
Evaluate all alternatives.
‘Is it too difficult on the
technology part? If we
don’t keep this part, will
it affect our business
model?’
Make a table to see the
differences.
Please note that this protocol is a translation of a Chinese design team, and that a
faithful translation of a transcribed protocol is nearly impossible. The designers express
their thoughts and ideas in ambiguous words and (incomplete) phrases that are hard to
translate into their English equivalents. The translated text is therefore not very
representative: many of the subtleties of the language are lost in the translation process.
Therefore the presented transcript has limited value outside the context of this study.
These problems did not affect our original data processing, since that was all done in
Chinese.
Data setup
The concept of reflective practice insists that design belongs to a kind of practice which
has the characteristic of reflection-in-action (Schön, 1983). The reflection is that people
think, respond and reflect what they are doing actively and positively during their actions.
In our previous work, we regarded every pair as a whole to see their thinking pattern and
strategy. Some other scholars also view them as a whole or see them separately in their
research. However, different from individual work, team-based work has the distinguishing
feature that team members contribute to the whole team and people share the same
information, learn from each other and generate new ideas. Thus, after two coders
finished the coding process of 18 designers’ videos, we took two set of data in each pair on
the same page to analyse their reaction. In order to find the deep reason why they behave
like this and why they get this outcome, the answer may exist in their reflection to each
other. Our setting of two people per team is also easy for us to explore the influence
between them.
To identify out mutual trigger effects, we firstly calculated the times that they trigger
each other. We define ‘trigger’ as, if Designer 1’s words are followed by Designer 2, that
means Designer 1 triggers Designer 2. Combined with the coding before, we could get
more detailed information, that what type of Designer 1’s words triggers what type of
Designer 2’s words. Taking the time that people need to contemplate into account, we
included two situations. Figure 1 shows that one person follows another seamlessly. From
this figure, we could see that Designer 1’s words belonging to category ‘RF’ triggers
Designer 2’s words of category ‘PD’. Figure 2 shows that one person follows another with a
short pause. From this figure, we could know that Designer 1’s words belonging to ‘RS’
triggers Designer 2’s words of category ‘GSL’.
221
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
Figure 1 The first situation-overlap mode.
Figure 2 The second situation- interval mode.
Trigger is mutual, which means in the whole process, designer 1 triggers designer 2
sometimes, and designer 2 triggers designer 1 sometimes. Thus, for each pair, we have
two charts. Table 4 is one of charts from Pair 5, showing the how D10 (the first row)
triggers D9 (the first column). Or, in other words, it shows how D9 is triggered by D10.
Table 4 The data of Pair 5 – how D10 (row) triggers D9 (column).
D10
ID
PD
GATH
GA
GSL
GC
GM
GP
MOD
DEC
COM
IMP
RND
RDP
RS
RF
RA
EVAL
ID
4
6
0
4
9
1
0
0
8
7
0
0
1
2
7
2
2
0
PD
6
16
1
9
18
1
0
0
18
17
2
0
6
9
24
7
5
0
GATH
3
6
5
1
8
0
0
0
4
10
0
2
1
6
7
2
3
0
GA
3
4
2
1
2
0
0
0
4
9
0
1
1
3
5
8
2
0
GSL
7
19
10
12
27
0
0
0
33
19
0
1
1
13
37
22
14
0
GC
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
GM
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
GP
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
MOD
6
13
3
2
11
1
0
0
13
16
1
0
1
8
26
6
1
0
DEC
4
12
0
3
5
0
0
0
10
26
2
9
3
9
22
8
4
0
COM
1
2
2
3
2
0
0
0
10
5
1
1
2
4
12
8
5
0
IMP
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
12
8
1
4
2
6
21
14
6
0
RND
1
4
0
0
6
0
0
0
6
9
1
0
1
4
7
4
3
0
RDP
5
11
1
2
10
1
0
0
9
18
2
1
2
7
9
5
4
0
RS
6
16
2
4
10
1
0
0
16
25
3
2
5
10
31
10
5
0
222
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
RF
3
8
5
1
5
0
0
0
12
12
3
3
2
7
26
7
1
0
RA
0
1
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
2
0
5
0
2
4
4
1
0
EVAL
1
3
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Figure 3 The info grahpic of Table 4-– how D10 (row) triggers D9(column).
Through visualizing, we could see the result more clearly through the histogram (Figure
3). The horizontal axis is the front one (D10), who leads to the words from the later one in
the vertical axis (D9). Since yellow is naming phase, green is moving phase and red is
reflecting phase, the info graphic clearly shows that what kinds of activities from D10 most
likely trigger what kinds of activities for D9. By this means, we get 18 info graphics (Figure
3) which show how each one is triggered by their partners.
Figure 4 An overview of several info graphics.
Data analysis-mutual trigger effect
Through the 18 info graphics, we can easily identify the difference in designers’ times
and network’s level of mutual triggers effect.
223
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
Cross-stage mutual trigger effect
Compared to junior designers, senior designers are more likely to initiate their
partners’ cross-stage design activities, like A’s naming stage activity initiate A’s partner’s
moving or reflecting stage activities. The difference between junior designers (D7) and
senior (D14) are very clear. Seniors have more control of at what time using what kinds of
information to stimulate their partners.
Figure 5 Novice D7 is weak in cross-stage mutual trigger effect
Figure 6 senior D14 is very strong in cross-stage mutual trigger effect
Different sensitivity to stimulation
Experts are more sensitive on mutual stimulus than novices in the ideation discussion.
Comparing Figure 7 and Figure 8, the info graphics show that the pair of D13 and D14 are
more active than D8 and D9. We could propose that senior designers are more sensitive to
partner’s activities, in the aspect of connecting, improving their ideas and making
decisions.
224
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Figure 7 D9 and D10’s performances.
Figure 8 D13 and D14’s performances.
Experts’ proficiency in reflecting stage
Experts’ activities can cause partners a higher frequency of showing reflecting
activities, which is positive to improving ideation to final concept. From the Figure 9, we
could see junior designer D7’s reflecting activity has a low degree of being triggered by
junior designer D8. In Figure 10, the reflecting activity of D5 has a medium degree of being
225
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
triggered. In Figure 11, D13 has a much higher degree in the reflecting activity triggered by
senior designer D14.
Figure 9 Novice D7 performance triggered by D8
Figure 10 Novice D5 performance triggered by D6
226
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Figure 11 D13 performance triggered by D14
Similar trigger mode in the same group
Moreover, designers’ skill level is consistent with their ability to mutually trigger their
partners. Team members which are similar in mutual trigger effect mechanisms due to
mutual effect in mind activity, are valuable to inspire to cooperation between experts and
novices. We could explore the sharing possibility of mutual trigger effect experience.
Limitation and discussions
One limitation of this work is that we observed the short-term ideation process, with a
small number of designers, which is a huge challenge to understand the real design activity
happening in design practice. Professional growth for service designer is a long and
delicate process, which impacted by various factors, including life experience, motivation
etc., that means it requires long-term tracking and research in order to clarify the clue.
Team member’s background to service ideation:
Service design is a multidisciplinary field. We find the important and positive role of
multidisciplinary team mentioned many times in the retrospective questionnaires. We
found in our experiment data, that the team combinations with different discipline
designers were more easily able to transition design stages and steps freely, which may be
thanks to the differences in their disciplines and backgrounds resulting in different angles
of thinking making it easier to pull away from the thinking patterns of a single discipline.
The study has implications for service design education (students, team leaders and
teachers):
Novice and expert have difference mechanism to solve design problems. Imaging and
leaping among different sections of activities happens to experts. For novice, they
incline to linear way of thinking and structuring problems. About the frequency of
being triggered, experts have a much higher level than novice. When designer
receives partner’s information, expert could give more feedbacks and produce more
positive outcomes. Considering the trigger results, experts have higher level in
227
YING HU, YINMAN GUO & RENKE HE
reflecting stage. Therefore, more cross-stage activity, high sensitivity and more
reflecting could be recognized as three aspects of an expert.
Although novice and expert have different level in cross-stage activity, sensitivity and
reflecting, novice have the possibility to be trained and upgraded in team-based
design practice. Since we find out the two designers in a pair present the similar
mode, it means there is a homogenization between them. The less experienced
designer in the pair could be influenced by the more experienced designer silently.
Expert have a leading and teaching effect in a team. This could be applied in the
future’s design education.
Conclusion and future work
From a series of experiments, we discussed our verbal protocol findings of service
ideation process from thinking pattern, design strategies, drive type and mutual trigger
effect through comprehensive analysis of qualitative and quantitative. In this paper we
focus on mutual trigger effect in team-based design activities. This study conducts an
analysis of the concept of derivative activities through reflective practice theory and Dorst
proposition framework approach, which contains two emphases: analysis on design stages
(naming, moving and reflecting) and design steps; analysis and comparison on mutual
trigger effect in team. We limited the study to two-persons units for group collaboration in
our protocol, which is easier to analyse compared with three and more people design
team, which is more common in industry.
Based on what have been found, it can lead to guidelines or toolkits for teachers or
students to use in their ideation process. Future work will explore more methods and
technologies to collect quantitative data, for example, to combine the sketching and
concept diagram into the current study, detect brain waves (e.g. alpha, beta waves which
indicate different mental states), analyse speech intonation (e.g. to identify ‘ah-ha’
moments), gesture analysis (e.g. to identify points of engagement and disengagement with
the creative process), and other more advanced and rich data collection, analysis, and
mining methods. Of particular interest would be the comparison of different kinds of data
points and how they correlate with points of ideation.
Acknowledgements: This project is funded by Chinese Ministry of Science and
Technology (Project code: 2012BAH85F02), International Science &
Technology Cooperation Program of China (2012DFG70310) and supported by
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
References
Atman, C., Chimka, J., Bursic, K., & Nachtmann, H. (1999). A comparison of freshman and
senior engineering design process. Design Studies, 20, 131-152.
Atman, C. J., & Turns, J. (2001). Studying engineering design learning: Four verbal protocol
studies. Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education, 37-60.
Carmel-Gilfilen C, Portillo M. (2012). Where what’s in common mediates disciplinary
diversity in design students: A shared pathway of intellectual development. Design
Studies, 33(3): 237-261.
228
Mutual Trigger Effects in Team-Based Ideation
Cash P J, Hicks B J, Culley S J. (2013). A comparison of designer activity using core design
situations in the laboratory and practice. Design Studies, 34(5): 575-611.
Cook, D., Goh, C., & Chung, C. (1999). Service typologies: a state of the art survey.
Production and Operations Management, 318-338.
DISR. (1999). The Australian service sector review 2000. Canberra: Department of Industry,
Science and Resources.
Dorst K. (1997). Describing design a comparison of paradigms (Doctoral dissertation). The
Netherlands: Delft University, 151-163.
Ericsson K A, Simon H A. (1984). Protocol analysis. MIT-press.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and
applications. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Gadrey, J., Gallouj, F., & Weinstein, O. (1995). New modes of innovation: How services
benefit industry. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 4-16.
Gero J.S. & McNeill T. (1998). An approach to the analysis of design protocols. Design
Studies, 19, 21-61.
Hu Y. Guo Y., Ji T., He R. & Galli F. (2014). Design patten and strategy in ideation.
Proceedings of 19th DMI International Design Management Research Conference,
London.
Lawson B. Schemata. (2004). Gambits and precedent: some factors in design expertise.
Design Studies, 25(5): 443-457
Li L., Hu Y. and Galli F. (2012). An Improvement In Method:From User Study First To First
To Fast Concept Design First. Proceeding Of The 2nd International Conference on Design
Creativity, Glasgow, UK.
Moreno, D. P., Hernandez, A. A., Yang, M. C., Otto, K. N., Hölttä-Otto, K., Linsey, J. S., &
Linden, A. (2014). Fundamental studies in design-by-analogy: A focus on domainknowledge experts and applications to transactional design problems. Design
Studies, 35(3), 232-272.
Moritz S. (2005). Service design: Practical access to an evolving field (3rd ed.). Cologne,
Germany: Köln International School of Design, 1-61.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New
York: Basic Books.
Sonnentag S. (1998). Expertise in professional software design: a process study. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 83(5): 702–715.
Valkenburg R, Dorst K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design studies,
1998, 19(3): 249-271.
Vinay V, Simona M. (2014). Introduction to Service Design. Available from
http://www.cipu.dk/upload/centre/cipu/pss%20130307/vinay.pdf.
229
Educating By Design
Marcello MONTORE* and Ana Lucia LUPINACCI
ESPM-SP (Brazil)
*mmontore@espm.br
Abstract: This work reports and discusses a unique pedagogical experiment
conducted in the course Project II – Corporate Identity, taught in the second
semester of the Graphic Design undergradute at Escola Superior de Propaganda
e Marketing (ESPM-SP) in São Paulo, Brazil. In 2006, ESPM partnered with the
Center for Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Technology (CIETEC) – the largest
incubator of technology companies in the country. The students at ESPM-SP
design corporate identities for incubated companies, taking into consideration
formal, functional and symbolic dimensions. This work includes:
creation of logo; creation of corporate stationery, namely: personal business
card, letterhead, envelopes and folder; and development of a Corporate Identity
Manual.
Reconciling critical academic training and preparing students for entry into the
world of work is characteristic of this Graphic Design undergraduate. To bring
together pedagogical goals with real world design activity, we adapted and
implemented a methodology capable of dealing with this unusual set of different
and often conflicting needs. In eight years of unbroken partnership, students
have created identities for 202 companies and research has shown that 80% are
using or intend to use them in the near future.
Keywords: corporate identity, graphic design pedagogy, methodology
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Educating by Design
Introduction
This paper describes and discusses a pedagogical experience conducted by the Graphic
Design Undergraduate at Escola Superior de Propaganda e Marketing (ESPM-SP), in São
Paulo – Brazil. This unique experience aims at connecting academic training and
professional life. In 2006, ESPM-SP set up a partnership with the Centre for Innovation,
Entrepreneurship and Technology (CIETEC), the largest business incubator in the country.
Students attending Project II – Corporate Identity, an eighteen-week, four-hour-a-week
course at the second semester of their academic training, design corporate identities for
companies incubated at CIETEC. Semiannual surveys conducted by CIETEC have allowed
the evaluation of its results.
For CIETEC, this partnership aims to allow entrepreneurs, in the beginning of their
activities, rely on consistent and professional corporate identities, that is, to provide a
coordinated and coherent image to their businesses without incurring prohibitive costs in
this early stage of their corporate lives.
As for ESPM-SP, one of the main features of its undergraduate is the reconciliation of
academic background, and the preparation of students for the world of work. It is attained,
among others, by having design professors with business experience, by the treatment of
subject matters in classes, by organizing and stimulating students to attend paralel
activities related to design and by setting up partnerships with diverse institutions.
For the influent thinker Donald Schön, practical and reflective thinking is a key aspect
of education, in which the role of personal perception and intuition makes up a kind of
skillfull practice appointed by him as reflection-in-action, that is, ‘thinking what they are
doing while they are doing it’ (Schön, 1987. Kindle edition). General expressions revealed
in actions are not always verbally explained. Still, at that time there is already construction
of a tacit knowledge24. Thus, it suggests questions, thoughts and reflections that are only
possible within those actions – it would not happen out of practice. Constituent parts of
this practice are: the process, the outcomes, and the awareness of the one who thinks and
reflects on the task. As Schön affirms, ‘our thought turns back on the surprising
phenomenon and, at the same time, back on itself’ (Schön, 1987. Kindle edition).
On the review and restructuring of this practical knowledge, that is, reflection-inaction, unexpected changes of direction of thought may occur. It is pretty different from
applied knowledge, which takes into account an explicit conceptual and practical basis,
thus enabling a connection for solving the problem at hand.
It is important to note that Schön grounds his work in the theory of inquiry created by
the North-american philosopher John Dewey, which emphasizes learning by doing.
24
Tacit knowledge is a concept found in the epistemology of Michael Polanyi. It works out the idea of
knowledge construction incorporating perceptual aspects to the rationalization and objectification of
knowledge, as clues and inferences. Thus, Polanyi places the explicit and tacit dimensions as
participants of this construction. Using the metaphor of the iceberg, the emerged or visible part is
the explanation, for instance verbalization – oral and written. About the immersed part, that is, the
tacit dimension, he shows that there is indeed knowledge on what has not been, or can not be
explained. It is particularly revealing in design, once the languages used for this knowing-in-action
are manifold, thus, requiring different representation skills.
231
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
He has to see on his own behalf and in his own way the relations between means and
methods employed and results achieved. Nobody else can see for him, and he can't see
just by being 'told,' although the right kind of telling may guide his seeing and thus help
him see what he needes to see (Dewey apud Schön, 1987. Kindle edition).
Based on the concepts by Schön discussed above, the process of coaching and learning
how to make and refine projects was structured and broadly thought of at ESPM-SP. In so
called educating by project, teachers and students engage in actions of different natures,
both have their specific perspectives and they assign their own meanings to those actions.
In addition to quests for creative and technical solutions, students develop attitudinal
skills, that we believe HEIs should also focus on to better prepare future professionals.
Educating by project
The project courses in Graphic Design Undergraduate at ESPM-SP have been founded,
as far as possible, on students' practical experiences. The proposed methodology aims to
exploring aspects of educating by projects at college, mainly in courses focused on visual
education, and emphasize the role of integrated and or interdisciplinary projects.
The idea of Universities as the greatest symbols of institutions dedicated to research
and theory, brings immediate parallel to organizations and companies devoted to the
practical world, what we may call the reality of the market. The intersection of both worlds
in the construction of knowledge, in spite of outstanding actions in this direction, it is still
dilemma and discomfort for many academics and many HEIs in the country.
The notion of designing, comprehensive in relation to other topics and areas beyond
design itself, always refers to becoming, to an idea of future that has its purpose and
ethical dimension on actual actions. As Brazilian theorist of education Nilson Machado
says, ‘The project is not a simple representation of tomorrow, but of a future to be
created, of a tomorrow to be materialized, of an idea turning into action’ (Machado, 2004,
p. 5. Our translation).
Projecting enables the continuous and complex exercise of looking at a scenario and
see ourselves as part of it, and also makes us wonder about the values that make us belong
to it. The idea of a projected action is two-way: scenarios and values, external and internal,
collective and individual. Therefore, projecting is to formulate and to problematize from
boundaries such as cultural, aesthetic, economic, social, marketing and technological,
adjusting them in a search for meaning in between these dualisms.
In its broadest sense the idea of projecting grounds its conception and action for the
design activity, combining methods, practices and, of course, actions. This is what we seek
in the pedagogical experience presented and discussed in this paper, that is, a contribution
to a broader understanding of design as an idea of projecting as explained before and,
above all, how to educate by design.
Educating by design embodies different perceptions, approaches and conceptions of
knowledge that it becomes fundamental to establish a scope. Here, we refer to formal
education and to higher education in particular. Although the focus on the thoroughly
understanding of the design field may be characterized by the project, it is in a more
humanistic and at the same time singularized perspective, that we approach what Boutinet
232
Educating by Design
in his Anthropology of the Project (2002) considers the two founding aspects of the whole
project:
Symbolic dimension, for him the value of project's existence; and
Technical dimension, for him the value of project's effectiveness.
The symbolic dimension relates to meaning and the sense it triggers. The technical
dimension relates to its materiality, justifying the action of every project.
Anthropologically, projecting provides a cognitive anticipation and a continuous transit
between the individual and the recognition of otherness.
This view has contributed to reflections and actions concerning the Undergraduate, the
search for its vitality and consistency and a consequent criticism. From the beginning, its
pedagogical proposition had a structural axis of semiannual project courses. Its conceptual
grouping of contents, methodologies and activities pervade every semester and provide a
multitude of experiences and partnerships such as CIETEC's.
ESPM-SP – CIETEC: partnership and project objectives
Since 2004, when the Graphic Design Undergraduate began, the syllabus of Project II –
Corporate Identity proposed the design or redesign of corporate identities for small
companies. The students were responsible to contact and to convince the owners of those
companies to participate in the project. From 2006 on, CIETEC has been providing
entrepreneurships, which have a non-professional corporate identity or none at all. The
student's job includes:
creation of logo and corporate identity;
design of stationery namely: personal business card, letterhead, envelopes and
folder; and
development of a Corporate Identity Manual.
From the academic point of view, the aim of this work is to give students a real world
work experience still in early stages of their training (second semester of the Graphic
Design undergraduate) with the guidance of a professor. We adopted Schön's practical and
reflective knowledge as the founding element of pedagogical strategies to deal with this
partnership in the best possible way.
In this process, students assimilate the need for intense and permanent dialogue with
their ‘clients’, that is, the entrepreneurs. Thereby, they become able to understand the
activity of graphic design as troubleshooting in communication which takes into
consideration the aesthetic, functional, technical, strategic and symbolic dimensions, thus
promoting differentiation and relevance to their client's businesses images.
A broader comprehension of the design process, the dialogue with students and the
professor – who is also a practitioner designer –, make the entrepreneurs better
understand and value the activity of designers as strategic partners. Therefore they
become able to spread this relevant notion to their peers. That kind of understanding has
been reported in periodic evaluations performed by CIETEC (shown below), and also
through oral testimonies of entrepreneurs. Those who participated in this experience claim
that they actually changed their understanding regarding the design activity and its huge
potential as a strategic tool for businesses. They come to the conclusion that design
233
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
implies the solution of problems using a proven methodology, which aims to enhance the
outcomes and optimize communication, away from the widespread and wrong idea that
designers are subject only to inspiration. As stated by Alina Wheeler:
The brand identity process is a proven and disciplined method for creating and
implementing a identity. It is a rigorous process demanding a combination of
investigation, strategic thinking, design excellence, and project management skills. It
requires an extraordinary amount of patience, an obsession for getting it right, and an
ability to synthesize vast amounts of information. [...]
The process is defined by distinct phases with logical beginning and ending points,
which allow decision making at the appropriate intervals.[...] The process, when done
right, can achieve remarkable results (Wheeler, 2003, p. 54).
These remarkable results is what we seek to achieve in this partnership. The work
process is what ‘assures the client that a proven method is being used to achieve business
results’ and thus, ‘sets expectations for the complexity of the process’ (Wheeler, 2003. p.
55).
Our perception is that the students feel challenged and stimulated by the prospect of
having their designs effectively implemented. Hence, their commitment to outcomes have
been greater than that observed when their work will have no actual use to clients (we are
comparing results from 2004-2006 classes – before the partnership with CIETEC –, to 20062014).
ESPM-SP and CIETEC evaluate the partnership on a semester by semestre basis. The
partnership frequently undergoes review, revisions and improvements. On 16 semesters,
that is, until 2014 we have created corporate identities for 202 companies, what results in
an average of 12 companies attended per semester.
Pedagogical contents
To implement the concepts of Schön explained above and to optimize the student's
projects, the course's contents are structured in three teaching units, namely:
Conceptual
Theoretical and practical classes in which students do exercises and read texts about
the subject matter. The professor explains and discusses the concepts and procedures for
developing corporate identities. These lessons cover the following contents:
the history of creating corporate identities;
concepts for the creation and evaluation of corporate identities;
seminars based on texts selected by the professor, which complement and reinforce
the conceptual contents taught in class;
terminology;
design methodology; and
creative processes.
234
Educating by Design
Procedural
Parallel to the conceptual approach, students learn and develop technical skills to
create graphic symbols, logotypes and logos, and to develop stationery. They face the
importance of coherent and structured corporate identities through the companies´
multiple points of contacts with its audiences. These lessons cover the following contents:
logo creation for a fictitious company (as an exercise);
technical aspects of a logo design, such as minimum size and clear space;
creation of stationery: business card, letterhead, envelopes and folder for the
fictitious company; and
presentation of cases of actual corporate identities and preparation for the
development of a Corporate Identity Manual.
Attitudinal
In scheduled meetings which take place at school, students present and discusses their
designs with their clients. The classroom is organized just like meeting rooms so they feel
they have their own professional spaces. It adds to the general feeling of a real business
presentation. Thereby students realize the importance of quality presentation materials,
proper behaviour, extensive design and concepts control and the so needed rhetoric
appropriate to presentation and ideas exchange with clients.
The attitudes of students toward the entrepreneurs is observed and later discussed by
the professor. The students are also stimulated to self evaluate their behaviour, body
positioning, rhetoric, selection of arguments and observe the responses and remarks made
by the entrepreneurs.
Project structure: interdisciplinarity, strategy and
methods
The Graphic Design Undergraduate at ESPM-SP values interdisciplinarity and seeks to
accomplish it in as many possible courses spread through all the semesters. We
understand that it helps the student make relationships between bodies of knowledge
produced in diverse conceptual, theoretical and practical courses. The Brazilian theorist of
education Lea Anastasiou defines interdisciplinarity as: ‘[...] the interaction of two or more
courses, from ideas, actions, tasks, to the interaction of conceptual fields, laws and
principles, and where the emergence of a new course is even a possibility’ (Anastasiou,
2004, p. 52. Our translation).
In this case, Project II – Corporate Identity works side-by-side with the course Graphic
Fundamentals. While in Project II students learn and practice conceptual, theoretical and
practical contents related to corporate identities, in Graphic Fundamentals they learn
about printing technologies, the use vector illustration and desktop publishing software
which helps them refine the logo (created in Project II) and develop the Corporate Identity
Manual. They also have conceptual reinforcements. The precise alignment of these
contents and schedules enables students to understand that knowledge is only formally
divided into different courses. They realize that it is their task merging them into a
consistent and cohesive whole during their academic training.
235
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
The corporate identity design process is done in teams with no more than four
students and values strategic thinking. Students are free to choose their working peers. It
is important to note that there can be no change of team members along the semester
and these teams will attend their clients just like a design company would do. Regarding
teamwork strategy, Anastasiou says that:
[...] careful organization and preparation is fundamental to the work, as is the
thoroughly thought planning shared with the student who, as a subject of his own
learning process, act diligently. Therefore the objectives, rules, forms of action, roles,
responsibilities, in short, the process and desired outcomes must be explicit and agreed
upon (Anastasiou, 2004, p. 75. Our translation).
We take into consideration the need for careful preparation and organization,
mentioned by Anastasiou, as a basic condition to ensure proper progress of the project,
precise allocation of interdisciplinary contents and thus enhance expected outcomes.
When dealing with teams, it is of utmost relevance, among other factors, creating
equality in the treatment of clients, meaning that one single and strict standard must be
followed by all teams. It includes, for instance, the same number of meetings with clients
and how the work shall be delivered. It has forced us to improve the organization every
new semester and accompany each one of the teams individually to ensure equality.
We have strategically divided the course in two moments. The first one takes place in
the first half of the semester (first two months), when students are introduced to the
history of brand identities, its terminology, concepts and methods. The classes include
theory and exercises. Students develop individually a corporate identity for a fictitious
company as preparation for the job ahead. Besides the logo, they create business card,
letterhead, envelopes and folder. These materials are analysed and discussed with the
whole group in class.
At the second moment (two last months), students already divided in teams create
individually at first, a complete corporate identity for their client's company. These
proposals are discussed with them and one of those identities is chosen for refinement
and development by the team. It will result in the final project to be delivered and possibly
used by the client.
The methodology we developed for this partnership comprises four meetings (detailed
below) between students and entrepreneurs throughout the semester. Three of them take
place at ESPM-SP. Regarding the briefing meeting, the client and students are free to set it
wherever they choose to.
First meeting – Beginning of work
The first meeting happens two weeks before the actual beginning of the work. The
clients are invited to a lecture given by the professor about corporate identity. It aims to
present them the concepts for the creation and evaluation of identity projects, the
terminology of the field, the method which will be used throughout the work, the strategic
role of design and the client/designer ethic relationship that shall be observed. The
presentation also intends to emphasize that the corporate identity process, as Wheeler
states, is a proven method to achieve business results. It is approached what the clients
can expect of this project done by students in their second semester of academic training
that at no time competes with professional designers. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy (see
236
Educating by Design
below) that almost 80% of them consider that the outcomes met or are beyond their
expectations.
At the end of this gathering every entrepreneur is invited to explain, in general terms,
their business to the class. Then, each team of students receives randomly a company to
work for and teams and entrepreneurs are given some time to know each other, to
exchange their contact information and possibly to arrange the briefing meeting.
Briefing meeting and visual research
Within two weeks from the first meeting, the teams must schedule a briefing meeting
where the students and the client should attend to in person. This meeting is prepared in
advance. The students take with them a set of questions from a script studied previously
and think about what information they believe will be needed for the project.
To approach the field of business of their clients, they research corporate identities of
similar companies. They prepare quantitative and qualitative analysis of the identities
collected. The briefing meeting and this research are a team activity. They will configure a
base of information to take their design decisions.
Project Part I – Individual proposals
From the information previously collected, each team member develops a logo, a set of
stationery to the client (business card, letterhead, envelopes and a folder) and a corporate
identity manual. This step lasts four weeks and is supervised by the professor through
individual consultations.
The weekly appointment with the professor involves the discussion, among others, of
the key concepts underlying the work, conceptual alternatives, logo definition, the
development of the set of stationery, and the corporate identity manual. Parallel to these
activities, the students refine the logo, prepare mock-ups of the stationery and the manual
which is done under supervision of the professor of Graphic Fundamentals.
At the end of this process, students present these individual outcomes for their clients
in the classroom and have their corporate identities evaluated by the professor. It is
noteworthy that the classroom layout is completely changed to simulate individual
conference tables for each team and their clients as previously mentioned. It promotes a
different perception of the space and puts students in a different mood, that is, at that
moment they are not students nor behave like students, they are professionals presenting
their work to clients. This allows the team meetings take place simultaneously and with
minimal interference, increasing and stimulating interaction between team members and
the entrepreneur. It promotes forms of assessment by the teacher and self-assessment of
those attitudinal contents mentioned above.
Along this process, the professor emphasizes the importance of benchmarks and
foments reflections from real world design solutions. Some variables are outlined early in
the project but many others will only be discovered in the design process. As states Schön:
The work of the practicum is accomplished through some combination of the student’s
learning by doing, her interactions with coaches and fellow students, and a more
diffuse process of ‘background learning.’
Students practice in a double sense. In simulated, partial, or protected form, they
engage in the practice they wish to learn. [...] They do these things under the guidance
237
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
of a senior practitioner [...]. From time to time, these individuals may teach in the
conventional sense, communicating information, advocating theories, describing
examples of practice. Mainly, however, they function as coaches whose main activities
are demonstrating, advising, questioning, and criticizing.
Most practicums involve groups of students who are often as important to one another
as the coach. Sometimes they play the coach’s role. And it is through the medium of
the group that a student can immerse himself in the world of the practicum – the allencompassing worlds of a design studio, [...] learning new habits of thought and action.
Learning by exposure and immersion, background learning, often proceeds without
conscious awareness, although a student may become aware of it later on, as he moves
into a different setting. (Schön, 1987. Kindle edition).
After the discussion about the individual projects and its analysis by the entrepreneurs,
they are required to choose which design solution is the most appropriate for their
business. They understand the importance of this decision and that it is the ending point of
this phase. According to Wheeler, the organization of the process is ‘defined by distinct
phases with logical beginning and ending points, which allow decision making at the
appropriate intervals’ (Wheeler, 2003. p. 54).
Project Part II – Refining the solution
Once chosen, the design will undergo development by the whole team. On the next
four weeks, teams will have new appointments with the professor to help them improve
the design. The whole team will refine the chosen project based on comments and
remarks made by the entrepreneurs and on discussions with the professor. We consider
the guidance, at this moment, critical for the quality of outcomes. It is the professor's task
to encourage the students to adopt an effective teamwork approach from that moment
on.
The team also refines and completes the corporate identity manual. A meeting for final
presentation of the identities to the clients is prepared including mock-ups and a printed
manual. On this third and last meeting in the classroom, the layout is once more changed
in the same way as before, to provide conference tables to the teams. The entrepreneurs
return to ESPM-SP to check out the project outcomes for their company's' corporate
identity. The teams show their clients the refined logo, the stationery and the corporate
identity manual, which are the agreed delivery between ESPM-SP and CIETEC. From this
moment, there is no room for new refinements since the semester is at the end.
Final gathering for delivering the Corporate Identity Manual
The final gathering is a ceremony in the school's auditorium when the Corporate
Identity Manual shall be handed to the entrepreneurs. In addition to the printed version of
the Manual and the logos for immediate use, they also receive a digital one. On this
partnership it is agreed that the entrepreneurs are responsible for the printing costs of this
hardcover manual.
Students, professors, the Graphic Design Undergraduate Dean, the General
Undergraduate Dean and the Academic Dean of ESPM-SP, and the CEO and the
Partnership Coordinator at CIETEC are invited to this ceremony. Each team is summoned to
hand over officially the Corporate Identity Manual to his client. The corporate identities
238
Educating by Design
created are shown on the screen (see figure 1). Thereby, the outcomes are shared and
appreciated by all participants.
Figure 1
Example of screens (two screens for each identity) shown on the Ceremony for each
corporate identity. Source: author's image.
At the end of this gathering, one student and one entrepreneur are invited to give an
oral testimony on behalf of their peers about the process. These information are important
subsidies for reflection and for improving the partnership.
Project and partnership evaluation
From the second half of 2008, CIETEC makes semi-annual qualitative evaluation with
the entrepreneurs who participate in the partnership. From 2010 onwards in addition to
qualitative information (open questions), it included closed questions to be answered
using the following criteria:
I expected something else (EsE);
it was below my expectations (BmE);
it met my expectations (MmE); and
it exceeded my expectations (EmE).
In 2009 it was not done, and we still don't have the evaluations for the second
semester of 2012 and the years 2013 and 2014.
The questions are about the progress of the project, the coordination of the work at
CIETEC, the final outcomes and the partnership in general.
The quantitative researches were done with 57 entrepreneurs/companies divided as
follows:
2010-1 – 9 entrepreneurs/companies
2010-2 – 9 entrepreneurs/companies
2011-1 – 15 entrepreneurs/companies
2011-2 – 11 entrepreneurs/companies
2012-1 – 13 entrepreneurs/companies
239
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
Quantitative research
Below we show summary tables of the above mentioned data:
TABLE 1 - PROJECT PROGRESS25
EsE
BmE
MmE
EmE
2010-1
0%
0%
44.0%
56.0%
2010-2
0%
11.0%
44.5%
44.5%
2011-1
0%
21.3%
43.0%
35.7%
2011-2
9.0%
9.0%
64.0%
18.0%
2012-1
0%
25.0%
67.0%
8.0%
84.9% of the entrepreneurs considered that the project progress met or exceeded their
expectations. However, it is noteworthy that it has become harder to exceed their
expectations. We believe it may be related to the fact that the partnership has reached
maturity, and also that each new entrepreneur see the brand identities created in previous
semesters for their colleagues and sets higher their own expectations. It is important to
mention that every semester ESPM-SP and CIETEC organize an exhibition of the identities
created in the previous semester.
TABLE 2 - FINAL OUTCOMES
EsE
BmE
MmE
EmE
2010-1
0%
0%
22.0%
78.0%
2010-2
0%
0%
44.4%
55.6%
2011-1
0%
35.7%
35.7%
28.6%
2011-2
18.2%
9.1%
27.3%
45.5%
2012-1
16.7%
33.3%
33.3%
16.7%
For the final outcomes, we observed that 77.4% of the entrepreneurs considered that
the outcome of the project met or exceeded their expectations. However it is important to
observe the increase in the number of entrepreneurs who expected something else. We
found it worrying and believed they were misinformed about what to expect from the
partnership. So, CIETEC's coordination addressed the problem making an initial
presentation to the entrepreneurs every semester when they detail, among others, what
25
The abbreviations used refer to: EsE: I expected something else; BmE: it was below my
expectations; MmE: it met my expectations; and EmE: it exceeded my expectations.
240
Educating by Design
the entrepreneurs should expect from the partnership and what outcomes they will
receive.
TABLE 3 - ESPM-SP/CIETEC PARTNERSHIP
EsE
BmE
MmE
EmE
2010-1
0%
0%
11.0%
89.0%
2010-2
0%
0%
22.2%
77.8%
2011-1
0%
50.0%
25.0%
25.0%
2011-2
9.1%
9.1%
27.3%
54.6%
2012-1
0%
16.7%
25.0%
58.3%
About the partnership, 83.0% of entrepreneurs considered that it met or exceeded
their expectations.
The research of the second semester of 2008 (which used other criteria as mentioned
above), was answered by five of eleven participant entrepreneurs. Among the information
collected by that assessment, using excellent, good, regular and bad as criteria:
All of them (100% – five entrepreneurs) rated the partnership as excellent;
The outcome of the brand identities was considered excellent by three entrepreneurs
(60%) and good by two entrepreneurs (40%);
The project as a whole was rated excellent by three entrepreneurs (60%) and good by
two entrepreneurs (40%).
We noticed that no entrepreneur considered the results regular or bad, by any of the
above criteria.
TABLE 4 - USE OF THE CORPORATE IDENTITIES
No
Partly
Yes
2010-1
0%
0%
100.0%
2010-2
11.1%
22.2%
66.7%
2011-1
13.3%
20.0%
66.7%
2011-2
16.7%
0%
83.3%
2012-1
50.0%
0%
50.0%
81.8 % of the entrepreneurs said they will use fully or partially the corporate identities
created by the students. It is worrying the great increase of those entrepreneurs who don't
intend to use them. We have improved the briefing to enrich the quality of information
that will base the project. Future researches may tell us if it has had any impact on these
numbers.
241
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
We show below (see figures 2 to 4) samples of materials the entrepreneurs are
effectively using. Some of them have used the logo in materials other than the stationery,
such as press kits, candy packagings, CD-ROMs, brochures and folders. What is relevant to
notice is that all of them respect the rules in the Corporate Identity Manual, like minimum
sizes and clear spaces. That shows they understood the importance of following those
rules to keep the coherence and consistency of their businesses' images.
Figure 2
Corporate Identities developed for Cemsa – mass spectrometry center applied, created in
the first semester of 2009 by André Bauer, Lucas Veloso and Pedro Spinola; Cast
Overmedia – video and media management, created in the first semester of 2010 by
André Puga, Eric Delbosque and Thomas Mourão; KPI Farm – land measurements
technology, created in the second semester of 2010 by Flora Tortorelli, Juliana Barletta
and Matheus Zoccal and Enercycle – energy recycling, created in the first semester of
2012 by Alex Fidelholc and Arthur Franco.
242
Educating by Design
Figure 3
Corporate Identity for Chem4u, a chemical company, developed in the second semester of
2010by the students André Tanahara, Lorena Bósio and Marianne Meni.
Figure 4
Corporate Identity for Aztek, a mobile learning company, developed in the second
semester of 2009by the students Fabiana Seto, Flávia Amato and Gustavo Alcover.
243
MARCELLO MONTORE & ANA LUCIA LUPINACCI
CONCLUSION
The project is supportive of a logic of action. It is not only theory nor only practice, it
anchors itself in its discourse and in its own doing (BOUTINET, 2002, p. 255. Our
translation).
Educating in design involves specific issues and singularities in the pursuit of
knowledge, and in this pedagogical experience we seek to reinforce some issues relating to
education in general and to educating by projects. We have shown theoretical
contributions combined with practical experience which demonstrated its success.
Different pedagogical actions call for approaches and epistemological concepts within
certain frames of reference (our own symbolic systems), where we find a plural sense.
It is important to clear that, in the project and its accomplishment, the solution is just
one among possible alternatives; hence the appropriateness, the scenario and the
purposes are what is pursued and questioned in each and every one of particular projects.
To carry out a project and at the same time its ambitions and expansions, it is the aim
to act that makes one perceive when this project's scope and limitations have been
reached. Thus, to design is also a way to seeing the present-future relationship and insert
perspective in the training of students with an eye in their personal achievements and also
as citizens.
Along these eight years of uninterrupted partnership with CIETEC, 202 companies had
their corporate identities created by students of ESPM-SP. We do believe that this
partnership has been reinforcing the objectives and the theoretical and methodological
proposal of the Graphic Design Undergraduate valued by the College's pedagogical project.
Thereby, when we work, as we do, with a practical and reflective teaching, we glimpse
something that can bring diverse contents and experiences to the students. These are not
confined only to this immediate project, they spread throughout their academic and
professional lives. Teaching by projects is, in our point of view, what anchors this
proposition of a graphic design undergraduate more properly.
This unique experience (we know of no other of this kind in Brazil) is a dynamic process
that undergoes constant and permanent revision and update. We feel there is always
room for improvement and we are attentive to it.
We may not forget the importance of this connection with entrepreneurs to raise their
awareness (and also the student´s) about the strategic dimension of design. The briefing
meeting has been reported as one of the most important moments of the whole project
since it brings to light reflections and thoughts about the businesses that were not
previously discussed. In this sense, clients and designers (students in this case) think
together about strategic possibilities for their companies images and communication with
its clients.
This partnership and the refined methodology developed for this process have proved
effective by research in helping to close the gap between academic training and
professional life. We must also point the relevant role of the professor along the whole
project. Besides providing contents – not just conceptual or technical, but also attitudinal
or behavioral – he must show a firm hand in following the process very close. He must also
be available to the students who see him as a guide through this sometimes anguishing
process of growth and maturation. Students have reported this experience as a turning
point in their lifes. We feel that their commitment to this project arises in them a desire to
244
Educating by Design
do more during their undergraduate and to improve their knowledge to become the best
possible future graphic designers.
References
Anastasiou, L. & Alves, L. (2004). Processos de ensinagem na universidade: pressupostos
para as estratégias de trabalho em aula. Joinville, Brazil: UNIVILLE.
Boutinet, J. (2002). Anthropologie du projet. Paris, France: PUF.
Lupinacci, Ana Lucia G.R. (2012). Design, projeto, linguagem, educação: das reflexões às
híbridas ações. PhD Thesis. São Paulo, Brazil: ECA-USP.
Machado, N. (2004). Educação, projetos e valores. São Paulo, Brazil: Escrituras.
Machado, N. (2009). Educação – competência e qualidade. São Paulo, Brazil: Escrituras
Polanyi, M. (1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, UK: Peter Smith.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: toward a new design for teaching
and learning in the professions. San Francisco, United States: Jossey-Bass. Kindle
edition.
Wheeler, A. (2003). Designing Brand Identity: an essential guide for the whole branding
team. Hoboken, United States: Wiley.
245
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum: A Framework
For Shaping a Participatory, Human-Centered Design
Course
Pamela NAPIER* and Terri WADA
Indiana University, Herron School of Art and Design
*pcnapier@iupui.edu
Abstract: Within design education and practice today, new ways are
continuously being developed to utilize Design Thinking in response to social,
environmental, economic, and cultural factors. In the Visual Communication
Design program at Indiana University, Herron School of Art and Design, Design
Thinking is an integral component to both curriculum development and course
content. In considering the inherent complexity of human-centered design—
which focuses on diverse stakeholder collaboration and participation within the
design process—simply understanding a design process and methods for
collecting data is not enough. Students must go through a process of building a
value system for conducting participatory design research. They must also
understand the nature of the changing role of designers, from more traditional
‘making’ roles, to design facilitators who must possess a particular mindset,
model certain characteristics, employ distinct skill sets and use a specific
approach. This presentation and paper will focus on an in-depth case study that
describes the authors' methodology for integrating Design Thinking into the
course curriculum of an undergraduate senior-level studio course, titled ‘Design
for Innovation: Introduction to Design Methods,’ where students work in a
variety of real contexts with diverse stakeholders throughout the design process.
Keywords: Design facilitation, Participatory methods
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Introduction
Our profession is changing dramatically and in doing so, redefining what today’s visual
communication designer is and does. Various factors may be seen as bringing about this
change including: evolving designer roles, a focus on participatory approaches, and a shift
to a problem-seeking—as opposed to problem-solving—mentality. Within this evolving
discipline, emphasis on human-centered design practices and programs have emerged in
response to an identified need for including user perspectives. Currently, there appears to
be quite a bit of existing research and texts available in the areas of methods and
processes for participatory design research. However, due to the inherent complexity of
human-centered design—which focuses on diverse stakeholder engagement, collaboration
and participation within a design process—simply understanding a design process and
deploying design research methods is not enough.
From a professional standpoint, the designer of today must be able to develop design
activities that empower stakeholders to express, make, evaluate and collaborate.
Additionally, the designer of today must be able to understand the increased value that
stakeholders bring to the design process and must be able to facilitate others through the
design process.
Curriculum
Within the Visual Communication Design Undergraduate program at Indiana University
Herron School of Art and Design, specifically in the junior and senior year, we utilize a
human-centered approach to social innovation projects. We not only place emphasis on
understanding and utilizing Design Thinking throughout a collaborative design process, and
developing and deploying appropriate design research methods, but we also emphasize
design facilitation as a distinctive capacity necessary for driving and leading participatory
design or co-design approaches that are seemingly fundamental in human-centered
design.
The student experience in the senior year is focused around three core studio courses:
Visual Communication Design 5: Introduction to Design Methods; Visual Communication
Design 6: Capstone Portfolio; and selecting one of two tracks: Design Interaction: Object
and Place I and II, or Designing People-centered Services I and II.
While students have had some experience in conducting research to inform visual
communication design outcomes, their first introduction to the myriad of design research
methods that exist (and how to select and deploy them throughout the design process),
happens in the first semester of their senior year.
Visual Communication Design 5: Introduction to Design Methods is the penultimate
studio (the main curricular experience) in the fall semester, and is an important step in all
visual communication design students’ educational experience. They continue building
their skills for developing collaborative, student-driven research projects, however in this
course, they are beginning to dive deeper into the theory behind participatory design
research, and utilizing more primary research methods versus mainly secondary research.
Primary research can be defined as ‘original research that is conducted by an organization
for its own use,’ versus secondary research, which refers to ‘reviewing a collection of data
or findings that have previously been published by an outside party, for an alternative
function’ (Visocky O’Grady, 2006).
247
NAPIER & WADA
The purpose of this course is to prepare senior visual communication design students
to successfully utilize design as a catalyst for change and innovation in our society and
culture. Within the course, students learn how to apply and integrate theory and skills for
selecting, developing and deploying design research methods throughout a creative
problem-solving design process. Students work in real contexts with stakeholders to
develop appropriate, meaningful and innovative solutions to complex ‘unframed’
challenges. Meaning that students conduct research in situations where problems have yet
to be defined, and they must work with people to identify and frame the challenges that
they will be trying to address. This may result in developing solutions that are outside of
the traditional expected visual communication outcomes. Special emphasis is placed on
service-learning as a pedagogical approach, and students are asked to continuously reflect
on their identity as a civic-minded designer.
Students in this course are tasked with first, self-selecting into groups of 3-5 people,
based on preliminary understanding of each student’s individual strengths, weaknesses
and future interests. ‘A study by Denton, published in 1997, examined some factors
involved in the planning and practice of multidisciplinary team-based design project work
at undergraduate level. The study reports that since industries increasingly require more
multidisciplinary project work than monodisciplinary team work, the demand for design
college graduates with experience in the former is increasing’ (Kwon & Jang, 2013).
Once they have their group formed, they are then tasked with selecting a context in the
local community (which could be a place, a service or organization, or a particular
experience) and identifying and framing a social issue/concern or problem space within
that context. Examples of issues could range from innovation in healthcare, to
governmental participation, to enhancing transportation. Students develop an action plan
for design research and utilize participatory design research methods to understand the
needs of the community and enable community members to generate ideas and evaluate
the proposed solutions. The methods that the students develop and deploy allow
community members to become co-designers throughout the process, in order to develop
the most appropriate and meaningful solutions.
A key learning outcome of this course is the ability to empathize with the people who
will be affected by or use the designed solution, be it a product, a service or some kind of
interaction. Civic-engagement is a critical component for this learning outcome, as it allows
students to work directly with stakeholders to deeply understand their issues and needs,
thus building empathy for them throughout the design process.
Course Structure and Activities
This 6-credit course meets in the studio for 2.5 hours, three times per week, for 16
weeks. The semester is segmented according to a high-level design process, which gets
broken down into three phases: Analysis, Synthesis and Evaluation. Emphasis is placed on
the selection, development and deployment of appropriate design research methods
within each phase.
The overall semester plan is broken down into 8 main areas: Developing a Mission
Statement; Introduction to Design Thinking; Team Formation, Context Selection and
Developing a Research Plan; Visualizing Information; Analysis Phase; Synthesis Phase;
Evaluation Phase; and Reflection.
248
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
The first 2 weeks of the semester focus on developing a personal mission statement; an
introduction to design thinking and participatory design research; team formation, context
selection and building a research plan; and techniques and activities to practice visualizing
information. The students then spend 4 weeks in the analysis phase, 4 weeks in the
synthesis phase, and 2 weeks in the evaluation phase. Throughout the three phases, each
week the students select at least one new method to execute. The last week focuses on
critical reflection and presentation of final deliverables.
The breakdown of weekly activities during the three phases stays within a consistent
structure. One day is reserved for ‘field research days,’ where the students are expected to
be in the field conducting research, working with stakeholders and participants and
deploying methods. On another day, the student groups meet with the instructors to
report on the method/s that they conducted, and their plans for selecting new method/s
for the following week. And the last day is reserved for reporting back to the entire class,
creating highly visual presentations describing the method/s, tools and process used,
including visualizations that portray the collected data, and findings and insights from
those particular methods.
The required books for the course included Vijay Kumar’s ‘101 Design Methods: A
Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your Organization,’ and Bruce Hanington
and Bella Martin’s ‘Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research Complex
Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions.’ These texts are used
as a starting point for identifying and selecting methods, and students are encouraged to
seek out other sources as well. These resources have been selected as the methods
presented enabled students to consider how research could be incorporated throughout a
design process, both with diverse stakeholders or designers only.
‘While research skills are more typically expected of graduate students, studies in
general education and design can introduce undergraduate students to research methods
and prepare them to read and use findings in studio projects. Student work at all levels,
therefore, should be informed by the study of:
What people want and need
What the context demands
How things get planned, produced and distributed
The effects of design action
Tools and methods for exploring these issues’ (Grefe, 2012, para. 9, section 5
‘Research).
The following sections describe the eight main areas of the semester activities,
highlighting both process and content.
Developing a Mission Statement
Upon entering their final year of college, most senior visual communication design
students in the program are met with the mixed emotions of anxiety and excitement at the
prospect of entering the ‘real world’ in just 8 months.
In order to enable the students to be reflective, as well as projective, on the first day of
class, students are given the assignment to develop a ‘personal mission statement.’ This is
intended to have students take inventory of where they are currently in their educational
249
NAPIER & WADA
experience, and where they plan to go professionally. Taken from an article published by
the Levo League, a ‘growing community of professional women seeking advice, inspiration,
and the tools needed to succeed,’ a series of questions and prompts are given to the
students to help craft their mission statement. First, they go through a process of taking an
inventory of their character strengths and virtues, examining their dominant personality
traits. Next, they clarify and define where there personal and professional priorities lie.
Then, they gather all of this information and reflect on four questions: Why are you here in
the first place? What does the world need most that you are uniquely able to provide?
What are you willing to sacrifice? What matters more than money? They are also given the
author’s example to think about how to structure their mission statement. The article,
written by the Levo League, titled ‘3 Steps to Creating a Personal Mission Statement’ is
structured into four categories: Who I am/What I value; Impact or Legacy I want to leave;
Professional Values; Personal Values (3 Steps, 2012). The students are given about a week
to complete their mission statement, and are told that they will be revisiting it at the end
of the semester.
Starting the semester with quite a heavy, introspective writing assignment is then
immediately followed by a quick, engaging activity that gives them a surface-level
understanding of the principles, process and tools used for design thinking.
Crash Course in Design Thinking
The recent emergence of open-source, human-centered design thinking tools and
resources have helped to proliferate design thinking as an approach to create meaningful
change in many new and broader contexts, such as business, healthcare and community
development. Within design education specifically, resources like the ‘Design Thinking for
Educators’ toolkit published by IDEO, and the ‘Virtual Crash Course in Design Thinking,’
shared by Stanford’s d.school, enable educators to consider how to integrate new
processes, tools and methods for design thinking into their curriculum.
Within the VC5 course, the d.school’s ‘Virtual Crash Course’ (Welcome to the Virtual,
2015) was used to provide an introduction to design thinking. The instructors facilitated
the 90-minute activity, allowing students to experience a fast-paced exploration of a
design process, using some basic principles of design thinking.
On the second day of class, students are asked to pair up and are given a set of
worksheets with several prompts. They are facilitated through a series of activities, from
interviewing each other, to sketching and prototyping ideas, to developing solutions in
order to ‘redesign the gift-giving experience’ for their partner. Each phase of the process is
timed, ranging anywhere from 1- to 10-minute activities. During the prototyping phase,
students are given an array of materials to physically build their solutions, such as pipe
cleaners, popsicle sticks, tape and tissue paper, markers, etc. At the end of the exercise,
students engage in a reflective group discussion, commenting on their experience and
their understanding of the principles of design thinking.
This 90-minute exercise allows students to experience the generative, iterative nature
of design thinking, before diving into a much longer process that will span a timeframe of
10 weeks.
250
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Team Formation, Context Selection and Research Plan
Once the students have developed their personal mission statement, and have
participated in a ‘crash course’ in design thinking, they are given a few readings,
specifically Tim Brown’s 2008 article in Harvard Business Review titled ‘Design Thinking.’
After a group discussion over the reading students are given time to self-select their teams
for their project work for the rest of the semester. Given that the students have been in
the same cohort for two years, we allowed them to develop their own 3-5 person teams,
with the caveat that they should think about their own strengths and weaknesses, their
preferred ways of working, and their relationships with one another. Once the teams were
formed, they were required to come up with a team name with the intention of building
some initial team cohesion and comradery.
Once the teams were formed, the students’ first task was to select a context within the
local community (which could be a place, a service or organization, or a particular
experience). The students were given an initial list of criteria to consider for selecting their
context. This included criteria such as accessibility; Was the context easy to access? Could
they visit the context on multiple occasions? Would there be people they could easily
engage with? Was it free to visit, or did it cost money? Was it open during class studio
hours? Another given criteria was locality; Was it close enough to be able to visit and
engage with people in person on multiple occasions?
With their given criteria, the students then worked within their teams to determine
further criteria that was important to them. Some examples included: Cost: How much
would each student be able to invest in transportation, materials, time spent outside of
class, etc.; Transportation: Were each of the team members able to visit the location/s?
Did it need to be on-campus if there were team members who didn’t have vehicles?;
Connections: Did any of the team members have any personal or professional connections
they could capitalize on?; and Interest: Did each of the team members have a vested
interest in the context?
Each of the teams spent time outside of class individually thinking about and searching
for possible contexts. When they came back together, they had to narrow down to three
possible contexts that they would present to the instructors to receive guidance and
feedback on selecting one to move forward with. Of the nine student teams, the final
selected contexts ranged from focusing on shuttle transportation on campus, to the
service experience at a local coffee shop, to the independent local musicians’ experience in
producing and promoting their music.
Once the teams narrowed their context selection, they were then tasked with
developing an initial research plan. They were given an example research plan that was
adapted from the Instructional Assessment Resources site from the University of Texas at
Austin, which focused on eight main categories: Project Title, List of Investigators, Project
Goals, Background and Significance, Methods of Research and Design, Participants and
Interaction, Potential risks, and Potential Benefits (Instructional, 2011).
Each of the teams developed their research plan and presented it to the instructors,
receiving detailed feedback for how to move forward and begin their initial research.
Visualizing Information
As the students began to conduct their initial secondary research, they were given a
short assignment to find a complex data set and visualize it in two very different ways.
251
NAPIER & WADA
Through short readings and lectures, the students were reminded about the importance of
the ability to visualize complex information in order to add meaning to collected data,
represent and communicate relationships and patterns, and bring clarity to concepts.
The students spent roughly 3-4 days creating their visuals, at the end of which a full
class critique was held. During the critique students provided comments and gave
constructive criticism and feedback to each other, focusing on the layout, composition,
visual vocabulary, type treatments, etc. of each of their peer’s visuals.
This short activity was meant to get the students to start practicing how to visualize
complex information for the purposes of clarity and communication; a refresher of sorts to
practice their skills of information design.
Design Process for Research
As previously mentioned, to help students frame their research this course utilized a
general design process consisting of 3 phases: analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Although
there are many differing processes for approaching design both within visual
communication as well as other design disciplines, the analysis, synthesis, evaluation
model can be recognized as one of the highest-level design processes (Dorst, 2009).
As presented in the course, the Analysis phase is concerned with conducting research
to understand the context of the project for the purpose of developing insights and
framing root problems or challenges. Building upon understanding developed in the
previous phase, Synthesis then focuses on generating solution ideas to address these root
problems or challenges. Lastly, the Evaluation phase centers around further developing
ideas gathered from the Synthesis phase in order to test, refine and iterate upon
prototyped solutions.
In moving through the three phases, each week every team was required to plan,
conduct and present on at least one research method respective to whichever phase of
design process they were working in. To aid in carrying out their weekly research, teams
met independently with the course instructors once per week to briefly discuss findings
from previous methods, propose the next method and get feedback on tools developed for
carrying out the next method. Each team also presented the same information, in a more
formal manner, to the rest of the class in order to gather additional feedback as well as
engage students in reflective practice. The teams then utilized their remaining weekly
course time conducting research in the field.
Analysis Phase
Beginning their participatory research in analysis, students were first introduced to the
purpose and outcomes of the Analysis phase through a facilitated discussion. Here it was
established that the main goal of this phase was to gather data focused on developing an
understanding about the research context. For example: who are the stakeholders; what
does the physical environment look like; what is the culture; what actions, behaviors and
values exist; what are the current experiences of people within the context; and so on.
As the teams moved through the Analysis phase, most began by conducting
ethnographic observations and one-on-one interviews. These methods enabled students
to gather a rich amount of qualitative data that they would then need to make sense of, or
(for lack of better terms at the time), analyze and synthesize. Use of these terms within a
larger process constructed upon the same, proved problematic as students at times
252
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
became quite confused about why they were synthesizing information within the Analysis
phase. Prior to carrying out their methods with participants, each team was required to
meet with the instructors to discuss their plans for engaging people in context and to
obtain suggestions or feedback on any tools they would be using.
Figure 1
Student developed observation tool
Drawing from their professional experience as design researchers, the course
instructors were able to offer insights from a high-level, considering the method choice as
a whole in relation to the research question being explored. Under closer examination, the
instructors also provided guidance in terms of both existing tools that could be used—such
as digital cameras, notepads, or audio recorders—along with created tools, worksheets,
interview questions, and observation frameworks, for example.
As the teams gathered data via their research method, emphasis was placed on the
development of visuals to both assist students in making sense of their data, along with
enabling others to engage with their research process and findings. Several of these visuals
took form as an infographic or rough experience map. Based on a newly developed
understanding about the research context, the teams were then guided to develop a new
research question upon which to shape the next method around. This activity of framing a
weekly research question encouraged the students to reflect on the work they had done
so far, in order to identify missing perspectives or factors thus, areas for further research.
Through repeating this process of contextual exploration over four weeks, the students
were able to narrow in on a root problem, which then became a challenge statement for
moving into the Synthesis phase. A challenge statement is a problem that is restated in the
form of a question (Basadur, 1994). At Herron School of Art and Design, we have adopted
the practice of restating problems as ‘how might we’ statements. Following are a couple of
examples of teams’ challenge statements: ‘How might we create a more
engaging first floor that is more inspiring, inviting and promotes communication within
253
NAPIER & WADA
Platform?’ and ‘How might we create a more social dining environment to eliminate the
‘open-seat, closed-table’ concept?’
Synthesis Phase
Once each team developed their challenge statement, they moved into the Synthesis
Phase. Within the course and project context, this phase focuses on solution development
through idea generation and prototyping. Students were encouraged to hold participatory
sessions enabling participants to generate and develop ideas through focused, facilitated
activities.
Generally, the teams worked through synthesis, by first thinking divergently and
gathering many ideas. From those ideas, themes or patterns were identified and used to
enable more focused ideation in subsequent methods. An example of a method pairing
used by one team was: ‘brainwalking’ and ‘affinity clustering,’ followed by focused
brainstorming on post-its.
Figure 2
Student developed model of brainwalking session
254
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Figure 3
Focused post-it brainstorm
Within this divergent step of idea generation, most ideas either offer only part of a
solution or are much too vague to move forward with. At this point, ideas then need to be
further fleshed out and concretized through modeling or prototyping. A few methods
utilized by teams were: card sorting as a modular modeling activity, solution
storyboarding, and co-design sessions.
Figure 4
Student developed modular concept modeling cards in action
255
NAPIER & WADA
Figure 5
Student developed solution storyboard tools in action
As outcomes for the Synthesis phase, teams were expected to create rough solution
prototypes to serve as models that could be taken into the next phase of Evaluation.
Evaluation Phase
Evaluation, being the shortest phase, was only allotted two weeks. This rapid
structuring was intentional in creating the course; considering the main emphasis on
refinement of an existing model through participant feedback, less time would be needed
to shape methods and tools to do so.
Working through this phase, teams generally utilized their solution prototype, resulting
from the Synthesis phase, as a prompting point for gathering feedback from participants
from multiple perspectives. These engagements took place primarily through either oneon-one or group interactions. A few example methods used by the teams included:
feedback interviews, evaluative questionnaires, and ergonomic studies.
256
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Figure 6
Solution prototype used in feedback interview
As an expected outcome from the Evaluation phase, teams were required to develop a
refined prototype that incorporated participant feedback. Due to the diversity across the
resulting solutions from each team, the course could not require a specific outcome, such
as a website, an app, and so forth. Instead, teams were instructed to produce a final
deliverable that successfully modeled or represented their solution concept to the highestlevel of fidelity that the students’ skills would allow. In this case, a few outcomes that
teams developed included a conceptual model for a non-profit music organization, interior
concepts for remodeling an on-campus dinning area, and spatial layouts along with
concepts for an environmental communication piece.
Reflection
Critical reflection is a core component of studio courses within the Visual
Communication Design program at Herron School of Art and Design. Emphasis is placed on
two specific forms of reflection: ‘reflection-in-action,’ and ‘reflection-on-action.’
Donald Shön, an influential thinker in the twentieth century who worked on developing
the theory and practice of reflective professional learning, defined reflection-in-action as a
practice where the designer is continually reflecting throughout the process on the current
understanding of the problem space and the validity and appropriateness of the ideas and
solutions being developed (Dorst & Lawson, 2009). Bryan Lawson and Kees Dorst, who
developed a new model of design expertise, describe reflection-on-action as being able to
step back from a particular design activity to assess the process or ‘flow’ of the activity or
activities as a whole (Dorst & Lawson, 2009).
While each weekly presentation allowed the students to share their moments of
reflection throughout their research, they were also required to participate in a whole
class discussion, as well as complete a written reflection, at the end of the semester.
257
NAPIER & WADA
On the last day of class, students turned in both digital and print versions of their final
case studies that resulted in various formats, from books, to websites, to digital magazines.
The case study was to highlight their context, research, process, methods, findings and
final prototyped solutions. They spent the first third of the class time looking at each
other’s work and talking amongst one another. Once everyone had a chance to view all of
the work, the instructors facilitated a group reflection discussion. Some of the prompting
questions included: How has this course experience changed/impacted your understanding
of participatory design? What were some of the most valuable experiences, both positive
and negative? How do you envision the content and experiences of this course
impacting/influencing what you will do in your Capstone course the following semester,
and even after you graduate?
In addition to the group reflection discussion, students turned in a final written
reflection. They were given the DEAL Model for Critical Reflection, developed by Dr. Patti
Clayton of North Carolina State University (Clayton, n.d.) which asks them to break down
their experiences and reflection into three areas: ‘Describe, Examine, and Articulate
Learning.’ They were asked to reflect on either one experience in particular, or their overall
experience in the course, connecting it back to the personal mission statement they
developed in the beginning of the semester, taking into consideration their personal and
professional goals and values. As one student stated:
‘VC5 has adjusted my scope on my professional values in that with any work
environment, it’s about meeting your supervisors requests as well as setting realistic
personal goals and treating others in the work field with respect. This course assisted me
with developing real research methods, involving real participants and working with real
stakeholders, which has been very different from previous VCD courses. This course helped
me to get out of myself and to take risks, to have faith, and to take the time to experiment,
ideate, test prototypes, and present concepts to stakeholders, not knowing how they
would respond.’
While critical reflection is a core component to students’ learning experience in the
classroom, it is also essential for design educators to continuously evaluate and reflect on
the overall experiences and outcomes of the courses they teach. As part of this practice,
the instructors of this course came together at the end of the semester, and went through
a process of comparing observations and analyzing what went well and what didn't
throughout the course.
Reflection of Course Process & Outcomes
Upon reflecting on the course, the instructors identified three main challenge areas
that have been re-examined and addressed on multiple levels. The new approaches and
frameworks developed will be implemented in the Fall Semester of 2015.
Challenge area 1: Trouble understanding and building a value
system for Human-centered Design approaches
Despite the inherent emphasis on human-centeredness throughout both the
undergraduate and graduate programs at the school where the authors teach, there seems
to be no existing platform through which the values for and benefits of human-centered
258
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
approaches in design are intentionally introduced and promoted to undergraduate
students. As a result of this oversight, students appear to grasp the importance of
conducting human-centered research within the Analysis phase of a project. However,
within the solution-focused Synthesis phase, a few students adopted a ‘design expert’
mentality, where the students’ claim that their education and experience in visual
communication design means that they ‘know what is good’ for the client and users. Upon
adopting this mindset, these students refused to see the value of engaging ‘non-designers’
in generating ideas for solutions, as they determined their exclusive role in developing
ideas.
Although several concepts about collaboration, design-centered research, and design
strategy are touched upon in courses prior to this course, students need to be adequately
primed with a value-system for including people—non-designer people—as stakeholders
and active participants throughout the design process. A loosely developed value-system
that the authors have adopted and established in their human-centered service design
practice, Collabo Creative LLC, sets up three core beliefs:
1. People are experts of their own experiences.
2. All people have the ability to design.
3. Design should be done with people rather than for people.
Derived from concepts expressed by a wide range of designers from Elizabeth Sanders
(founder of Maketools and author of Convivial Toolbox), to John Thackara (director of The
Doors of Perception and author of In the Bubble), to Jane Fulton Suri (IDEO), and John
Heskett (author of Toothpicks and Logos); these three core beliefs provide the underlying
foundation which is necessary for priming students to drive human-centered approaches
in design.
Challenge area 2: How to select, develop and deploy
appropriate design research methods.
While the required books and list of sources that were given to the students provided
examples of methods, processes and tools to use, there has been a consistent issue with
finding established educational materials that are appropriate to use in teaching design
research, whether it’s in graduate or undergraduate curriculum. There exists specific
materials for both practice and application, but little that explore how to build a more
holistic understanding of design research methods, and within the scale and scope that
they need to be used. Several books and open source tools also tend to tie specific
methods to a particular design process, which becomes problematic, given that methods
can serve multiple purposes in multiple phases of a design process.
This has become a research area of particular interest to the authors, and in response
to this challenge area (which has proven to be a challenge at both undergraduate and
graduate levels), they have begun to develop a framework for design research activities,
namely, the selecting, developing and deploying of design research methods.
259
NAPIER & WADA
Figure 7
Framework for shaping design research activities developed by Collabo Creative
The activities that happen throughout the design process can be viewed through the
lens of two different forms of thinking: Divergent thinking and Convergent thinking. Dr.
Min Basadur, Professor Emeritus of Innovation in the Michael G. DeGroote School of
Business at McMaster University and recognized world leader in the field of applied
creativity, describes the skills that are associated with these two forms of thinking:
divergent thinking can be demonstrated by ‘continually seeking new opportunities for
change and improvement; viewing ambiguous situations as desirable; seeking potential
relationships beyond the known facts’ (Simplex, 57). Divergence is about quantity of ideas,
deferring judgment and widening the scope of possibilities. Convergent thinking then, is
demonstrated by ‘taking reasonable risks to proceed on an option instead of waiting for
the perfect answer; and viewing differences of opinion as helpful rather than a hindrance’
(Simplex, 57). Convergence is about the quality of ideas, applying judgment and narrowing
the scope of ideas.
Within divergent thinking there are two categories for developing design research
methods and activities: Exploratory, which has to do with exploring and understanding
‘what exists,’ and resides at the furthest point of divergent thinking; and Generative, which
focuses on exploring ‘what could be.’ Within convergent thinking, there are also two
categories: Sensemaking, which is about making sense of and ‘shaping understanding,’ and
Evaluative, which is focused on ‘shaping decisions,’ and is at the furthest point of
convergence.
The authors have broken down each category, and started to highlight specific design
research methods that may be most appropriate given the type of thinking that is needed
in a given activity:
Exploratory: Ethnographic Observation, Interviews, Participatory Sessions, Cultural
Probes
Generative: Brainstorming, Group Sketching, Rapid Prototyping
260
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
Sensemaking: Affinity Diagramming, Flow Analysis, Insights Sorting, Context Mapping
Evaluative: Surveys, Criteria Matrixes, Paper Prototyping, Concept Modeling
If students are given this new framework to help identify, select and deploy design
research methods, they could begin to think about methods in terms of the kind of
thinking they want to enable, versus trying to figure out what is appropriate based on what
phase of the design process they are in.
The authors are currently exploring the development of specific tools that could
accompany this framework, enabling students to think through the anatomy of a method
(which is made up of purpose and application), appropriate contexts for deployment of
methods, and necessary tools needed to execute the method.
However, it is not enough to simply introduce a new framework and process for
deploying design research methods; students must also be able to facilitate design
research activities.
Challenge area 3: Design Facilitation as an emerging skillset
Due to the changing roles of designers today, from more traditional ‘making’ roles, to
being able to facilitate diverse groups of stakeholders throughout the design process,
students must be able to build a new skill set around the practice of design facilitation.
While students in the VC5 class were given a process, process tools, method sources
and a planning framework for the development of participatory sessions, it was not
enough to enable them to develop the skills necessary for facilitating others. Entering their
senior year in the visual communication design program, students have had minimal
experience in facilitating groups of people throughout the design process, and their
previous experiences with design research have focused mainly on secondary research and
engaging others through interviews and surveys, which could be done both in-person and
virtually.
The authors found that the students not only needed more experiences to practice
design facilitation, but also a stronger foundation to build an understanding around the
mindset, skills and characteristics needed to effectively empower people to share, express,
make and evaluate throughout the design process. Through reflection on the course, and
practice within their service design firm, the authors have developed a model that focuses
on two core areas of design facilitation. The first includes the concept of ‘Shaping the
Designer,’ which focuses on Mindset, Skills and Characteristics. The second is about
‘Approach,’ providing the necessary tools for utilizing a human-centered approach. This
includes Process and Process Tools, Human-centered Design Research Methods, and a
Planning Framework.
At the highest level, shaping a designer to carry out effective design facilitation begins
with a mindset that is threefold, based on having a value for empathy, objectivity, and
process-orientation. Skills are directly related to the nature of the design activities being
carried out, and with each kind of activity design facilitators must be able to utilize
different skills or combinations of skills, for example flexibility, visual and verbal
communication, and reflection. And, there are certain characteristics that lend themselves
nicely to the types of skills needed for different activities, such as humility and openmindedness.
261
NAPIER & WADA
In order to carry out a human-centered approach for participatory, collaborative
design, there are essential tools that are needed. The authors have found that within this
approach, there are three essential facets to consider: process and process tools, humancentered design research methods, and a planning framework to aid with planning the
facilitation of participatory design sessions. Founded upon the authors’ professional
experience, both in practice and education, this framework includes six sections that we
believe to be equally essential to carrying out effective approaches to design thinking:
Objectives, Time, Environment, People, Methods and Supplies.
Figure 8
Planning Framework developed by Collabo Creative
In addition to providing the necessary tools for carrying out a human-centered
approach, and further shaping the mindset, skills and characteristics needed for effective
design facilitation, students also need multiple experiences practicing and using these new
skills and tools. They need structured experiences within the safety of the studio to
practice, fail, iterate, and try again.
Conclusion
As previously discussed, resulting from the ever-changing landscape of our societies,
the role that a designer now plays and will play in the future has shifted from focusing
mainly on end of the line, production and implementation, to also include more
collaborative, strategic ‘fuzzy’ front-end facilitation. Given the unique skills and traits that a
visual designer cultivates and hones, they are well positioned to not only design outcomes
262
Designing Design Thinking Curriculum
from expertise, but also enable and leverage collaborative creativity from those not
formally versed in design. Thus with this expanding role, the designer of today must now
be able to shape and carryout human-centered research that empowers stakeholders to
express, make, evaluate and collaborate. Additionally, to drive or lead a human-centered
approach, the designer must also understand and ‘buy-in’ to the increased value that
stakeholders bring to the impact of designed outcomes.
Considering the supplemental skills necessary to fulfill both the researcher and
facilitator roles, in addition to the traditional visual designer role, emerging designers
today must be adequately prepared to work in this burgeoning field. Therefore, we have
presented in this paper a working model for developing and offering practical humancentered design experiences to undergraduate, senior visual communication design
students.
References
3 Steps to Creating a Personal Mission Statement. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.levoleague.com/articles/career-advice/personal-mission-statement-threeeasy-steps-defining-creating
Basadur, Dr. Min. ‘Simplex: A Flight to Creativity.’ Canada: The Creative Education
Foundation, Inc. 1994.
Clayton, Dr. Patti. (n.d.). DEAL: A 3-Step Model for Reflection. Retrieved from
http://servicelearning.duke.edu/uploads/media_items/deal-reflectionquestions.original.pdf
Dorst, K. and Lawson, B. (2009). Design Expertise. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Ltd.
Grefe, R. (2016, August 12). Evolving Expectations for Design Education. Retrieved from
http://www.aiga.org/evolving-expectations-for-design-education/
Instructional Assessment Resources. (2011). Retrieved from
https://www.utexas.edu/academic/ctl/assessment/iar/research/plan/examples/explan.pdf
Kumar, Vijay. ‘101 Design Methods: A Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your
Organzation.’ Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2013.
Kwon, D.E., & Jang S.H. (2013). An effect of multidisciplinary design education: creative
problem solving in collaborative design process. In E. Bohemia, I. Digranes, P. Lloyd, E.
Lutnaes, L.M. Nielsen, & J.B. Reitan (Eds.), Design Learning for Tomorrow: Design
Education from Kindergarten to PhD. Paper presented at DRS Cumulus: 2nd International
Conference for Design Education Researchers, 14-17 May 2013, Oslo Norway (183-198).
ABM-media as c/o Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences.
Martin, Bella and Hanington, Bruce. ‘Universal Methods of Design: 100 Ways to Research
Complex Problems, Develop Innovative Ideas, and Design Effective Solutions.’ Beverly,
MA: Rockport Publishers. 2012.
Visocky O’Grady, Jen and Ken. ‘A Designer’s Research Manual: Succeed in Design by
Knowing Your Clients and What They Really Need.’ Gloucester, MA: Rockport
Publishers, Inc. 2006.
Welcome to the Virtual Crash Course in Design Thinking. (2015). Retrieved from
http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/
263
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics
in Design Education
Naz A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
Middle East Technical University, Department of Industrial Design
nborekci@metu.edu.tr
Abstract: A study was conducted on the preliminary and final submissions of five
industrial design education projects carried out in teams, based on the argument
that teams develop characteristics during the design process, and these
characteristics determine the project development levels. The study examined
the features of the 38 project submissions that define project development
levels, which were identified as: qualities of the design solution, representational
qualities, and qualities indicating attainment of educational objectives. These
features helped determining the project development levels as problematic, low
effort, acceptable, satisfactory, detailed and advanced. An analysis of team
compositions revealed the factors affecting team characteristics as: composition
of the team and background of members; voluntariness in team formation and
involvement in group activities; strategic division of labour; management of
team dynamics; team positioning; and, motivation and team ambitions. These
factors were found to be contributing to the success of collaboration among
team members, and affect the level in which a project is developed before
submission. Overall, these findings suggest that various team characteristics can
be described in terms of skills, mental attitude, process conduct and design
outcome.
Keywords: Teamwork in design, team characteristics, design education projects,
project development levels.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Introduction
The studio courses constitute a major part of the curriculum of our four-year
undergraduate program at the METU Department of Industrial Design. The academic year
is composed of two semesters, each with a duration of 14 course weeks. The industrial
design studio courses are 12 hours per week. In the third and fourth year studio courses,
generally around two projects are conducted in a semester (Evyapan, Korkut & Hasdoğan,
2006; Korkut & Evyapan, 2005). When a project is assigned in the course, the students are
presented with a brief that includes a process planning, a project calendar, and
requirements for the stages of the process. Students are directed with individual and panel
critiques from instructors, and also carry out various studio activities to support their
design processes (Evyapan, Korkut & Hasdoğan, 2005; Hasdoğan, Evyapan & Korkut, 2006).
Throughout years, the studio course has evolved such as to incorporate more group work
and design projects carried out in teams. Each academic year, it is aimed to carry out at
least one team project.
Conducting design education projects in student teams requires an effective
management of the process for teams to be able to successfully complete their projects.
Teamwork differs from individual work in design, from various aspects; teams have to
communicate their current thinking, and besides dealing with the design task, teams
organize and execute group activities as part of their work (Stempfle & Badke-Schaub,
2002). Planning activities in advance and keeping within the time schedule are critical in
managing the design process for teams, as well as being able to identify opportunities and
drift from the agreed plan when necessary for the project’s interest (Cross & Cross, 1995).
Team size seems to be a factor that affects team performance and around three to five
members are shown to be ideal in the literature. Cash, Elias, Dekoninck and Culley (2012)
explain that larger teams may produce more ideas but take longer to arrive at decisions;
besides, participation may decrease in larger teams, and actions may require leadership.
Smaller teams on the other hand, may show conflicts in deciding on an idea, due to the
tension that may arise between members, which all the same seems to positively affect
the creative problem solving ability of the team.
A major influence on team performance seems to be the team members’ abilities in
communication and cooperation. Cross and Cross (1995) point to the difficulties that
teams have in arriving at a shared understanding of the design problem and in team
working towards proposing and developing design concepts in response. It is important for
team members to discover, accept and explore their strengths and weaknesses, both
individually, and as a team. This will make it possible to establish a team approach to the
project, with a common understanding of the design problem and an agreement on the
solution area in which design solutions will be explored. Besides, as Cross and Cross (1995)
point out, team members will thus be able to adopt roles within their team, as well as
resolve and avoid conflicts during the process.
Wiltschnig and Christensen (2013) explain that in design teamwork, team members
mostly collaboratively conduct the problem-solution co-evolution (developing an
understanding of the problem and generating solutions for it simultaneously), and this
takes place distributed over time. Therefore, collaborative problem-solution co-evolution
episodes require support in terms of process management and decision-making. Dong,
Kleinsmann and Deken (2013) investigate the mental models that teams adopt with their
265
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
collective cognitive structures and design processes, and assess the match between the
team mental model and the team members’ mental models, as this match is a critical
factor for a team to act in a goal-directed behavior. The course instructors appreciate the
difficulties of conducting teamwork and therefore search for ways to overcome these, and
make use of the team dynamics in a productive way.
Aim of the Study, Methodology and Background
This study was formulated around a concern about how teams can be supported in
succeeding with their projects. The author has observed during the conduct of various
team projects that, the project outcomes are highly influenced from the team
characteristics. Team characteristics define how teams approach a design problem,
conduct the design process and conclude the project, in the mean while organizing the
team dynamics in a way specific to the team, also affecting team performance. Team
characteristics do not only depend on the individual characteristics and design abilities of
the team members, but also develop during the course of the process, as teams carry out
collaborative activities, jointly make critical decisions, and show an effort for the
preparation of their submissions.
Based on this concern, the author was motivated towards understanding the factors
that affect team characteristics and in turn, how team characteristics affect team
performance. For this purpose, a study was formulated based on the examination of the
outcomes of five design education team projects. The author believed that a revision of
previously carried out team projects in terms of process and development levels could
help in determining the performance shown for the submissions, and this in turn could
make it easier to understand the dynamics involved. The aim of this paper is to discuss the
features that constitute the project development levels in undergraduate industrial design
students’ teamwork submissions as a display of team performance, in the meanwhile
exploring the factors that affect team characteristics.
The study analyzed the preliminary and final submissions of a total of 38 team projects
in terms of content and quality. The review also utilized the author’s personal notes on
design progress follow-up, observation on team dynamics, and assessment of team
performance, kept on the teams in course diaries for each academic year. The study
initially reviewed the design briefs of the five team projects from diverse sectors, the
submission requirements for the preliminary and final evaluation phases, and the grading
criteria for the projects. The project briefs were based on real needs identified by partners
from the national industry, and one NGO, and were elaborated by the course instructors
with priority given to educational objectives. Table 1 gives project information and the
number of teams for each.
The process determined for the projects in the briefs followed a similar construct,
allowing the students time for literature and user or on-site research, identification of
design opportunities, idea generation, and selection of initial ideas, followed by a
submission for the preliminary jury. The submission requirements for the preliminary juries
included CAD visualizations of one or two design solutions thought-out in detail, showing
each design solution within its context and its usage described in a scenario. The format
varied, including colour print-out presentation posters or PowerPoint presentations, also
expecting 3D models showing critical features. Following feedback from the preliminary
266
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
jury, teams were expected to develop their design proposals, and prepare their final
presentations. The final submission required presentation boards describing one design
solution in detail within its usage context with CAD visualizations, user-product interaction
scenario, research and process history, technical drawings, justification of anthropometric
dimensions, and detailed 3D models.
Table 1
Project Information
Code
Year
B
2006-2007
Fall
VE
2007-2008
Fall
K
2010-2011
Fall
CN
2013-2014
Fall
ID
2014-2015
Fall
No. of
Teams
Project Title
Food storing and cooking product systems.
Duration: 13 weeks (4 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Digital products for portability and mobility.
Duration: 10 weeks (3 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Open-plan en-suite bathroom products.
Duration: 9 weeks (3 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Sustainability scenarios on neighbourhood identity.
Duration: 6 weeks (2 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
Alternative usages of pick-up trucks.
Duration: 10 weeks (4 weeks between Preliminary and Final
submissions)
7
9
7
7
8
Evaluation of the projects were carried out by the course instructors, other invited
instructors from the Department and firm representatives, for both the preliminary and
final juries, while the teams presented their projects. The submissions were evaluated in
terms of design, justification, detailing and presentation qualities. Three of the projects
were graded over 4,00, whereas two were graded over 100. Grading for the third and
fourth year studio courses is divided into eight categories ranging from outstanding to fail.
Table 2 shows the distribution of the preliminary and final evaluations for each project into
these grading categories.
Grading categories for the projects
Very good
Good
Adequate
Poor
Very poor
Fail
Preliminary
Jury
Number of
projects per Grading
grading
categories
category
Over
100
Over
4,00
Excellent
Outstanding
Table 2
90-100
85-89
80-84
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
50-59
3,604,00
3,253,59
2,753,24
2,252,74
1,752,24
1,251,74
0,751,24
0,000,74
8
3
15
7
4
0
1
0
267
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
13
7
7
4
0
0
0
Final
Jury
7
Features of the Project Development Levels
The grading categories were considered to be demonstrative of the project
development levels. In order to identify the features that earned these projects their
grades, the 2D submissions and the visuals of the 3D models for the five projects were
sorted into their grading category for a thematic content analysis. The identified features
were grouped under the themes of ‘qualities of the design solution’, ‘representational
qualities, and ‘qualities indicating attainment of educational objectives’.
Qualities of the Design Solution
Qualities of the design solution are about how well the solution responds to the design
problem as defined, and the extent to which it is developed. These qualities include the
following. The product/service must provide a fit between the form or structure and the
purpose and function. The design solution must provide alternative usage possibilities, or
be flexible in terms of changing contexts of usage. The design solution must demonstrate
the interaction possibilities for the users. The product/service must be developed with the
overall experience and expected outcomes of various stages of usage in mind. The design
solution must provide a developed interface that is well integrated to the product. The
solution must also offer a high level of design detailing, demonstrating how a detail will
affect the overall product/service system. The interior and exterior of the design solution
must be consistent, with realistic sections. The design solution must be suitable to the
materials and production methods that are suggested. Overall, an important quality of the
design solution is its being characteristic, having features that identify it, and differentiate
it from the others.
Representational Qualities
Representational qualities are about the ways in which the design solution is presented
and how well this is achieved. Representations include 2D presentation posters and 3D
models, and in some cases animations showing product and interface usage.
Format: As the projects have to be presented in a limited space, the 2D presentations
have to explain for themselves, be to-the-point, and avoid repetitive usage of information
given with visuals and texts. The composition of the presentations have to be well thoughtout, also considering the balance and hierarchy between visuals and texts. The
presentation boards must form a visual harmony as they are used together. The visuals
used are mostly renderings, followed by mixed media (digital and hand-made) visuals and
a lesser amount of hand-made visuals. For digital visuals important aspects are, the
realistic selection of perspective angles; appropriate and balanced framing that does not
cut off critical features; balanced usage of zoom-ins and zoom-outs showing details;
correct usage of lighting and avoiding excessive shadows; and, accurate technical drawings
and measurements using line drawings besides renderings in order to reduce the weight of
visuals. It is seen that text supports the design solution with explanations that could not be
268
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
made sole through usage of visuals, but is also used as a graphical element. The
appropriate amount of text used, selection of font type and size, and usage of language
without spelling or grammatical errors are critical, as incorrect usage of these may weaken
the persuasiveness of the project.
Content: The presentation boards are expected to display the usage of
products/services within context. The background theme must reflect the lifestyle that the
product/service is addressing. A realistic background, preferably on photographic visuals,
better contextualizes the design solution rather than a modelled environment. Likewise,
using modelled human figures weakens the image, whereas photographic human figures
may contribute to the project. On the other hand, using human photographs on all the
informative visuals may load the presentation and cover over critical features. A successful
strategy that teams have used is usage of background-product/service-people in a
hierarchy depending on the feature that needs to stand out. For example, using a
transparent background and a transparent human figure brings forth the product in focus.
Models: Models are an important part of the submissions in demonstrating the design
decisions. The finishing and detailing qualities of the models are an indicative factor of the
project development levels. Apart from the submission requirements, the additional
models that the teams prepared distinguished them from the others. The additional
preparations included, scaled or 1:1, colored realistic exterior model; details showing
moving or removable parts; models with moving or removable parts showing how the
product is set-up or converted; models showing the interior structure of the product; and
additional models of the components of the products or systems.
Team identity: Overall, a main feature indicative of the project development level, as
well as effective team dynamics, was the reflection of a ‘team identity’ on the
presentations. Some presentation boards had graphical features that united the boards in
a way unique to the team. Although prepared by different team members, the finalized
models appeared to be made from a single hand, with the same surface finishing qualities
and detailing level. Oral presentations to the jury also differed in terms of strategies.
Teams that prepared in advance either selected one or two spokespersons to carry out the
oral presentations, or distributed the presentation equally to all team members. There also
were teams that attended the jury without any oral preparation, either from confidence or
from the lack of an opportunity to discuss how to proceed in the jury presentation.
Teams were generally referred to by numbers or letters of the alphabet. In one project,
teams chose to use names to represent themselves. Finally, it was observed in some teams
that the team members dressed in a similar fashion using the same color palette or
clothing type for their final jury presentations.
Qualities Indicating Attainment of Educational Objectives
Qualities indicating the attainment of educational objectives are related to how well
the teams conduct the earlier stages of the process such as research, idea generation,
critiques and evaluations, and make use of the outcomes for building up on the design
solution. As an educational objective, we expect the students to develop the design
thinking abilities that allow the correct contextualization of a design solution, with a match
between the problem area and the solution area. Therefore a main concern is the correct
identification of a design opportunity within the solution area, and the students must be
able to achieve this altogether, using the suggested procedures and methods applied in
269
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
studio, and according to schedule. Another important concern is to prevent situations in
which students are confused in their exploration, fail to identify a design opportunity, fail
to explore design ideas, or fail to discover the potentials of the ideas they have explored to
a certain extent. This may lead to switching to other ideas way into the design process,
requiring that the exploration process is repeated, making teams loose time. This reflects
on the final project submissions as underexplored product-context relationships,
underdeveloped design solutions, lack of a reflection of the earlier stages of the process,
and only drafted 2D and 3D presentations.
Project Development Levels
A revision of the projects within grading categories in terms of these qualities, allowed
the determination of the project development levels.
Problematic Projects (Grading Categories: Poor, Very Poor)
A major problem observed in the project at the problematic level, was the lack of an
appropriate problem identification in response to the brief. Besides, the team delayed
their discussions on the problem area, and this affected the remaining process. The
identified design opportunity was based on a limited point of view. The resulting project
was not detailed, and the final presentations failed in reflecting the features of the design
solution.
Low Effort Projects (Grading Category: Adequate)
The projects at the low effort level were those that completed all submission
requirements, in most cases on time, in a few cases with delay. The problematic that puts
these projects in this category is weak technical detailing. Critical issues related to the
usage scenario and context have not been resolved, and in some projects, minimum effort
is given to 2D and 3D presentations. In some cases, lack of team effort is sensed.
Acceptable Projects (Grading Category: Good)
The projects at the acceptable level have covered all submission requirements. The
major concern is in the way in which the problem is defined and the mismatch between
the problem and the solution. The components of the project seem to have been solved in
separate hands, and not developed in equal level, leaving weak spots in the overall design
solution. The projects have either failed in developing the design idea in full consideration,
or have overdone the design in order to compensate for the weaknesses of the concept.
Satisfactory Projects (Grading Category: Very Good)
The projects at the satisfactory level bring an original problem definition that in some
cases differ significantly from the rest of the teams, and offer a design solution that
responds to the problem. All the same, the projects present difficulties in justifying some
contextual aspects, such as explaining how the design solution fits the suggested usage
area. It is seen that some teams that are graded higher in the preliminary jury, have
renounced from the details that brought a unique quality to the project but presented risk
to its successful completion, rather than attempting to solve them. Some teams have
270
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
considered their effort for the preliminary jury to be sufficient, and neglected the detailing
of the design, leaving the project unrefined.
Detailed Projects (Grading Category: Excellent)
The projects at the detailed level present highly satisfying design solutions focusing on
a main design idea, with well-prepared presentations reflecting the features. There is an
in-depth exploration of the context, and justification of usage scenario. Some features of
the project may be underexplored, such as an unprioritized mechanical detail or material
selection. Some projects may not involve a risk-taking design idea but end up as extremely
well-detailed and finalized, setting strong alternatives for the current market. The projects
in this category are the result of good team effort and collaboration.
Advanced Projects (Grading Category: Outstanding)
The projects at the advanced level provide a well-established design concept that
involves a variety of design ideas integrated into an overall design solution. The design
ideas are highly detailed, all at an equal level. There is extensive consideration of the usage
possibilities, particularly in terms of product components and integration of the design
solution with the surrounding system. The ideas are considered from the points of view of
many users, enriching the possibilities provided with the design solutions. Some projects
include additional features supporting the concept (e.g. product/service brochures); as
well as additional supportive design solutions (e.g. reusable packaging). Projects in this
category are the results of extremely hard and effective teamwork, and involvement of
user research.
Team Formation and Team Categories
The 38 teams examined for this study were formed on a voluntary basis (Table 3). All
the same, in two occasions, students who were not able to take part in a team during the
set-up, were distributed into teams by drawing lots.
Table 3
Project
B
Information on team formation
Number of
teams
7 (+ 1)
teams
VE
K
9 teams
7 teams
CN
7 teams
ID
8 (+ 1)
Person per team
Team formation
All teams of four.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
One left-out student drew a lot to join a team.
Following preliminary submission, this student
completed the process individually.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
All teams of four.
Three groups of
three.
Four groups of four.
Four groups of six.
Three groups of
seven.
Four groups of four.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
Three left-out exchange students picked up by
teams.
Four left-out students came together to form a
team.
Teams formed on a voluntary basis.
271
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
teams
Four groups of five.
Four left-out students drew a lot to join teams.
Following preliminary submission, one student
completed the process individually.
For an analysis, the teams were initially categorized according to the design skills of the
team members, based on individual project performances and social skills as a prospective
team member. In this categorization, besides students’ grades from earlier studio projects,
observations on their in-studio behavior (such as time management, responsibility and
collaboration with others) and notes from earlier critique sessions on individual
performances (such as work effort, design abilities and communication), were also taken
into consideration. This analysis revealed two types of teams: teams were either
composed of members with equal levels of skills, or composed of members with differing
levels of skills. For both types the subcategories were, teams composed entirely or mostly
of members with high, medium or low level skills (Table 4).
Table 4
Team categories according to individual performance of team members
Grading for
Preliminary
Submission
Grading for
Final
Submission
Grading for
Preliminary
Submission
B_T1
B_T2
B_T4
High skills with weak
protegé
High
ID_T5
High
K_T2
B_T3
CN_T3
CN_T5
ID_T3
K_T3
VE_T8
K_T1
K_T7
VE_T3
VE_T7
Excellent
Very Good
Medium
VE_T6
CN_T6
Low
VE_T4
CN_T1
ID_T8
B_T5
ID_T1
ID_T2
Medium skills with weak
protegé + weak lot
ID_T4
B_T6
B_T7
Low skills group of
strategic convenience
CN_T7
ID_T6
VE_T5
Low
Teams with Members of Mixed Skills
Medium
K_T6
Teams with Members of Equal Skills
K_T5
CN_T2
Medium skills with weak
protegé
K_T4
Outstanding
ID_T7
VE_T2
Medium skills with strong
protegé
Medium skills with strong
driver
Medium skills with
medium protegé
Medium skills with
medium lot
Medium skills with weak
lot
VE_T1
CN_T4
VE_T9
Good
272
Adequate
Poor
Very Poor
Grading for
Final
Submission
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
The grades that the teams received for their projects’ preliminary and final evaluations
were matched into this categorization (Table 4). It was seen that there is a relation
between the team project grades and the levels of skills of team members. For example,
eight out of nine teams including members of high level skills received the highest grades.
On the other hand, only four out of eleven teams including members of low level skills
received the lowest grades for their submissions. Likewise, out of 18 teams including
members of medium level skills, four received the highest grades, and three received the
lowest grades. The range of the grades within each team category indicated that this
relation was not necessarily direct.
Besides, it was seen that teams did not always perform at the same level for their
preliminary and final submissions. Only eleven out of 38 teams received the same grades
for both submissions, whether high or low. This indicated that there were various factors
affecting team performance during the process, and depending on the course, the
performance could be affected positively, where the teams would raise their grades for
their final submissions, or negatively, where the teams would drop their grades.
These suggested that the team characteristics, rather than the individual characteristics
of team members, were more significant in determining the dynamics within teams. The
following section discusses the factors that play role in the development of team
characteristics.
Factors Affecting Team Characteristics
Composition of the Team and Background of Members
The composition of the team members and their individual background is a factor in
the development of team characteristics. The team members’ character traits, gender,
experience, and background constitute the individual characteristics; their design skills and
design-related interests determine the nature and level of their contribution to the
project, and their social skills contribute to the effectiveness in carrying out the design
process. Overall, although expectation of success, social factors such as long-time
friendships and gender preferences played role in team formation, strategic factors such as
varying the skills within the group (is good at computer modelling, is good at solving
mechanical details, is meticulous at model making) and logistic opportunities (has a car,
has a flat available to accommodate all during the project, mother is available for user
trials) were also considered in team formation.
Voluntariness in Team Formation and Involvement in Group
Activities
It was observed that students preferred coming together with peers from a closer
social circuit in order not to lose valuable project time while getting to know each other.
Voluntariness in team formation contributed to the team motivation, provided swiftness in
team actions, eased the process in arriving at decisions, and facilitated the distribution of
work. Teams that were not formed on a voluntary basis had difficulties in starting the
process. Team members delayed early group discussions on the problem area and
273
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
therefore delayed idea generation. The generated ideas lacked a common effort and
remained irrelevant, as the teams did not have a project goal. There was lack of
communication between team members, and those who did not show up regularly for
meetings remained uninformed of the process and of the decisions that the team had
made so far.
On the other hand, voluntariness in team formation did not always guarantee that the
team performed in good terms until the end of the process. One team had difficulties in
arriving at an agreement on the main concept that the project would pursue, also affecting
the team members’ social relations in the future. Another team had arguments on the
unequal workload for the final submission. Problems in other cases were observed as well,
although in principle teams chose to overcome difficulties as early as possible. Teams that
felt conflict followed two strategies. One was to divide the tasks among team members,
carry out individual work remote from the others, and meet up to gather the work for the
submissions. Another was to follow the decisions of a trusted team member who finally
had to assume the role of ‘leader’.
Strategic Division of Labor
Some teams had difficulties in understanding that collaboration in teamwork does not
mean that all members do the same thing at the same time, in the same amount and for
the same duration; or that if their individual design ideas were not selected to be pursued
for the team project, this did not mean that they were not able to contribute to the
process. Some of these cases resulted in team members alienating themselves from their
teams.
Once the teams got to know their members’ strengths and weaknesses, and their ways
of thinking, they were able to strategically divide labor among themselves. This was
generally possible following the initial stages of the process such as research and problem
identification. In some cases, the collaboration was swift, and at a certain stage of
progress, the team members were able to vary the team effort; such as, while one team
member carried out technical research, one would visit a user, another one would prepare
mock-ups, and the other one would work on a graphical identity for the presentation
posters. In some cases, a team member who could not be effective in developing the
design ideas, was given additional work on model making, or computer modelling. It was
seen that division of labor extended to providing something to eat for the team, and
shopping for model making materials, which were seen as a natural part of teamwork.
Management of Team Dynamics
Teams mostly chose to manage the project as a process in which all members had an
equal saying. Some teams determined for themselves a ‘team driver’ whom they found to
be stronger in designerly skills. This member also acted as the team spokesperson in some
cases, but in a few cases, preferred to remain in the background, leaving the opportunity
to present the ideas to the others. In some cases, team members switched roles
depending on the actions required. While working equally for some stages of the project,
when it came to making critical decisions, team members could assume more
preponderant roles, and keep the leadership role for a duration, until a next critical
decision had to be made by another team member. Having to take responsibility and step
up for certain actions was an important effort towards acting as a team.
274
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Team Positioning
Following the early evaluation stages, such as research presentations and initial ideas
evaluation, it was seen that teams positioned themselves in reference to one another.
Teams assessed the others in terms of performance and set goals for themselves for the
following stages. The teams that were found to be successful in such evaluation stages,
raised the bar for the others. For example, if a team was preparing for a submission with
extra work that was not required in the brief (e.g. an animation for the interface), or if a
team was using a particular technique for the final presentations (e.g. usage of a new
computer program) most of the other teams would also make the same preparations. Or
else, if a team was found to be more effective in a particular aspect (such as a strong
design idea, or strong graphical qualities in the 2D presentations), other teams would
determine for themselves, a specific aspect (such as better mechanical detailing, or extra
effort on model making), that could differentiate them from the others.
Motivation and Team Ambitions
A major motivation for the teams was to be able to stand out among others in the final
jury, in terms of design idea and project representation. The more a team was ambitious,
the more frequently it demanded design critiques from the instructors and the earlier it
was able to take critical decisions within the process. Particularly considering that these
projects were carried out in collaboration with firms, the more firms were involved in the
process (such as coming to critique sessions, attending the evaluation juries, indicating at
the beginning of the process that the teams would be rewarded), the more determined
the teams were in fulfilling the project goals. Other factors were the possibility of being
chosen for an office internship, or for collaboration in the student’s graduation project.
The students gave importance to the projects also for the opportunity of using their grades
to raise their GPA, and for the positive impact of having the project in their portfolio. A
rewarding expectation was the possibility of the projects resulting with designs subject to
intellectual property rights.
Conclusion: Team Characteristics
As a result of this study, it is possible to discuss team characteristics in terms of skills,
mental attitude, process conduct, and design outcome.
In terms of skills, the 38 teams could be described as highly confident, moderately
confident or with low confidence. The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams
were related to the team members’ levels of designerly skills, and could change as the
process progressed. Activities conducted in the studio for which team members had to
come together (e.g. critiques from instructors, method applications), helped members to
know each other better, and gain confidence in themselves’ and their peers’ skills.
Likewise, joint preparation for submissions also affected relations between team members
and their performance.
In terms of mental attitude, the teams could be described as determined, or confused.
The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams were related to their success in
determining project goals and ability in carrying out group activities towards this end.
Determined teams were those who set their project goals early within the design process
and could work systematically towards their realization. Determination is a factor that
275
NAZ A.G.Z. BÖREKÇİ
positively affects team performance, as it contributes to the regularity of effort and
progress. On the other hand, insisting on a design idea may result negatively, particularly if
there is a mismatch between the problem and the solution; therefore teams have to
identify these mismatches at an early stage to allow time to change their design strategies.
Confused teams were those who generally had difficulties in identifying an appropriate
design idea within a solution area, either as a result of too diversified an exploration, and
late identification of the idea to pursue; or due to difficulties in deciding on how to
progress with their processes following decisions made for various stages.
In terms of process conduct, the teams could be described as leader-driven,
coordinated, or fragmented. The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams were
related to the social skills of the team members and their expectations from the process in
terms of outcomes. Leader-driven teams worked around a team driver who showed
responsibility in critical decisions and division of labor. Coordinated teams aimed to show
equal amount of effort and contribution, and in general did not need to be guided by a
driver, regulating their own actions instead. Fragmented teams were those with members
who had difficulties in coming together and preferred to work individually in between
submissions.
In terms of design outcome, the teams could be described as risk-takers and safeplayers. The dynamics that affected this characteristic of teams were related to their
interest in the project, the effort they committed to design development and the strategic
decision making ability of the team. Risk-taking teams were those that aimed at bringing
innovative solutions to the problem. Safe-playing teams provided solutions that could be
considered as alternatives to what is already available in the market. Success for both
groups depended on the level of design development and detailing that the teams were
able to achieve.
The study described in this paper helped in determining team characteristics that
develop as a result of the dynamics occurring in the process of an educational design
project. These characteristics evolve during the course, affecting team performance and
therefore reflecting on the project development levels. The next step following this study
would be to assess how team characteristics relate with project development levels. This
would help in suggesting strategies for studio course instructors and students to effectively
manage the design process of team projects, identify teams having difficulties with project
development, support teams in overcoming difficulties and ensure project development.
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank the instructors and the
students of the ID401 Industrial Design V courses of the 2006-07, 2007-08,
2010-11 and 2014-15 academic years, and of the ID301 Industrial Design III
course of the 2013-14 academic year for their contribution to the courses and
involvement in the projects mentioned in this paper.
References
Cash, P., Elias, E., Dekoninck, E., & Culley, S. (2012). Methodological insights from a
rigorous small scale design experiment. Design Studies, 33, 208-235.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.008
276
Project Development Levels and Team Characteristics in Design Education
Cross, N., & Cross, A.C. (1995). Observations of teamwork and social processes in design.
Design Studies, 16, 143-170. doi:10.1016/0142-694X(94)00007-Z
Dong, A., Kleinsmann, S., & Deken, F. (2013). Investigating design cognition in the
construction and enactment of team mental models. Design Studies, 34, 1-33.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2012.05.003
Evyapan, N., Korkut, F., & Hasdoğan, G. (2005). Glass Packaging for Food and Beverage
Products: Design Process and Innovation Strategies in an Educational Project. In M. Gül
& E.S. Umdu (Eds.), Proceedings of IV. International Packaging Congress and Exhibition,
(Vol. 2, pp. 637-646). İzmir, Turkey: TMMOB Kimya Mühendisleri Odası.
Evyapan, N.A.G.Z., Korkut, F., & Hasdoğan, G. (2006). Implications of Collaboration with
Industry for Educational Strategies in Industrial Design: A Case of Graduation Project
Course. In Allan Davies (Ed.), Proceedings of CLTAD 3rd Int. Conference: Enhancing
Curricula (pp. 137-159). The Center for Learning and Teaching in Art & Design, UK.
Hasdoğan, G., Evyapan, N.A.G.Z., & Korkut, F. (2006). Understanding User Experience for
Scenario Building: A Case in Public Transport Design. In Philip D. Bust (Ed.), Proceedings
of Contemporary Ergonomics (pp. 189-193). The Ergonomics Society, Taylor & Francis,
UK.
Korkut, F., & Evyapan, N. A. G. Z. (2005). Dynamics of Collaboration with Industry in
Industrial Design Education: The Case of a Graduation Project Course. In P. Rodgers, L.
Brodhurst & D. Hepburn (Eds.) Crossing Design Boundaries: Proceedings of the 3rd
Engineering & Product Design Education International Conference (pp.477-481). Taylor
& Francis, UK.
Stempfle, J. & Badke-Schaub, P. (2002). Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team
communication. Design Studies, 23, 473-496. doi:10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00004-2
Wiltschnig, S., Christensen, B.T., & Ball, L.J. (2013). Collaborative problem-solution coevolution in creative design. Design Studies, 34, 515-542.
doi:10.1016/j.destud.2013. 01.002
277
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-Making in Design
Thinking
Delane INGALLS VANADA
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
Delane.vanada@uncc.edu
Abstract: In this global economy, there is a critical need for training students to
be more well-rounded, strong in collaborative skills and able to think critically,
creatively, and practically. In order to develop tomorrow’s change makers and
problem solvers, design thinking processes can capitalize on a balance of skills
and mindsets including inductive and deductive reasoning along with abductive
sensemaking. The paper will highlight the author’s published mixed model
(QUAN + QUAL) research study in middle school art and design classrooms as
well as action research projects at the college level which brings to light the
major drivers of dynamic thinking and learning in art and design toward
fostering tenacious, creatively confident, connection-makers who also possess
the practical skill sets for meaningful success in learning and life. From a
systems-thinking approach, this research strives to understand the
multidimensionality of environment, teacher pedagogy and beliefs, curriculum,
and students’ perceptions of their abilities— critical components of motivation
and behavior, effort, and persistence and grit in the face of setbacks. How
students perceive their competence—their theories in action—correlates with
their creative confidence. Design- and project-based learning provide learnercentered pedagogical examples for empowering students.
Keywords: Design thinking, design- and problem-based learning, dynamic
learning
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Introduction
There is a lot of discussion in 21st century education about the need for nurturing
resilient students who are independent and self-directed thinkers, able to take risks,
collaborate, and possess a balance of critical, creative, and practical skills (Duckworth,
2006; Ingalls Vanada, 2013; Zhao, 2009). Yet, opportunities for developing these
competencies—essential to today’s students’ inevitable multiple careers, but more
importantly for overall success in life—are mostly overlooked for the sake of teacher and
school accountability in Standards-rich, American culture.
At every level, students are primarily exposed to linear and logical ideas about learning
intended to produce one right answer, stifling innovative mindsets. Traditional schools in
which prescribed content, compliance, and excessive foci on external standards and
standardized assessments as measures of academic success have generally been found
ineffective or suppressive of creativity (Ken Robinson,2006; Zhao, 2012). School is thought
of as a place to practice creativity, but it is becoming less and less true. If we do not want a
culture based on imitation, the view of the purpose of education is where change has to
take place.
Further, our students fear failure and are more comfortable with being told what to
think to pass the test, rather than how to think and to trust their own abilities to make
connections and solve complex—or heaven forbid, ambiguous—problems. Sir Ken
Robinson (2006) stated in his popular ‘How Schools Kill Creativity’ TED Talk, that modern
education is training students out of mindsets necessary to innovation:
What we do know is, if you're not prepared to be wrong, you'll never come up with
anything original—if you're not prepared to be wrong. And by the time they get to be
adults, most kids have lost that capacity. They have become frightened of being wrong.
And we run our companies like this. We stigmatize mistakes. And we're now running
national education systems where mistakes are the worst thing you can make. And the
result is that we are educating people out of their creative capacities (para. 6).
But students aren’t the only ones who must be prepared to be wrong. Educators must
also take risks, says Kwek (2011), to ‘depart from the ideas and pedagogies of yesterday
and become bold advocates to develop the sorts of learning dispositions needed’ in our
21st century problem solvers (p. 3). This requires a focal shift in teaching quantities of
knowledge to developing a balance of students’ qualities of thinking —creative, critical and
practical. Teachers need to envision and design cultures of thinking that move away from
convergent-thinking end products and think of themselves as designers of student’s
thinking and dispositions through more integrated approaches (Kwek, 2011).
A Systems View of Developing Dynamic Learning
To grow students’ creative confidence, critical thinking, and making sense of and
connecting information from multidisciplinary sources, along with their resilience as
learners, it is time to rethink the old systems and fundamentally ‘reboot’ the education
process (World Economic Forum, 2011, p. 6):
Educational institutions at all levels (primary, secondary and higher education) need to
adopt 21st century methods and tools to develop the appropriate learning environment
for encouraging creativity, innovation and the ability to think ‘out of the box’ to solve
279
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
problems. Embedding entrepreneurship and innovation, cross-disciplinary approaches and
interactive teaching methods all require new models, frameworks and paradigms.
Notable education researchers, Dewey, Piaget, and Vygotsky, with more recent
educational psychologists such as Gardner (2007) and Sternberg (2008) have long
challenged narrow views of intelligence and proposed that students should be selfdirected and active learners. Knowledge, as defined by deep understanding, is not
acquired by passively absorbing information; it is constructed through direct experience
and making connections to prior learning and in multidisciplinary ways (Bransford, Brown
& Cocking, 2000). This article proposes that different and more learner-centered
approaches are needed in our classrooms—including design- and project-based learning
provide—as constructivist exemplars for empowering and training more self-directed,
intrinsically motivated, and balanced students. A few essential questions are in order:
How can art and design instruction and classroom culture best develop students’ skills
and dispositions for creativity/innovation, critical thinking, and practical intelligence?
How can educators best prepare students for the world in which we live — one in
which self-direction, creative confidence, and connection-making are imperative?
From a systems-thinking approach, which looks beneath the surface for the
interconnected factors and how all aspects of a system are interconnected, this article
brings to light underlying drivers of dynamic thinking and learning in art and design toward
fostering resilient, creatively confident, connection-makers who also possess the practical
skill sets for success in learning and life. The author also reports on a mixed model
research study conducted in middle school art and design classrooms as well as an action
research project at the college level that provide new models that can be used in visual
arts classrooms for ‘designing thinking’ (Ingalls Vanada, 2011).
A Systems View of Developing Dynamic Learning
The process of developing dynamic learners—defined as those who self-activate their
creative, analytical, and practical skills and dispositions with depth and complexity—can be
thought of as a complex system much like Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari's ‘rhizome’
(1987). Rhizome is a term used to describe the relations and connectivity of things, as of
certain roots that spread underground but remain related and dependent upon one
another such as a grove of aspen trees. A systems-thinking approach to developing
dynamic learners considers both the external and internal aspects of the learning process,
similar to the visible and invisible (yet evident and active) action of the rhizomatic roots of
aspens. Each tree is visible, yet the interaction of the complex root system of the entire
grove is largely invisible, sometimes evidenced when new trees start to grow where you do
not want them to grow. Every part of this system is connected to another, and each affects
each other.
Fostering students’ dynamic, balanced, and powerful learning requires a view of
intelligence as a multifaceted process involving a complex interplay of skills and
dispositions (Claxton, 2007). In this system, the development of students’ learning power is
a process that involves related catalysts or drivers. Some of these major drivers of dynamic
learning are the learning culture and philosophy, teacher pedagogy and beliefs, curriculum,
and students’ thinking skills, dispositions and self-beliefs. These factors are all critical
components of students’ capacity to learn as well as their motivation and behavior, effort,
280
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
persistence and grit in the face of setbacks. How students perceive their competence—
their ‘theories in action’ (Argyris & Schön, 1996) affects their creative confidence.
In our quest to make sense of the factors impacting dynamic learning, learner-centered
philosophy serves as a starting point for making meaning of the complex avenues of
accessing students’ individual capacities as learners.
Learner-centered Philosophy
Ritchhart (2002) claims that in order to have an impact on students’ creative, analytic,
and practical thinking skills and dispositions, teachers must be purposeful about the
learning and thinking culture they create. Covering course content doesn’t assure that
students ‘learn’or develop deep understanding. Learning too, is an organic, rhizomatic
process—one that relies highly upon integration/connection making, student autonomy
(choice), and personal, creative expression (Cullen, Harris & Hill, 2012). The classroom
environment, particularly one more learner-centered, plays an important role in students’
self-efficacy, confidence, desire to learn, and motivation, factors which are known to
further predict and affect levels of learning and achievement (Bransford, Brown & Cocking,
2000).
A learner-centered classroom is defined as inherently constructivist in theory, building
on philosophies mentioned which contend that students should be actively involved in the
learning process rather than passively taking in information imparted to them from
teachers and textbooks. Learner-centered philosophy promotes students’ deeper
understanding and integrative meaning making through first-hand experience or active
learning and is supported by a vast research base indicating its effectiveness (Bransford et
al., 2000; Cullen et al., 2012; Weimer, 2002). In a balanced view, learner-centered goals
build upon the pillars of connection-making, inquiry, and student self-direction (Ingalls
Vanada, 2011). These ideas coincide with Sternberg’s ideals (2008) that students’
successful intelligence can be seen as a balance of creative, critical, and practical thinking
skills. See Figure 1.
Figure 1. Learner-centered Goals
Paradigm Shift
Learner-centered curriculum focuses less on the end product (typically the first step in
most teachers’ planning), and more on the thinking and learning process. In this
281
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
constructivist paradigm, responsibility for learning is shifted to the students, and teachers
become co-learners and guides. In an LC approach, shared power and increased choices for
students are priorities. Sharing power happens by providing choices in the procedures of
the classroom, giving students the responsibility for goal setting, and designing curriculum
in ways that give students in how they learn, its relevance, as well as how they will
demonstrate what they know and understand. In so doing, teachers are placing the
responsibility for learning in the hands of students—where it belongs—and in alignment
with the LC mantra, ‘The one who does the work, does the learning.’
LC students practice dealing with a level of ambiguity along a trial of inquiry, not often
found in traditional classrooms (Dewey, 1938; Weimer, 2002). Students’ dispositions for
self-direction, self-efficacy, creativity, and increased motivation are reportedly more
positive in more learner-centered classrooms (Cullen et al., 2012), yet it is typical for LC
teachers to experience some pushback from students who are more used to tightly
mandated traditional student-teacher roles, instead of a level of ambiguity involved in
creative problem solving and having to exercise independent thinking (Weimer; 2002).
In an action research study I conducted in a large, 200-student university liberal studies
course, I experienced students’ discomfort at times, but the integration of more learnercentered principles (operationalized through inquiry, connection-making, and selfdirection) led to their enhanced perceptions about their balanced thinking skills (creative,
critical and practical) as well as their mindsets about themselves as learners (Ingalls
Vanada, 2013).
Rather than a strict content and discipline-focused approach, LC curriculum is often
organized around problems or complex, big ideas: philosophical issues or theories of social
concern that require multidisciplinary, authentic, real-life solutions (Constantino, 2002;
Cullen et al., 2012). In these problem-based, big-idea classrooms, students make
connections from disparate sources and across disciplines to develop artworks or ideas
that draw upon what Howard Gardner (2007, p. 45) calls, ‘a synthesizing mind.’ This is a
‘learning with understanding’ approach (Bransford et al., 2000, p. 8), wherein investigation
and observation lead to finding a problem, asking a question, and searching for knowledge
to answer it. Focusing questions are used to encourage independent thinking, curious
inquiry, and life-long learning.
Lastly, a learner-centered paradigm encourages students to become independent
thinkers, problem-finders, and problem-solvers through direct experience and while
actively learning with others, questioning and using critical thinking, examining, and
rethinking. Critical to this paper, these ideals are also inherent in design thinking, as
utilized in educational settings to promote deep and relevant learning. Design thinking is a
learner-centered and constructivist design, with many similarities to learner centered
theory: learning by doing, creativity, motivation to explore, openness to new ideas,
dispositional benefits, and emphasis on process. To this we will now turn.
Design Thinking Frameworks
Design thinking is an iterative, collaborative framework and process that facilitates
problem identification and problem solving. Opportunities (‘I could do this!’) or difficulties
(‘This needs to change or I could be better!’) in a current situation, together with a
decision that some action could solve the problem, is the start of a design process
(Razzouk, 2012). Design thinking phases include: (a) developing understanding and
282
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
empathy through observation and need finding, (b) problem solving, (c) generating
multiple possibilities, (d) prototyping, then (e) testing solutions. Typical phases of the
design thinking process, as identified by the Hasso Plattner Institute of Design or ‘d.school’
are in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Design thinking process (d. school as cited in Carroll et al., 2010)
The design thinking process, as a system of overlapping stages rather than a sequence,
can be divided into three phases: inspiration, ideation, and implementation (Brown, 2008).
The Inspiration phase includes understanding a problem by gathering data and inquiry;
students ideally direct this search.
Ideation is the process of possibility thinking and brainstorming to generate as many
ideas toward solutions, then develop and test those ideas by prototyping.
Implementation is the final phase that relies on feedback and reflection to modify then
develop a solution/idea or creation that aligns with the first phase.
Design thinking is aligned with active and experiential learning; it has long focused on
processes familiar to students in engineering and architecture: the posing of a problem
which is open-ended with some constraints, which nudges them to practice dealing with
ambiguity (Kellogg, 2006). As an approach to learning in the classroom, DT processes
utilizes active inquiry to build empathy and identify problems, promotes a bias toward
action (followed by reflection), activates collaborative effort, encourages ideation, and
fosters active problem solving and reflection (Carroll, Goldman, Britos, Koh, Royalty &
Hornstein, 2010; Kwek, 2011; Razzouk et al., 2012). Seeking for ways to meet human needs
fosters empathy.
For students, design thinking develops both their inductive and deductive reasoning
skills along with abductive thinking—possibility thinking linked to intuition (Kolko, 2010).
Students bridge the gap between subjective and objective reasoning by using intuitive
abilities to combine ideas and common sense into a new whole, says Kellogg (2006). This is
sensemaking! For teachers, design thinking requires a decentralization of power in the
classroom and a pedagogical shift toward learning that is: 1) human-centered; 2) action
oriented; and 3) process-oriented (Carroll et al., 2010). Incorporating design thinking into
the classroom means that teachers must value active problem solving; learning through
constructivism; dealing with ambiguity; and focusing on solutions (Cross 2007).
The use of design thinking models in the art education classroom have been found as a
key to unlocking 21st century skills and a balance of students’ thinking skills and
dispositions (creative, critical, and practical) because design thinking brings awareness to
283
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
the supportive role of critical thinking to creativity and creativity to critical thinking, with
greater development between both processes (Carroll et al., 2010; Cross, 2007; Ingalls
Vanada, 2011).
Both design- and problem-based learning rely on open-ended questioning and inquirybased methods to solve multidisciplinary design challenges or units of academic study
structured around real world problems (Carroll et. al, 2010). In the regular classroom and
visual art classrooms, design thinking clearly supports the three main pillars of learnercentered theory: inquiry, connection-making, and student self-direction.
Research in Art Education
Traditional art education classrooms, more focused on end products with less emphasis
on student-led inquiry, connection making and meaning making are missing opportunities
to develop the capacities of tomorrow’s change makers and problem solvers. More
learner-centered models that put students in charge of their learning, foster student-led
inquiry, and integrated learning are needed. There is a continued need for research
regarding how problem- and design-based models in the art education classroom might
advance students’ balanced thinking skills and dispositions (Ingalls Vanada, 2011).
In a mixed model comparative study (QUAL + QUAN) I conducted in large suburban
middle schools, regarding the effects of learner-centered classrooms (utilizing inquiry,
connection-making, and self-direction) on art students’ balanced thinking in the visual arts,
I found conceptually close ties between learner-centered philosophy, constructivist
pedagogies, and design thinking processes.
The purpose of the study was to explore the kinds of teacher pedagogies and classroom
cultures that can foster students’ balanced thinking and dispositions (creative, critical and
practical). I also wanted to understand any correlation between students’ perceptions
about themselves as learners, and their learning cultures, including teacher pedagogies. Its
purpose was defined by two questions: (1) Is there a difference in students’ quality of
thinking skills in classrooms that are designed to foster inquiry, connection-making, and
self-directed learning and those that are less so?; and (2) How do students perceive their
intelligence and understanding of a subject in these classrooms?
While the overall results of this research project are beyond the scope of this paper,
this work illuminated statistically significant (.935 at the .05 level) and qualitatively positive
effects of learner-centered pedagogy on students’ balanced thinking and dispositions
(creative, critical, and practical) (Ingalls Vanada 2011). There was also a significantly
positive relationship between more learner-centered environments and students’ more
positive perceptions about themselves as learners (their self-beliefs) in these classrooms
(.933 at the .05 level). What this indicates is that students in classrooms designed to be
more learner-centered/constructivist, performed better at a variety of assessments that
measured their balanced thinking skills and dispositions (creative, critical, and practical);
they also felt more confident and in charge of their learning in those classrooms. How
students perceive their competence—their ‘theories in action’ (Argyris & Schön, 1996)
correlates with their creative confidence.
The qualitative data gathered and coded led to an emerging theory of ‘Quality Thinking
Systems’ (Figure 5), which highlights the interconnectedness of students’ success as
learners, the learning culture, curriculum, and student and teacher beliefs.
284
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Figure 5. Quality Thinking Systems Theory
From a systems-thinking view, three outcomes highlighted how more learnercentered/constructivist classrooms promoted: (1) exploratory, (2) balanced, and (3) deep
learning. Students were more in charge of their own learning. The theory indicates how
exploratory thinking and learning might be displayed (connectivist, inquiry-driven,
constructivist, and self-directed); how balanced thinking and learning might be displayed
(analytical, creative, and practical, and process equaling product); how deep thinking and
learning might be displayed (conceptually flexible, synthetic, meaningful, and visible).
The overall results of this exploratory study are beyond the scope of this paper and do
not claim causation, but it may point to the learning culture and pedagogy, students’ belief
systems, and a systems view affecting students’ overall learning power.
Overall Quality of Thinking and the T-H-I-N-K Tool
To measure students’ balanced thinking skills and dispositions, a matrix of assessment
tools were created specific to art and design that measured students’ quality thinking—
their creative, critical, and practical thinking skills and dispositions (Ingalls Vanada, 2011).
One of the assessments, the Overall Quality Thinking tool (OQO), was developed to explore
kinds of knowledge to be learned (knowledge dimension), along with the depth and
complexity of thinking (cognitive process dimension), as inspired by Bloom’s revised
taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). The OQO resulted after extensive reviews of
best-practice literature relating to assessments in quality thinking in art and design,
problem-based learning (including design-based learning), cognitive theory (Bransford et
285
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
al., 2000; Burnette & Norman, 1997; Gardner, 2007; Sternberg, 2008). The core ideas are
featured in Figure 3.
Figure 3. T-H-I-N-K tool for Quality Thinking (2011)
The OQO led concurrently in the development of a creative process and design thinking
model, or T-H-I-N-K model (Revised model, 2014; Figure 4). The acronym, ‘THINK’ was used
to label and define each dimension, assigning levels of complexity toward students’ more
complex thinking and observed action at each level, including:
T: engage thinking (to recall, define, and observe)
H: have a plan (set learning goals and organize)
I: investigate (make connections and explore)
N: generate new ideas (create and attach meaning)
K: know or understand (synthesize, elaborate, and reason with evidence)
This model is currently being used and tested in K12 classrooms, undergraduate
teacher training courses in art and design education (Ingalls Vanada, 2014), and during
development for teachers. In an undergraduate ‘Critical and Creative Thinking Course’ for
preservice art educators, students engage with the T-H-I-N-K model in a collaborative
research project that guides them into inquiry and research to identify problems they
observe in their clinical assignments, develops empathy for their ‘user’ (teachers, students,
or administrator), and leads them to hopeful, more innovate lesson planning attached to
the benefits of problem- and design-based learning. The T-H-I-N-K process is used in this
case to also promote a greater ability to deal with ambiguity and orchestrate learning
processes that put student self-direction, thinking skills, and inquiry at the forefront. In this
preservice art education course, design thinking is also used to encourage future art
educators’ abilities to design innovative student-centered learning investigations (lesson
plans) versus the lock-step filling out of lesson plan templates.
286
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Figure 4
Although the results are still emerging, early reports on using design thinking processes
in this art education course indicated that teacher candidates using this model are
challenged to think more about developing students’ thinking skills—and less on the final
product. After interviewing and observing students in action during their clinical
observations, they approach curricular planning from an aspect of the students’ expressed
needs and problems, expanding their ability to motivate students and individualize their
learning. Candidates link these needs to State Standards in the visual arts, collaboratively
brainstorm for innovative solutions, and then synthesize their ideas into solutions that are
prototyped. The T-H-I-N-K process encourages collaboration, something that their training
in studio classes does not equip them for, and to engage in deductive brainstorming, which
surprisingly causes discomfort. Candidates have reported that in studio classes they rarely
push themselves to create multiple solutions to problems, and that design thinking forced
them to think both divergently to come up with never-before-thought of solutions, then to
move back into convergence (Lee et al. 2010).
Candidates also expressed difficulty with dealing with the ambiguity of inquiry-driven
research and planning, being more used to filling in prescripted, traditional lesson plan
templates. At the same time, one student commented on the design thinking process used
in the model:
I really liked this whole process. It was energizing and invigorating to know that I can
have a hand in change! This process definitely helped me to think outside the box in
287
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
everyday problems. It also gave me a chance to work with different personalities in a
corroborative setting. …The skills of thinking, creating, listening and evolving will be used
throughout the rest of my career as well as in my personal life.
Summary
In order to build students’ agency and sense of self as learners and creators, at every
level, teachers must be purposeful about the learning and thinking culture they create. Not
only should more passive pedagogies in art and design education (and education overall)
be replaced with more constructivist, learner-centered models which provide active,
social, and affective facets of learning. From a systems-thinking approach, this research
strives to understand the multidimensionality of environment, teacher pedagogy and
beliefs, curriculum, and students’ perceptions of their abilities— critical components of
motivation and behavior, effort, and persistence and grit in the face of setbacks.
Pedagogical models that incorporate design thinking across disciplines, including art
education, can activate students’ analytical thinking and creative problem-solving skills to
higher levels. Design-based learning experiences can affirm a postmodern point of view
that engages art education students in empathic inquiries into problems of social interest
that support contemporary art integration.
Models for thinking that incorporate design thinking across disciplines, including art
education, can activate students’ analytical thinking and creative problem-solving skills to
higher levels. Design-based learning experiences can affirm a postmodern point of view
that engages art education students in empathic inquiries into problems of social interest.
In this way, the focus is on creative, critical, and practical thinking processes, including
inductive and deductive reasoning, along with abductive and synthetic sensemaking
(Kolko, 2010). As we envision a more connected education, one in which prepares students
for a complex future, balanced and learner-centered arts and design environments provide
needed inspiration.
References
Anderson, L., and Krathwohl, D. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison
Wesley Longman.
Argyris, C., and Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice.
Reading, Massachusetts: Addison Wesley.
Bransford, J., Brown, A. & Cocking, R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind,
experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review: Paperback Series. Boston:
Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.
Burnette, C., & J. Norman, J. (1997). Design for thinking DK-12. Tucson, Arizona: Crizmac
Art and Cultural Materials.
Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A. & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination,
imagination and the fires within: Design thinking in a middle school classroom.
International Journal of Art and Design Education, 29(1), 37-53. Available from
http://www.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/takingdesign/proposals/Destination_Imagination_the_Fire_Within.pdf
288
Dynamic Inquiry and Sense-making in Design Thinking
Claxton, G. (2007). Expanding young people’s capacity to learn. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 55(2), 115-134.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser Verglag AG.
Constantino, T. E. (2002). Problem-based learning: A concrete approach to teaching
aesthetics. Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research in Art Education,
43(3), 219-231.
Cullen, R., Harris, M. & Hill, R. (2012) The learner-centered curriculum: Design and
implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dewey, J. (1938). Education and experience: The 60th anniversary edition. Bloomington, IN:
Kappa Delta Pi. (Original work published 1938)
Duckworth, E. (1996). The having of wonderful ideas and other essays on teaching and
learning. New York, Teachers College Press.
Gardner, H. (2007). Five minds for the future. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Ingalls Vanada, D. (2014). Balance, Depth and Beyond: Tapping in to Design Thinking in Art
Education. The International Journal of Arts Education, 10(1), 1-14. Common Ground
Publications: ISSN: 2326-9944. http://ijae.cgpublisher.com/
Ingalls Vanada, D. (2013). Practically creative: The role of design thinking as an improved
paradigm for 21st century art education. Paper presentation (paper refereed 1st for
acceptance) at the 2nd International DRS/Cumulus ‘Design Learning for Tomorrow: Art
and Design Education from Kindergarten to PhD’ conference, Oslo, Norway.
Ingalls Vanada, D. (2011). Designing thinking: Developing dynamic learners in the arts.
Saarbrücken, Germany: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Kellogg, C. (2006). Learning from studio: Focus on the future. Design Intelligence
Knowledge Reports, January.
Kolko, J. (2010). Abductive thinking and sensemaking: The drivers of design synthesis.
Design Issues, 26(1), Winter 2010
Kwek, S. H. (2011). Innovation in the classroom: Design thinking for 21st century learning.
(Masters thesis).
http://www.stanford.edu/group/redlab/cgibin/publications_resources.php
Razzouk, R. & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of
Educational Research, 82(3), 330-348.
Ritchhart, R. (2002). Intellectual character: What it is, why it matters and how to get it. San
Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Robinson, K. (2006, June). How schools kills creativity [Video File]. Retrieved from Lecture
Notes. http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity/
Sternberg, R. (2008). Increasing academic excellence and enhancing diversity are
compatible goals. Educational Policy, 22(4), 487-514.
Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes in practice. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Zhao, Y. (2009). Catching Up or Leading the Way. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
289
Hidden Value - Towards an Understanding of the Full
Value and Impact of Engaging Students in User-Led
Research and Innovation Projects Between
Universities and Companies
Mark BAILEY*, Mersha AFTAB and Neil SMITH
Northumbria University
*mark.bailey@unn.ac.uk
Abstract: ‘Live’ projects have been the staple of degree programmes in design
for as long as design education has existed. They represent the perfect vehicle
through which students can test their evolving knowledge and skills. They
provide an ideal constructivist platform through which problem-centred,
authentic learning can be achieved and deliver immediate value to student
learning. This study explores the value to the other stakeholders in such projects:
the Company and the University. A suite of projects undertaken over a ten-year
period between a leading Design School and one of the largest Fast Moving
Consumer Goods companies in the world has been reviewed. Semi-structured
interviews with Company employees and academics have been used to establish
the impact of each project, and this data has been mapped against the original
objective of each project in order to identify the hidden value of these
collaborations. Through this exploration of a decade of University-Company
collaborations, the authors identify levels of engagement that go beyond the
‘live project’. The paper illustrates the value of such projects for the ‘client’
organisation, and the academic community, as well as reflecting, briefly, on the
student experience.
Keywords: Live-Project, Industry-collaboration, Innovation, Impact
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Background
The site of this research, Northumbria University School of Design (hereafter NUSD),
has an international reputation for the excellence of its teaching of industrial design
practice at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. It is also an acknowledged pioneer of
multidisciplinary practice learning within design, and, between design, business,
technology, and social sciences subjects. A characteristic of NUSD is the essential role that
projects (conducted between external partners, academics, and students) play in the
curriculum.
NUSD plays host to the students with the highest academic points-score in their
University and the brightest design students in their country. The academic team comes
from different facets of design dealing with both theory and practice-based design
research. In addition to the academic team, the School of Design involves ‘Innovators in
Residence’; recent Masters Graduates who support the projects whilst being mentored by
the University as they launch their own businesses.
Projects undertaken between student groups and external organisations are often
referred to as ‘live’ projects. This study makes a distinction between ‘live’, ‘collaborative’
and ‘partnership’ projects. A ‘live’ project as defined by the LiveProjectsNetwork;
comprises the negotiation of a brief, timescale, budget, and product between an
educational organisation, and an external collaborator for their mutual benefit. The project
must be structured to ensure that students gain learning that is relevant to their
educational development (Anderson, J., & Priest, C., 2015).
The live project is, in effect, an outcome-focused transactional project.
Introduction
IMPLEMENTI
NG
291
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
COLLABORAT
ION
BETWEEN
ORGANIZATI
ONS:
AN
EMPIRICAL
292
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
STUDY OF
SUPPLY
CHAIN
PARTNERING
IMPLEMENTI
NG
293
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
COLLABORAT
ION
BETWEEN
ORGANIZATI
ONS:
AN
EMPIRICAL
294
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
STUDY OF
SUPPLY
CHAIN
PARTNERING
This paper explores the ten years of University-industry collaboration between NUSD and Unilever.
The nature of the collaboration started with live, outcome-based projects focusing on learning for
both the Company and the University’s students. This relationship has ultimately transformed into a
partnership where both parties still learn from creating outcomes, but learn more about the
cultures, methods and approaches that prevail within each organisation and the disciplines involved
in them.
Pertuzé, et al. (2010, pp. 83) state that, ‘Most previous studies of industry-University collaboration
[partnership] have framed the analysis of such partnerships in terms of research project outcomes,
defined here as a result that creates an opportunity for a company, such as guidance for the
direction of technology development. From a business standpoint, however, research outcome is of
only incidental importance. What matters is not the outcome but impact – how the new knowledge
derived from a collaboration with a University can contribute to a company’s performance.’
As the collaborations between Unilever and NUSD strengthened over time, the relationship has
transformed into a partnership where both enjoy a number of impactful benefits. The paper
identifies the nature of project relationships and the benefit of these to both parties; the Company
and the University.
Relationship history
A chance meeting, a decade ago, brought together the School of Design and Unilever. A
senior research chemist interested in the relationship between detergent and fabrics had
295
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
engaged in projects with Fashion Design programmes and was also working with a design
agency that employed an alumnus of NUSD. The alumnus introduced the chemist to the
School of Design.
At that time, most of the School of Design in question (and indeed industrial design
education as a whole) was very much focused upon the traditional role of the Designer as
creative problem-solver and crafter of artefact. In this context, a telephone call from a
chemist curious to find out whether industrial design students had anything interesting to
say about ‘the nature and behaviour of fluids’ might have met with a lack of positivity.
However, the creative potential in this enquiry, and the opportunity that it presented to
move students out of their comfort-zones was recognised and a live project was duly
established. This was in 2005.
The student outcomes of this project were truly surprising; the students were guided to
think beyond product design, and to consider what might happen if fluids (in the context of
the Company’s products) were unconstrained by packaging. They were asked whether
scientists could design the behavior of fluids within certain consumer contexts. What
resulted was a series of designed narratives; user-stories from the consumers’ perspective
that highlighted the role that designerly ways of thinking and communicating (Saikaly,
2005; Yee, 2009) can play in informing scientific enquiry upstream in scientific discovery.
The project outcomes took a shortcut from laboratory to supermarket shelf, and caused
the client to consider how they might engage a wider Company audience in this type of
thinking and way of working.
This first project was very much in the transactional model of the live project with a
sole industry contact that had an interesting question of minimal commercial value. In this
case, however, its value can’t be overstated for it paved the way for 23 subsequent
projects (and counting) undertaken over a ten-year period that have enabled the
relationship to grow to that of a partnership.
Research Methodology
As the projects have been conducted over a ten-year period, there have been a
number of different actors involved from both the University and Company. However,
there is a small number of key NUSD staff that have been involved in all of these projects,
and these staff were consulted from the outset. Workshops were conducted in which they
created a timeline for the projects onto which they mapped key information (Figure 1).
This timeline and mapping was conducted at a large scale and on the wall; externalizing
the information, and sharing it in this way prompted the recollection of data, and
supported the synthesis of data at a later stage (Saldana, 2009). It allowed for recollection
over time and for multiple actors to become involved.
Figure 1
Relationship timeline and project mapping
296
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Evidence and Interviews
Interviews were conducted with key Unilever staff who had been involved with
projects over the ten years. They highlighted the value of engaging with students. For
example, the Director, Homecare Discover Team, Unilever stated, ‘It’s a way of breaking
out of the box of kind of a traditional thinking that we do in Unilever’; the R&D Programme
Director, Unilever added, ‘What Northumbria brings to the table is not one-to-one
relationship but one-to-many’, also indicating that Unilever has learnt new ways of looking
at their problems. Unilever’s ‘smart futures leader’ saw clear advantage in collaborating
with Northumbria students and she added, ‘It was clear that we were working with
partners that were [going to] help us really generate something completely different, but at
the same time make sure that it was grounded with our consumers and aligned to the
brand that we work with.’
She further confirmed that engaging with Northumbria led Unilever to understand the
real value of ‘compelling communication’ by stating, ‘we were able to come up with an
output to the project, which was completely different from what we would have got from
an internal team [doing] it. We have been able to gather a set of videos as the output,
aligned to our consumers, for each of the ideas that we came up with. I think the videos
that we have produced were absolutely key in getting stakeholder buy-in for at least one or
possibly two projects that we are now doing, which simply would not have happened if we
would not have done that piece of work.’
Finally, Unilever’s ‘Project Team Leader’ provided evidence towards the collaborative
projects delivering real business value to Unilever by stating, ‘The real value that we have
got out of working with Northumbria is two folds; firstly, we have got a very different way
of thinking about some of our products and some of our problems, and some new
populations, and secondly, we have got a way of understanding how we can turn that into
a business proposition’. Additionally, Laundry Liquids Designer at Unilever, said, ‘The ideas
that we create are sensible ideas with a business context, are creative and enable us as an
organisation to file and protect the IP in the territory, or bring those ideas to market.’
Academic staff, reflecting on the students’ perspective, and interviews with students
themselves highlighted that these sort of partnerships provided the opportunity for the
students to practice their new found design skills in these new contexts with real
professionals. Additionally, staff also confirmed that such partnerships helped in making
their students employable in industry.
Several students’ interviews highlighted value in this collaboration as well. For
example, a MA Student stated that, ‘I definitely felt from this project that I progressed in
terms of being able to work with a live client.’ An undergraduate student on Northumbria’s
Design for Industry course confirmed that regular feedback from industry clients was great
to build his confidence. Further, a MA student, MDI) stated that partnership projects
helped her understanding the needs of the client and through constant feedback she was
able progress in her design capabilities.
Data Analysis
Whilst the very earliest live projects were not subject to any formalized post-project
review, from the third year of the relationship onwards, University staff have
systematically gathered feedback from the Company representatives involved in the
297
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
projects. Such data has informed a number of studies, including doctoral research. The
Company perspective from the interviews was thus represented in the mapping exercise,
and has subsequently been corroborated by semi-structured interviews with the primary
contacts (including reflection on the earliest projects with the lead contact from that
period). Seven criteria were used in order to map the projects (Table 1). In the mapping
exercise the criteria were colour-coded in order to ease evaluation.
Table 1
Mapping Criteria
Criterion
Evidence
What we did
Summary of the brief and objectives
How we did it
Methodologies employed
Who we did it with
Key contacts, their role and position within the Company
Impact to Company
What changed in the Company as a result of the project
Impact to University
What changed for the University as a result of the project
What we learned
New knowledge or approach (es) resulting from the
project
Financial Value
Sponsorship income resulting from the project
The criteria of particular interest in this paper are ‘Impact to Company’ and ‘Impact to
University’. However, it is worth noting that University staff involved in the workshops and
mapping became somewhat confused between ‘Impact to University’ and ‘What we (as an
academic community) Learned’. It is clear that gaining new content knowledge; specific to
the topic under consideration, the sector, Company etc. or disciplinary knowledge;
involving new methods or approaches to practice both create an impact for the University
(and its students). With hindsight, the study may have benefitted from de-coupling
learning from impact when posing the question to the Company in order to gain a more
detailed understanding. However, as the criteria merely acted as prompts to aid reflection
in the mapping and evaluation exercises, this omission is not considered material to the
overall validity of the findings.
Despite focusing on the three criteria indicated above, ‘What we did’ sheds some light
on where the University has impact in the Company. This criteria, then, has also influenced
these findings.
Project Engagement
The typical student engagement in a project took the form of a team-based learning
project, generally of 6-8 weeks in duration. Undergraduate students would be assessed on
the team outcome of the project; how good the design was, whereas Masters students
would be assessed on their reflection on what they had learned from undertaking the
project. In all cases, the Company’s business context framed the problem space for the
students, and each team was invited to work with this to create their own brief for the
project. Outcomes from the projects have included designs for: new business models;
brands; development strategies; product and formulation designs; advertising; and
communication materials.
298
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Key Findings
Four types of projects
Reviewing ‘What we did’ enabled the authors to identify that there have been four
broad categories of project conducted with the Company during the ten-year period;
Framing & Exploring
Projects in this category were essentially about understanding the true underlying
problem in the territory that interested Unilever, then framing this in a way that
(re)defined the explicit nature of the problem, engaged the Company with their
commercial language and context, and directed the academic/student teams in the
project. This laid the foundations for disrupting the territories by challenging basic
assumptions through the lens of different disciplines.
Communicating Science
These projects were concerned with bringing science to life; translating early scientific
discovery into meaningful, tangible, consumer-relevant communications. The audiences
for such communications were internal to the Company (e.g. the outputs were intended to
allow R+D teams to gain advocacy for new science programmes from Marketing colleagues
or to provide collateral for consumer testing etc.), and Business-to-Business (e.g. in
support of engaging external agencies or commercial collaborative partnerships)
Changing Consumer Behavior
In this category, the Company was interested in how a given market or category might
be transformed through consumer behavior-change supported (or driven) by relevant
product, system, service or business-model development.
Market Strategy
Projects in this category sought to identify strategic opportunities to load the
Company’s Innovation Funnel based on project content from the above three areas. This
was to deliver a macro context to project work, which aligned with the Company’s toplevel strategic direction.
Figure 2
Distribution of project category over time
299
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
Figure 2 identifies how the various project categories are distributed over time with a
consistent spread of Framing and Exploring projects evident across the timescale.
Communicating Science has featured consistently from three years in (this corresponds
with the University’s development of its Multidisciplinary Innovation Masters programme),
and latterly Changing Consumer Behavior and Market Strategy have started to feature. The
volume of project activity has also increased substantially in recent years and a number of
projects have involved work in more than one category.
From Live Project to Partnership, via Collaboration
By reviewing a ten-year relationship between NUSD and Unilever, the authors have
been able to identify the changing nature of that relationship. From merely conducting a
small number of ‘framing and exploring’ projects, to engaging in a partnership with a
combination of the four aforementioned project types caused the relationship to progress.
This long term history with working and learning together led to an increased
understanding of the different levels of engagements the key stakeholders could have, and
the benefit these engagements could bring to both. As a consequence of this, the reach of
the University within the Company has extended and the role of the projects is moving
more towards the strategic.
Historically, Unilever and the School of Design have worked together in three specific
ways that can be described as Live Projects, Collaborative Projects and, more recently,
Partnership Projects.
L IVE P ROJECTS
Anderson and Priests (2015) definition of Live Projects reflects the transactional nature
of the relationship. What has been observed within the School of Design is that, whilst
students gain from the experience, ‘mutual benefit’ is limited in reach for companies and
University. The emphasis is, rightly in one respect, on student learning. The use of the
word ‘live’ implies that the project brief is commercially significant, and presently of
concern to the organisation. Our study found that this is rarely the case when the
transaction is as described in their definition. The project outcomes in these cases reflect
only a small amount of the academics’ research knowledge other than as it applies to any
teaching associated with the project. In other words, the client company typically gains
inspirational raw ideas, but little of commercial relevance.
C OLLABORATIVE P ROJECTS
‘Collaborative Projects’, on the other hand, go beyond the simple transaction of
agreeing ‘brief, timescale, budget and product’, and place emphasis on mutual
commitment as well as mutual benefit. They are undertaken as more of a joint venture
with the external party(ies). This ensures a greater partner input to the project (beyond
the budget and brief), and consequently greater academic contact and thereby
opportunities for deeper sharing of knowledge. Inevitably, this increased sharing delivers
greater benefit to all stakeholders; the company employees witness alternative ways of
thinking about their world and different ways of working, and academics are able to
measure the currency of their knowledge in real-world commercial contexts.
300
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
P ARTNERSHIP P ROJECTS
Ultimately, a Partnership Project offers the greatest opportunity to deliver truly mutual
benefit, and goes beyond the benefits of mere collaboration in that the partners become
so aware of each other’s needs, culture and direction of travel that they can become proactive in the relationship. Close alignment of the goals, culture, and ethos of the University
and company leads to increased impact of any project undertaken involving the students.
Pertuzé, et al. (2010) suggest that in such a project scenario the real impact of the
partnership can be brought to life; the relationship could go beyond the finishing of the
project, and lead to implementation of the learning within the company and the University
for real business impact.
Discussion
This study explored the value of ten years of collaboration between NUSD and Unilever
by illustrating the different types of collaborations that led to a strong partnership
between the two. The paper concludes that ‘Partnership Projects’ lead to a stronger longterm relationship between the two partners, and highlights the hidden value these ten
years of working together brought to the Company and the University.
Figure 3
Hierarchy of impact
We have identified three levels of impact for the Company in respect of this
relationship and these can be expressed as a hierarchical model as depicted in Figure 3.
The nature of the aspects that the Company values (set out 1-5 in the next section) can be
mapped onto this hierarchy, where at the bottom of this pyramid, fragile, often naïve,
student generated ideas in need of nurturing can act as inspiration, and at the very top,
game-changing new products and new ways of working are the prize. By moving from a
live project approach, which only delivers at the bottom of the pyramid, to a partnership
model, the scale of impact potential increases without losing the value of those fragile
inspirational ideas. In order to be at the top of the pyramid and the outcomes to become
more impactful, the University stakeholders need to be active in the project longer,
beyond student involvement. They need to deploy their knowledge, in partnership with
301
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
the Company, to translate the student outputs into more Company applicable, refined
solutions. Nevertheless, the research recognises the difference between valuable benefits
and impact that the engagement brings to both stakeholders.
Benefits and Impact to the Company
Value to the Company through Live and Collaborative projects
In identifying valuable benefits and impact, we have considered what Unilever’s
representatives have told us that they valued most about engagement in these projects,
and considered the ‘reach’ that these aspects can have within the organisation.
Rapidity
In relative terms, a project conducted in the hothouse environment of a studentengaged project, delivers ‘tangible’ results very quickly. (Tangible results in this respect are
manifestations of an idea in a format that is readily understood by a specific audience.
These may include mock-ups and prototypes, faux-adverts (in poster and video format),
video stories, animations, poster-presentations and reports). What this means is that new
scientific discovery can be postulated as consumer-ready products whilst still in early
exploration. When such discoveries are placed in meaningful consumer contexts in this
way, their proponents can garner advocacy for the idea, highlighting potential consumer
benefit, and potential return on investment thereby aiding go/no-go decision-making.
2. High Volume, High Quality
Whilst Osborn’s (1953) assertion that ‘quantity breeds quality’ in idea generation has
been challenged (Diehl and Stoebe, 1991), there is still a very good case to make for high
volume idea generation in the context of a student-engaged project with industry. For
Unilever, in the context of these projects seeing their situation played back to them
through the multiple lenses of many students’ understanding increases the potential for
them to derive value from the exercises:
affirmation/validation of their own thinking;
inspiration; entirely new ideas and approaches;
unexpected connections (from sector to sector, culture to culture, life-stage to lifestage);
and valuable ‘stupid’ (naïve) questions.
Proponents of Osborn’s brainstorming method, and derivatives thereof, highlight the
importance of quantity over quality. And supporters of live projects with students will
often cite (Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Brown, 2013) the main value as being the ‘creative
naïvety’ that students bring to a problem. This is, indeed, an important source for
challenging company-held perceptions, and pre-conceptions relating to the given context.
Whilst the typical student may lack experience and wisdom born out of age and life
experience, this delivers a particular value to the company. By proposing positively naïve
ideas, intelligently framed, and in a contextually-relevant way, their value and potential
impact increases significantly.
Compelling Communications
Smith, et al. (2010) identified the essential role of story-making and story-telling in
multidisciplinary design projects, especially those engaging scientific communities. They
302
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
explain that story-making acts as mediation between different disciplines seeking to solve
the same problem but employing methods, approaches, behaviors and knowledge specific
to their own background. This story-making approach places the consumer at the center of
the story; understanding the consumer is therefore key.
Unilever have a sophisticated model for representing different consumer types in
different global situations. This guides internal decision-making and new brand strategy,
product development and positioning. However, whilst the tool is sophisticated, and based
on thorough research and rigorous data, it can be somewhat ‘lifeless’. Story-making (and
the character creation required) brings the consumer to life, and immediately places the
ideas in the consumers’ context.
Smith, et al. (2010) explain how, as a project progresses, the story-making must
translate into storytelling. Storytelling and its relationship to the design pitch is a relatively
under-researched area, however there have been recent attempts to understand how
approaching storytelling at this stage of a conceptual design project has an impact on a
company in terms of their ability to see value in the work of a designer (Parkinson et al.,
2012a, 2012b). In particular Parkinson and Bohemia (2012a), highlight the importance of
considering the perceptions of a company when devising the structure of a story, in terms
of what type of communication they perceive to be diverse and different, and what
perspectives and cultural beliefs their users have.
The means of presenting such stories is also important. The mock-ups and prototypes,
faux-adverts video stories, animations, poster-presentations and reports previously
mentioned, can all act to bring aspects of the ideas to life, and are often combined to
create presentations that are transportable; can be replayed and reused within a company
by the project champions, long after the students have moved on to other things.
At the onset of projects, the School of Design has learned that investing time in
interrogating the project brief, mapping the project objectives, assumptions and context
against the School’s own knowledge of the situation, and placing all of this in the context
of the consumer has particular value. We call this ‘brief-back’. This ‘brief-back’ ensures
that both parties fully understand each other’s perspective and have a shared, common
goal for the project prior to student engagement. This also gives the company a compelling
narrative with which to garner internal advocacy for the work and stimulus material with
which to bring colleagues onboard.
Impact to Company through Partnership Projects
True impact of the engagements between Unilever and the School of Design has been
witnessed only through Partnership Projects that have brought both parties to align their
thinking, cultures and ethos. The most valuable impacts to the Company as identified by
them are:
4. Co-creation
In Partnership Projects, a greater degree of ownership of the outcomes ensures that
the project has increased potential to influence internal Company development activity
once the academic community has stepped away. Engaging a broad team of Company
representatives in co-creative activities as the project progresses by establishing a series of
workshops throughout the project allowed the Unilever team to engage directly with the
students in story-making. This inspires their own creativity and lowers inhibitions.
303
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
Company employees state that working with students gives them ‘permission’ to behave
more creatively, especially if the workshops are held in the School of Design premises. By
‘permission’, employees are referring to the creative freedom that working with students
liberates, away from the constraints of their ‘day-job’ and the perceived professionalism
called for when engaging with external commercial creative agencies.
This co-creation helps to establish ownership and a desire to see the ideas through into
the Company Innovation Pipeline. However, it has a more profound impact; employees
have explained that working with NUSD has impacted on their working practices, bringing
about new ways of approaching problems, and engaging in a more consumer-focused and
multidisciplinary practice.
5. Beyond students
Whilst the typical ‘live’ project concludes with the ‘final presentation’ to the ‘client’ and
some feedback from them, research previously conducted in the School of Design (Bailey
et al 2013) identified an important post-completion phase of activity, in effect, ‘feedforward’ – ‘what happens next…’. Building on this research, the School of Design has
established a mechanism through which the academic team can work with recent
graduates engaged in an Innovators in Residence scheme to work with companies to refine
ideas, establish appropriate strategic propositions based upon them and communicate
these appropriately. This level of engagement is important to Unilever because it answers
the question which are often posed in feedback at the conclusion of the typical live
project; ‘that was great - now, what can we do with it?’
Benefit and Impact to the University
The overarching value to the University from this type of engagement with an
organisation is that it provides a platform for truly integrated academic practice; a model
in which external engagement provides both a learning context for students and research
site for academics (for the application (and exchange) of existing knowledge and creation
of new).
Value to the University through Live and Collaborative Projects
Barnes et al. (2002) explain that, in the context of university-company interactions, the
different parties have different motivations;
any University partner aims through its research activities to achieve certain important
academic objectives, e.g. the publication of research results in academic journals; to run
projects for research students leading to postgraduate degree qualifications; to perform
further research in specific areas; and through this research to develop new teaching and
case study material.
These academic objectives are certainly present within the School of Design, however,
there is another motivation at play, which possibly takes a higher priority than all of these
and this is that of providing authentic learning; learning opportunities that allow for theory
to be applied in practice in addressing ‘real-world’ problems.
High Level Learning Within Real World Context Bailey et al. (2014) identified context of
application as essential to establishing authentic learning. With regard to these projects
with this Company, it is clear that the closer the relationship moves towards the
Partnership Project model, the more authentic the learning opportunity becomes.
304
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
Impact to University Through Partnership Projects
1. Generation of Currency in Practice Based Knowledge
Within the context of design innovation education, it is essential that contemporary
(and future) influences on the designers’ practice are continually refreshed. Traditional
academic research practices, longitudinal studies and engagement with the academic
community at large, offer one dimension in this respect. However, active engagement with
commercial contexts of application allows academics to understand much more rapidly the
pervading priorities of the time. This ensures a currency of knowledge, which is not always
achieved through theoretical study. In turn, it ensures that what is taught in the classroom
and studio is entirely relevant to contemporary practice, and therefore better equips
students for employment.
2. Opportunities for Future Research and Funding
Such contemporary awareness sets the scene for relevant, practice-based research. In
the same way that real-world context is essential to student learning, so it is for research.
It provides a testing ground for evolving theories and approaches, methods and tools.
Based upon the co-creative approaches outlined above, it also provides an opportunity for
such approaches to be tested with industry collaborators.
Conclusion
The University gives importance to delivery of excellence in learning and teaching, and
programmes of study need to demonstrate high achievement across the range of
University and HE metrics against which they are judged. The move from ‘Live Projects’
through ‘Collaborative Projects’ to conducting ‘Partnership Projects’ has proved beneficial
not just for the primary partners (Unilever and Northumbria University), but also for the
students. The more closely the students work with the Company (co-creating in the
partnership model), the greater their experience of working in a real world context,
learning the skills and competencies which not only make them highly employable, but
also confident agents of innovation and change.
The Future
As highlighted in the paper, partnership through students’ projects in order to propose
solutions to real world problems generates great value for the students, the company and
the University. In addition to the former, such collaborations also generate value for the
disciplines, and the individual stakeholders who are part of the partnership. This poses a
challenge for the University; to ensure a four-way value creation i.e. for the company, the
discipline, academic research and students. This has to be done by balancing the
University-company relationship (business) while creating viable research output (adding
value to the discipline), research opportunities (future collaborations and funding
opportunities), and enhancing student experience; we call this Integrated Academic
Practice.
305
MARK BAILEY, MERSHA AFTAB & NEIL SMITH
References
Anderson, J., & Priest, C. (2015) Live Projects Network. Retrieved 24 January 2015, from
http://liveprojectsnetwork.org/about/
Bailey, M., Smith, N., & Aftab, M. (2013, 14-17 May). Connecting for Impact Multidisciplinary Approaches to Innovation in Small to Medium Sized enterprises (SMEs).
Paper presented at the DRS/Cumulus Conference 2013: The 2nd International
Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo, Norway.
Bailey, M., Aftab, M., & Duncan, T. (2014). New Design is Bigger and Harder - Design
Mastery in a Changing World. Paper presented at the International Conference on
Engineering and Product Design Education, Enschende, The Netherlands.
Barnes, T., Pashby, I., Gibbons, A. (2002) ‘Effective University – Industry Interaction: A
Multi-case Evaluation of Collaborative R&D Projects’. European Management Journal 20
(3), 272-285.
Blumenfeld, Phyllis C. et al. (1991) ‘Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the
Doing, Supporting the Learning.’ Educational Psychologist 26, no. 3-4: 369-98.
Brown, J. Benedict (2013) ‘An output of value’ - Exploring the role of the live project as a
pedagogical, social and cultural bureau de change. Presented at Association of
Architectural Educators Conference, 4-5 April, Nottingham Trent University. 4.
Michael Diehl; Wolfgang Stroebe (1991). ‘Productivity Loss in Idea-Generating Groups:
Tracking Down the Blocking Effect’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 61 (3):
392–403
Osborn, A.F. (1963) Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem
solving (Third Revised Edition). New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Parkinson, D. and Bohemia, E. (2012a) Developing the Design Storytelling Impact-Approach
Framework, 2012 International Design Management Research Conference, Boston,
Massachusetts, U.S.A.
Parkinson, D., Bohemia, E., Yee, J. and Smith, N. (2012b) Design Process and Organisational
Strategy: A Storytelling Perspective, Design Research Society Annual International
Conference, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pertuzé, J. A. et al. (2010). Best Practices for Industry-University Collaboration. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 51(4), 82-91.
Saldana, Johnny (2009). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: SAGE
Publication Ltd.
Saikaly,F. (2005) Approaches todesign research:Towards the designerly way. Sixth
international conference of the European Academy of Design (EAD06). University of the
Arts, Bremen, Germany
Smith, Neil & Mark Bailey & Steve Singleton & Phil Sams. 2010. Storytelling stimulates
science. International Conference On Engineering And Product Design Education 2 & 3
September 2010, Norwegian University Of Science And Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Smith, N., Bailey, M., Singleton, S. and Sams, P. (2010) – 12th International Engineering &
Product Design Education conference, E&PDE 2010, Trondheim, Norway. ISBN 978-1904670-19-3.
Yee, J. S. R. Capturing tacit knowledge: Documenting and understanding recent
methodological innovation used in design doctorates in order to inform postgraduate
306
Hidden Value - Towards an understanding of the full value and impact of engaging students in
user-led research and innovation projects between universities and companies
training provision. Experiential Knowledge Conference, 19th June 2009 London. London
Metropolitan University
307
What Problem Are We Solving? Encouraging Idea
Generation and Effective Team Communication
Colin M. GRAY*a, Seda YILMAZa, Shanna R. DALYb, Colleen M. SEIFERTb and
Richard GONZALEZb
a Iowa
State University; b University of Michigan
*cmgray@iastate.edu
Abstract: Idea generation has frequently been explored in design education as
an exercise of students’ ‘innate’ creativity, and few tools or techniques are
offered to scaffold ideation ability. As students develop their design skills, we
expect them to demonstrate increasing ideation flexibility—a cognitive and
social ability to see a problem from multiple perspectives, and to create more
varied concepts within the problem space. In this study, we introduced three
tools— functional decomposition, Design Heuristics, and affinity diagramming—
to aid students’ ideation in a three-hour workshop. Participants included 20
students in a junior industrial design studio arranged in five pre-existing teams.
These participants first decomposed the functions within an existing set of
concepts they had generated, then selected a specific function and generated
additional concepts using the Design Heuristics ideation method. Finally, teams
organized these concepts using affinity diagramming to find patterns and
additional concepts. Our findings suggest that this process encouraged students
to try multiple ways of examining the existing problem space, resulting in a
broadened set of final concepts. More striking, the instructional activities served
to foreground differences in team members’ understanding of the problem they
were addressing, fostering alignment of their problem statement and aiding in
its further development.
Keywords: problem framing; functional decomposition; Design Heuristics;
affinity diagramming; team communication
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
What Problem Are We Solving?
Introduction
The framing of a design problem is a key component of design thinking (Dorst, 2015;
Paton & Dorst, 2011). Previous research has addressed the exploration of problem spaces
(Cross, 2007; Goel & Pirolli, 1989; Schön, 1990), both through the application of productive
constraints (Biskjaer & Halskov, 2014; Stokes, 2009) and the dialectic between problem
and solution states (Dorst & Cross, 2001), in which problem framing can make a wicked or
ill-structured problem tractable for individual designers and design teams. However, less is
known about how designers and design teams develop consensus around problem
framings in order to develop potential solutions, particularly early in their design
education. While the reflective skills of articulating design decisions and building
consensus around those decisions are hallmarks of expert design behavior (Lawson &
Dorst, 2009; Nelson & Stolterman, 2012), the pedagogical scaffolds that are needed to
effectively teach these skills have not been adequately identified.
Numerous scholars have suggested that sketching offers a unique insight into the
creative process (e.g., Goldschmidt, 1997; Goel, 1995; Self & Pei, 2014) by externalizing
design cognition in a visual form, forcing the individual designer to document potential
design solutions. However, sketching as a method or tool does not necessarily constrain
the student’s articulation of the problem space they are working within, and when
sketches are externalized and isolated from the individual designer, can often be too
ambiguous to build consensus without other forms of communication. When multiple
stakeholders are engaged in the design process (as is most often the case), the alignment
of problem space and potential solutions—as depicted through sketching and other
communication tools used in early concept generation—becomes even more complex,
requiring complex patterns of communication in order to reach an understanding among
team members (e.g., Cross & Cross, 1996; Nelson & Stolterman, 2012).
The issues of team communication, dialogue, and negotiation are critical in forming an
understanding of how design is practiced; however past design research has focused
primarily on the relationship of the individual designer to the created artifact. However,
Cross and Cross (1996) offer an early example of how team alignment and the roles of
designers within the team can affect the ability to build consensus and work efficiently.
McPeek and Morthland (2010) focused on the development of communicative patterns
that facilitated alignment and understanding within student teams, including a common
dialogue and language. In addition to these more general studies of team alignment, and
the elements of interaction that facilitate this alignment, some scholars have focused more
closely on problem framing and its role in facilitating and sustaining alignment. Stumpf and
McDonnell (2002) operationalized Schön’s concept of reflection-on-action between team
members as a way to make the frame negotiation process explicit, with team recognition
of major shifts in framing as a productive step towards producing aligned concepts. Hey,
Joyce, and Beckman (2007) expanded on the idea of frame negotiation as a cycle of frame
setting, where students’ individual frames are systematically made explicit, which then
raises potential conflicts between individual frames, ultimately leading to the construction
of a shared frame.
Reflection-on-action is valuable to externalize and explain the situated design
judgments of an individual designer (e.g., Holt, 1997; Schön, 1985) on both the design
decision and problem framing levels. But team-based design requires not only
309
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
externalization, but also negotiation. Nelson and Stolterman (2012) refer to the object of
negotiation as the desiderata—or ‘that-which-is-desired’—which reinforces the need to
understand design intentions in a specific, situated design process. The negotiation of the
desiderata, which encompasses the problem framing along with the dimensions of ethics,
aesthetics, and reason, is at the core of developing a team design solution. Yet there is
little research addressing the mechanics of this alignment process, particularly in relation
to ideation and the continued development of a collective understanding of problem
framing. So, while we know that designers constantly engage in a dialectic between
problem and solution (Dorst & Cross, 2001; Maher & Tang, 2003), it is less clear how this
dialectic forges alignment between team members.
Three Design Methods
For this study, we selected three existing, complementary design methods to scaffold
the generation of ideas and help students gain an understanding of the problem space.
The first method, called functional decomposition (e.g., Booth et al., 2014), encourages the
generation of productive constraints. The second method, called Design Heuristics (Daly et
al., 2012b; Yilmaz et al., 2014), provides strategies or shortcuts for designers to generate
multiple, varied concepts. The third method, affinity diagramming (e.g., Hanington &
Martin, 2012; Kawakita, 1975), encourages the sorting and grouping of data to understand
potential relationships. The relevant cores of each method, we propose, can be
synergistically combined to support designers as they actively and explicitly set design
constraints, and then use that constrained problem framing to create innovative concepts.
Functional Decomposition
Functional decomposition is a method commonly used in engineering (e.g., Booth et
al., 2014). It describes a product or system by means of its functions, often oriented in a
hierarchical way. Thus, when a product is defined in terms of functions, each function can
be thought of as modular or replaceable to some degree (van Eyk, 2011), and this
decomposition provides insight into how a system works. In order to adequately describe a
product or system in terms of its functions, an engineer must have the cognitive skill that
Umeda and Tomiyama (1997) refer to as functional reasoning—an ability to understand
subfunctions of a product, and to relate them to each other in a logical, hierarchical
manner.
A common approach to functional decomposition in the classroom is to begin with an
existing product or system and decompose the primary and secondary functions in order
to identify the hierarchy of functions present within an extant design (Toh, Miller, &
Kremer, 2012). This approach often includes not only conceptual decomposition, as in
software engineering (Jackson & Jackson, 1996), but also a physical product dissection in
order to encourage students to understand how component functions relate to each other
(e.g., Booth, Bhasin, Reid, & Ramani, 2014; Lamancusa & Gardner, 1996). In this study, we
focus on conceptual functional decomposition, using the resultant understanding of
functions as generative constraints to further develop early concepts (Gray, Yilmaz, Daly,
Seifert, & Gonzalez, forthcoming).
310
What Problem Are We Solving?
Design Heuristics
A variety of idea generation techniques and approaches have been introduced in the
engineering and design literature (e.g., SCAMPER, TRIZ, morphological analysis). Design
Heuristics is an evidence-based method for encouraging the production of varied concepts
during idea generation (Daly et al., 2012b; Yilmaz et al., 2014). Design heuristics were
derived from award-winning products (Yilmaz & Seifert, 2010) and the design activities of
expert designers (Daly et al, 2012b; Yilmaz et al., 2010; Yilmaz & Seifert, 2011). The 77
identified heuristics comprise a catalogue of ‘cognitive shortcuts’ that can be used in
generative ways to transform or modify design concepts. This method has been
extensively validated in studies of ideation in engineering and design classrooms (Christian
et al., 2012; Daly et al., 2012a; Kotys-Schwartz et al., 2014; Kramer et al., 2014; Yilmaz et
al., 2012). The Design Heuristics are presented on a deck of 77 cards, with each card
including a heuristic, a written description, an abstract depiction of the heuristic, and two
examples of the heuristic as it is used in consumer products (Figure 1).
Figure 1
Sample Design Heuristics card (front and back).
Affinity Diagramming
A final method introduced to the students in the study is the use of affinity
diagramming (Hanington & Martin, 2012) to create clusterings of potential concepts that
support the selection of a final product design direction. This method originated as a way
to understand relationships between complex sets of qualitative field data (Kawakita,
1975), and has been widely used in business settings and participatory design to encourage
the collaborative grouping of information, with participants distilling this information into
themes or clusters that may drive further development or iteration.
Purpose
In this study, we addressed the gap in research on the team negotiation of problem
framing through a situated design project in an industrial design context. We focused on
individual and team understandings of problem framing, and how these understandings
affected idea generation and selection. While the majority of research on idea generation
strategies have focused only on individual or team behaviors, in this study, we address the
movement from team to individual processes and back to team through the process stages
of problem framing, idea generation, and recomposition of concepts using the following
research questions:
311
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
What individual and team problem framings did students rely on when performing
their functional decomposition?
How did the students’ selected focal function and resulting concepts relate to their
individual and team problem framing?
How did the scaffold of three design methods influence the nature of divergence in
concept generation and sorting relative to initial and revised problem framing,?
Method
Participants
Twenty students (6 female and 14 male) in a single junior-level undergraduate
industrial design course at a large Midwestern U.S. university participated in the study.
These students were organized into five teams of four students at the beginning of the
semester, and all teams engaged in an industry-sponsored semester-long project on the
development of innovative kitchen products related to rising food costs, the future of
food, or the unique needs of millennials.
Classroom Intervention and Problem Statement Evolution
The study took place as a workshop held during a three-hour class session (Figure 2),
during the fourth week of the semester. The workshop included a set of activities to
facilitate the generation of divergent concepts through three methods: individual
functional decomposition of existing concepts, individual concept generation using Design
Heuristics, and affinity diagramming in teams. In preparation for these activities, each
team was asked to produce ten detailed concepts related to a previously defined problem,
and these team-generated concepts informed the individual functional decomposition
noted in Figure 2.
Figure 2
Overview of the classroom intervention, including individual and team activities.
Data Collection
Beyond the specific intervention, classroom activities supporting individual and team
problem framing throughout the semester were used as a secondary data source. In this
study, we drew upon three separate groups of problem statements created by each team
312
What Problem Are We Solving?
during the classroom intervention: 1) an initial set of problem statements completed
individually by each team member in the first week of the semester, resulting in a total of
18 potential problem statements from three starting statements, forming iterative
‘ladders’ of related statements; 2) a team problem statement supported by the initial
research created in the third week of the semester; and 3) the final team problem
statement included in the end-of-semester process book.
The concept data from the classroom intervention include: 1) team-generated concepts
immediately prior to the intervention; 2) individual concepts generated across three
sequential 15-minute stages (ideation, iteration, recomposition); 3) team clustering of
individual concepts, which includes the composition of concepts and cluster names; and 4)
the final concepts generated by each team at the conclusion of the intervention. These
primary data sources are contextualized within the problem statements generated before
and after the intervention, including the relationship of generated ideas to the final design
at the conclusion of the semester.
Analysis
Data were analyzed using several strategies focusing on the longitudinal development
of a problem statement within each team, and the relationship of that problem statement
to the concepts each team member created and then clustered with other team members’
concepts. We first identified emergent themes from the team-generated concepts prior to
the intervention, relating these concepts to the previously defined problem statement. In
isolation, we then analyzed the labeled clusters of concepts identified by each team,
including the composition of concepts from individual team members. These clusters were
then related to the initial problem statements generated by individual team members in
the first week of the semester, and the correspondence of final concepts generated by the
team to the problem statement the team had generated collaboratively. Finally, these
clusters and problem statements were compared to the completed design at the end of
the semester. All comparisons were initially made by the lead researcher, and then were
confirmed and altered where necessary by a second researcher familiar with the classroom
intervention until agreement was reached.
Results
In the classroom intervention, five teams of students generated a total of 237 concepts
across the three design stages (i.e., ideation, iteration, and recomposition), with an
average of 11.8 concepts (SD=4.06) each. All 20 students generated concepts in the
ideation phase (n=133), 17 students generated concepts in the iteration phase (n=82), and
only 8 students generated concepts in the recomposition phase (n=22). The number of
sketches varied somewhat by team, with the lowest averaging 9.5 sketches (SD=5.2) per
team member in Team 1 (T1) and the highest average of 14.5 sketches (SD=4.2) in T2.
All teams generated concepts in the final stage following the clustering activity, with an
average of 4.0 concepts (SD=2.3) each. The affinity diagramming activity resulted in an
average of 5.6 clusters (SD=2.4; min=3; max=9), with each cluster including an average of
6.8 concepts (SD=4.6; min=3; max=26). Out of the 237 total concepts students generated,
189 were organized into labeled clusters; 3 concepts were not organized into a cluster; the
remaining 45 concepts did not appear to be represented in team activity (M=2.4; SD=2.26).
313
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
A summary of the team problem statement, individual functions selected by team
members to direct their ideation, team clusters, and final concepts are included in Table 1.
Table 1
Summary of Individual and Team Concept Framings.
Tea
Initial Team
Problem Statement
Individual
Functions After
Functional
Decomposition
1
System-based solution to
improve upon portion
control, food preservation, &
waste
Compartmentalization
Ease of Access
Space saving
[N/A]
Accessibility (n=4)
Adjustable Dividers
(n=5)
Exterior
Adjustability/Space
Saving (n=8)
Interior Adjustability
(n=12)
How can we create a
system that
discourages millennials
from throwing away
food at home?
2
...this system will work
towards saving space,
minimizing waste,
maintaining taste &
nutrients, & decrease
amount of time.
Compactable
Hold
Adjustable
Fold Down
FFB (n=4)
FFP (n=6)
FPT (n=3)
Inset stackable (n=3)
Lid (n=4)
Misc. (n=7)
Sliding lids (n=5)
Stackable (n=8)
Strainers (n=2)
How could we create a
system that encourages
millennials to connect
with one another while
preparing a meal?
3
The proposed dehydration
solution will be combined
with a microwave and/or
convection oven to provide
faster access to dehydrated
produce, accommodating a
busy lifestyle.
Collapsible
Dries food
Air circulation
[N/A]
On-the-go (n=26)
Preparation (n=10)
Preservation (n=7)
Facilitate an emotional
connection with a food
preservation system
that encourages
healthy and
personalized snacking
experience.
4
Generate products that
increase convenience,
support and encourage the
principles of a healthy
lifestyle, and tie in a
community facet within the
preparation and
consumption of meals.
Be held
Covering of base
Intuitive use
Unique experience
Attachments (n=11)
Coverings (n=9)
Handles (n=9)
Serving (n=6)
Storage (n=3)
How could we compose
an engaging interaction
specifically adapted to
the eating habits of the
dynamic millennial
lifestyle?
5
Develop a system, which will
re-invent the perception of
'on the go eating' that
conforms to the lifestyles &
eating habits of healthconscious millennials.
Give user experience
Emotional
Cleaning
Versatility
Customizable
Container (n=3)
Lid (n=6)
Other (n=4)
Flexible
Cleaning Mechanisms
(n=5)
Storage Mechanisms
(n=7)
Experience
Consumption (n=6)
Storage (n=6)
Promote an experience
that accommodates
eating habits which
reflect the diverse
lifestyles of the out and
about millennial.
m
Team
Concept Clusters
After Affinity
Diagramming
Team End-ofSemester
Problem
Statement
Based on the initial summary and descriptive statistics of all five teams, we selected
two contrasting cases from this intervention, representing diversity in the number of
314
What Problem Are We Solving?
generated concepts and the apparent degree of alignment among team members around
a central problem framing.
Team One: Divergence Through Multiple Interpretations of the
Problem Space
Team One (T1) included one male and three female students. In previous problem
framing activities, they had generated a wide range of potential problem framings, first in
laddering exercises performed individually (18 framings per team member), and then later
in a collaborative one-page summary document drawing on several themes based on the
individual laddering exercises. These concepts were primarily combining elements rather
than selecting or synthesizing. The resulting problem statement was broad, with the team
focusing on a ‘system-based solution to improve upon portion control, food preservation,
& waste.’
I NITIAL C ONCEPTS
Prior to the classroom intervention, T1 created 10 concepts in a collaborative manner,
working within the problem framing that had previously been set. The team’s concepts
primarily addressed issues involving extending or enhancing existing functions within an
existing refrigerator or freezer system (e.g., shelves, drawers). As shown in Figure 3, the
concept drawings were developed as relatively detailed marker comps, including callouts
and arrows to indicate movement. Eight of the 10 concepts dealt directly with organizing
or making food in the refrigerator/freezer more accessible, with the remaining two
concepts targeting space-saving elsewhere in the kitchen. Although all of the concepts
addressed the overall problem framing, they lacked any sign of integration, and instead
were viewed as separate entities.
Figure 3
A sample of T1 initial concepts, generated prior to the classroom intervention.
I NDIVIDUAL D ECOMPOSITION AND I DEATION
During the functional decomposition stage, each team member produced a function
tree based on their understanding of the concepts and problem space that had previously
been defined. It appears that Participant 1 (P1) recognized opportunities outside of the
refrigerator (Figure 4, top) because her function tree focused on the temporal context of
use, with elements of the problem statement embedded in each function. In contrast, P3
focused on an area less defined by the problem statement: namely, storage (Figure 4,
bottom).
315
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Figure 4
Comparison of P1 (top) and P3 (bottom) function trees.
P1
P3
Figure 5
Sample concepts generated by P1 and P3 which exemplify use of Design Heuristics to
modify existing team concepts. P1’s concepts include one that simply expands and
contracts (left) and another where containers attach using suction cups. P3’s concept
identifies a ‘slide out platform to set fridge items on to allow easier access to back items.’
When ideating using their individual understanding of the problem framing, team
members took different approaches to divergence within the problem space based on
their selected function. P1 focused on compartments that functioned in and out of the
refrigerator by exploring mechanisms shared between containers to save space and
provide a degree of adjustability. P3 focused on reducing common issues a user might
encounter when storing food in a refrigerator. Both participants used Design Heuristics
extensively in all of the phases where they generated concepts, frequently beginning with
316
What Problem Are We Solving?
a concept relatively similar to one of the ten team concepts, and then refining or
reworking that concept using a Design Heuristics card as a modifier (Figure 5). For instance,
several of the team concepts included items being ‘attached’ in some way to each other or
to the wall of the refrigerator or freezer space. P1 used these concepts as a starting point,
identifying a storage form that could expand or contract to fit the contents (using heuristic
#32: ‘expand or collapse’), and connecting containers together with suction cups (using
heuristic #13: ‘apply existing mechanism in a new way’). In total, the four team members
produced 38 concepts, 28 of which indicated use of one or more Design Heuristics. In
keeping with the functions each team member selected, the concepts were widely varied
within the originally defined problem space. P1 focused on the function of
‘compartmentalization,’ and generated concepts relating to compartments, dividers, and
other forms of expansion/contraction or attachment to other container elements. P2 did
not provide a function tree, but her concepts related primarily to compression, crushing,
and bending container forms to fit tight spaces. P3 focused on the function ‘ease-ofaccess,’ creating mechanisms that slid out or attached to fridge in some way, with
unrelated container concepts that had soft edges or soft/hard ribs to promote flexibility.
Finally, P4 focused on the function ‘space saving,’ and produced concepts that worked in
and out of the refrigerator, including stackable components, flexible covers, and hanging
jars.
T EAM A FFINITY D IAGRAMMING
During the affinity diagramming phase, the team members worked together to sort
their concepts into groups or clusters. Unlike the previous individual phases, the process of
sorting the concepts generated by all of the team members encouraged externalization of
the rationale for the concepts, and discussion of how they related to the concepts of other
team members. T1 struggled to identify commonalities between their concepts, generating
several possible groups before finalizing four categories (Table 2).
Some of the indecision in relation to the cluster names is visible in the final affinity
diagram (Figure 6). The cluster titled ‘transfer’ has no concepts assigned to it, whereas the
‘adjustable’ cluster is linked to the external and internal adjustability clusters. These two
clusters represented the most alignment among team members, with all participants
creating concepts in one or both clusters. However, the other clusters were comprised of
concepts created by only one or two team members. Interestingly, when considering
phase of production (i.e., ideation, iteration, recomposition), only the interior and external
adjustability clusters included concepts from the final recomposition phase.
Table 2
Summary of T1 clusters.
Cluster Name
(# using Design Heuristics)
1
P
2
3
4
TO
TAL
Space saving/ Exterior adjustability
(n=6)
3
1
2
2
8
Interior adjustability (n=10)
7
2
1
12
Adjustable dividers (n=4)
5
317
P
P
P
5
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Figure 6
Accessibility (n=4)
1
Unassigned (n=4)
1
3
4
1
4
3
9
T1 affinity diagram.
F INAL C ONCEPTS
Following the clustering of individual team members’ concepts, students were directed
to ‘recompose’ concepts from the clusters to form new concepts they could move forward
with as a team. T1 created two different concepts (Figure 7): a band to hold silverware in
the refrigerator (left) and a microwaveable container that could keep a compartment of
food cold while heating the other compartment’s contents.
Figure 7
T1 final concepts, generated by all team members.
Interestingly, neither of these concepts appears to have a direct origin in the individual
team members’ concepts. Instead, they provided a new set of framings within the overall
problem space. Arguably, these concepts do not fit within the three broad categories
identified in the original problem statement (i.e., portion control, food preservation,
waste); however, they make sense as a progression of the storage concepts explored by P3
and the containers designed for multiple stages of use by P1. While the team did not
appear to come to consensus on their problem statement in this intervention, the variety
of concepts generated by the team members encouraged an in-depth conversation about
318
What Problem Are We Solving?
desirable problem framings. The final project presented by this team at the conclusion of
the semester was present, in initial form, in the intervention, with significant resemblance
to the refrigerator slider concept produced by P3. This concept (Figure 5, bottom), while
later valued, was not included in any of the clusters produced by the team, indicating a
lack of fit within the clusters or a lack of alignment around this concept at this stage of the
team’s work.
Team Five: Divergence Through Intentional Segmentation of
the Problem Space
Team Five (T5) included three male students and one female student. As with T1, they
had generated a wide range of potential problem framings through laddering exercises and
a collaboratively created summary document. Unlike T1, however, the resulting problem
framing was more narrow and purposeful, with a relatively exclusive focus on ‘on-the-go’
eating. This statement unified the team’s ideation efforts in terms of context (e.g., eating
while on the move) and target outcomes (e.g., healthy eating).
I NITIAL C ONCEPTS
Unlike T1, T5 took a very different approach to the initial concept generation phase. As
demonstrated by T5’s initial ten sketches (Figure 8) generated prior to the classroom
intervention, the concepts dealt with the storage of food while focused on a particular
facet unique to the subject (e.g., the experience from eating out of a container). A wide
range of graphic styles and approaches were used, representing multiple team members’
contributions. This variety is in contrast to the homogenous visual style from T1, likely
indicating a single author for all sketches. This early approach to engaging variety across all
team members appears to have enabled the team to cover large portions of the target
problem framing.
Figure 8
A sample of T5 initial concepts, generated prior to the classroom intervention.
I NDIVIDUAL D ECOMPOSITION AND I DEATION
During the decomposition stage, T5’s alignment as a group became more visible.
Because of the clear and unified problem statement, with all team members engaged in
addressing the topic of ‘on-the-go’ eating, the function trees were considerably more
consistent across team members (Figure 9). In particular, all trees branched from a unified
‘on-the-go’ problem, a stark contrast to the variation seen in T1. From this point, however,
T5 took on a ‘divide and conquer’ approach by systematically addressing a range of
319
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
behaviors implicit in eating while on the move, with each team member selecting a
complementary perspective. In doing so, the team used the function trees to select
functions and explore the problem space in a divergent manner, addressing the need for
cleaning, versatility, portability, and experience. Overall, the team’s evident early
alignment positioned them to blend resulting concepts, with multiple perspectives working
towards the same ultimate goal.
Figure 9
Comparison of T5 function trees, showing alignment of core concepts across all team
members (P17-P20 clockwise from top left).
While T5 members were aligned around their problem framing, their individual
perspectives and selected functions allowed them to take different approaches to diverge
on the concepts they had already created. P18 was focused on the emotional experience
of product use, while P19 addressed common issues that might appear when cleaning
containers. Both of these participants used Design Heuristics extensively in all of the stages
in which they generated concepts, often modifying concepts generated in the first idea
generation stage in later stages (Figure 10). For instance, the combination of containers
with multiple compartments or elements were a common theme in the initial concepts.
P18 started in this general space, first creating a bowl that could be flipped to serve, with
the lid functioning as a plate. In a later iteration phase, P18 refined this concept further
using heuristic #50 (‘provide sensory feedback’) to add the functionality of a scale to the
plate. Similarly, P19 used Design Heuristics to transform initial hunches about potential
cleaning issues into new concepts. P19 started by identifying a product that could easily
bend to fit into a dishwasher rack, with a flexible middle portion. Later in the idea
generation session, this participant modified this ‘bendable’ concept to include a more
accessible lock that could be clicked (heuristic #50: ‘provide sensory feedback’) by moving
a clasp (heuristic #2: ‘motion’). All participants in T5 exhibited similar transformations of
concepts, with several visible threads of concept iteration using Design Heuristics.
320
What Problem Are We Solving?
P18
P19
Figure 10 Sample concepts generated by P18 and P19 which exemplify use of Design Heuristics in
generating concepts. One of P18’s concept sequences includes a ‘flip and serve’ bowl (top
left), which is then modified with heuristic #50 (‘provide sensory feedback’) to include a
display of the weight of the food (top right). P19’s concepts also show a similar iterative
development, with a bendable container that bends to fit more easily into the dishwasher
(bottom left). This concept was extended using heuristic #2 (‘motion’) and #50 (‘provide
sensory feedback’) to include a quick release clasp and snap for washing (bottom right).
In total, the four team members produced 46 concepts, 38 of which indicated use of
one or more Design Heuristics. The concepts were widely varied within the originally
defined problem space, but all strongly related to the selected function. P17 focused on
the function ‘user experience,’ experimenting with unique container forms, attachments,
and ways of stacking or collapsing elements, focusing on portability and user friendliness.
P18 focused on emotional qualities by attempting to impart an emotion in the course of
using the product, relying on transformations of objects through rolling or orientation
shifts to provide a memorable user experience. P19 addressed cleaning as his function,
experimenting with different materials and mechanisms to ease the process of cleaning.
And finally, P20 focused on the versatility, exploring a variety of inserts or additions to
increase configurations or capabilities without altering the core container.
T EAM A FFINITY D IAGRAMMING
T5 then worked together to sort their concepts into clusters. Because the team
members were already aligned in their overall problem framing, they began by reiterating
an explicit problem statement, writing it next to their eventual affinity diagram (Figure 11).
This statement appeared to guide the clusters they would develop:
‘Design a solution that provides users w/ a system that is customizable, gives
affordances for flexibility & storage, and provides users w/ an experience.’
Unlike any other team, T5 created nested clusters, with three top-level clusters of
‘flexible,’ ‘customizable,’ and ‘experience’ (Table 3).
Table 3
Summary of T5 clusters.
321
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Cluster Name
(# using Design Heuristics)
P
17
P
18
P
19
P
20
TO
TAL
Flexible
Storage mechanisms (n=5)
1
3
Cleaning mechanisms (n=5)
2
1
5
7
5
Customizable
Container (n=2)
1
Lid (n=6)
2
Other (n=4)
2
1
3
2
2
6
2
1
4
Experience
Consumption (n=5)
6
6
Storage (n=5)
3
1
1
1
6
Unassigned (n=6)
4
1
1
3
9
Within each of these clusters, sub-clusters were created to further distinguish among
concepts. It is notable that all of the top-level clusters included concepts from all team
members, with most of the gaps in sub-clusters among team members resulting from the
explicit functions each member uniquely pursued. Only the ‘customizable’ cluster included
concepts from the recomposition phase of the idea generation exercise.
Figure 11 T5 affinity diagram.
322
What Problem Are We Solving?
F INAL C ONCEPTS
After clustering the team members’ concepts, T5 used the newly defined problem
statement to ‘recompose’ concepts from the clusters. Unlike any other team, T5 team
members generated concepts in the recomposition stage individually (Figure 12). They
drew upon their conversations as a team, but retained their individual understanding of
the ‘next steps’ for developing their problem space. This strategy not only resulted in a
greater variety of concepts than in other groups, but also a larger quantity of total
concepts, with an additional nine concepts in this phase alone.
P17
P18
P19
P20
Figure 12 T5 final concepts, organized by participant.
Final concepts varied widely in T5, with many drawing on multiple concepts from the
team (Figure 12). In general, it appeared that the team members found it easier to
recompose these concepts because the elements were significantly more interchangeable
than those of T1. This is likely due to the complementary set of functions the team
members chose, and their joint understanding of how these perspectives fit together, as
demonstrated in their refined problem statement. The team’s final product design at the
end of the semester blended a number of the concept approaches explored in this
classroom intervention, resulting in a hybrid, compartmentalized water bottle and snack
container (similar to the second concept by P20 above).
323
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Discussion
These two cases illustrate different ways in which functional decomposition, Design
Heuristics, and affinity diagramming can encourage team alignment and divergent concept
generation. T1 created an exceptionally broad and multi-faceted problem space, and a lack
of explicit alignment among the team members in relation to that problem space. This
appeared to lead to the development of several isolated clusters of concepts, and
provoked a broader discussion about where the team wanted to focus moving forward.
These isolated clusters were based on different interpretations of the team’s problem
statement which, when broken down to the functional level, resulted in clusters of
concepts that were not complementary. Due to this lack of conceptual alignment and
divergence at the problem level (rather than concept level, as in T5), the affinity
diagramming activity encouraged externalization of team members’ assumptions about
what the problem space should include, and which interpretation they were willing to
proceed with in the next stages of concept development. In contrast, T5 agreed on a more
narrowly stated problem framing, and team members were generally aligned around what
kinds of concepts would address their chosen space. As a result, rather than team
members creating isolated clusters of concepts, T5 participants selected functions
representing complementary aspects of the overall problem framing (e.g., user experience,
emotion, cleaning, versatility). They diverged in their perspective on the design problem—
choosing elements to foreground and background—but not so completely that their
approaches were in conflict.
These differences in team alignment surrounding the understanding of a shared
problem space—and by extension, a singular desiderata—underscores the importance of
scaffolding activities that encourage team communication. As we will discuss in more
detail below, only through aligned problem frames does convergent or divergent activity
become clear to the team at large; and, without this realization, the dialectic movement
between problem and solution (Dorst & Cross, 2001) can lead to frustration and tension
among team members rather than productive engagement.
Alignment of Problem Frames
In the early problem exploration process, the majority of individual and team problem
statements were quite broad, representing or defining spaces that did not narrow the
complexity of the overarching client problems. This breadth, particularly in the team
problem statements, seemed to stem from the variety of individual framings that existed
among the team members. Then, when creating the group statement, multiple framings
were combined rather than selected or synthesized. The resulting problem space was too
large due to this union of multiple frames, and further complicated through the
engagement of multiple stakeholders (i.e., team members). The result was a series of
misunderstandings among team members about what constraints within that space were
appropriate or desirable (e.g., ‘frame conflict;’ Hey, Joyce, & Beckman, 2007). While the
concepts that teams brought to class the day of the intervention represented a first step
towards consolidating the problem space, these concepts were not sufficient to align the
team’s differing frames. Instead, articulation of the constraints and features of the
problem space—or bringing the tacit understandings of the team members into explicit
324
What Problem Are We Solving?
communicative acts— was required (McPeek & Morthland, 2010; Stumpf & McDonnell,
2002).
Relationships of Divergent and Convergent Behaviors
Success in idea generation and development relies on both divergent and convergent
thinking (Cropley, 2006; Dym et al., 2006; Yilmaz & Daly, 2014); however, students
generally need more support to generate divergent concepts, particularly in academic
environments that may not value play or speculation. In this study, divergent idea
generation was supported through individual use of Design Heuristics, and was critical in
creating a space for teams to effectively converge on ideas later in the design process.
While students in these groups went about diverging ideas in different ways—the first
team in a more chaotic, ad hoc way, and the second team in a more systematic way—the
result was the same: a move towards convergence based on their team’s breadth of
divergence, individually and collectively. The group clusters reified this divergence, leading
to a conversation that helped to identify individual understandings of the problem space,
and which convergent paths might be most beneficial.
Figure 13 Dialectic of Divergence and Convergence (DDC) Model, illustrating the shaping of the
problem space boundaries through individual and group activities.
Idea Generation to Stimulate a Dialectic Movement Between
Divergence and Convergence
Numerous methods exist that have the potential to scaffold divergent or convergent
thinking (e.g., Hanington & Martin, 2012), but this study suggests a need to focus on the
dialectic between these two modes of exploration. In particular, the relationships between
divergent/convergent behavior through situated methods use and the impact of the
broader problem framing are poorly understood, even when using empirically validated
tools such as Design Heuristics. In this study, we have shown how the setting of decisive
325
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
and generative constraints, supported by functional decomposition, Design Heuristics, and
affinity diagramming in an instructional intervention, can encourage both types of thinking
and exploring, and movement between these modes of design.
This study suggests that the multiple scaffolded ‘shifts’ in problem framing and
structured ideation are productive to the development of design expertise, especially in
relation to practicing a expert-like dialectic movement between problem and solution. As
seen in Figure 13, the students were guided through multiple framings of the design
problem, drawing on both team and individual understandings of the problem space over
time, resulting in a dialectic of divergence and convergence (DDC). The framing that
students developed through individual work and team concepts prior to the classroom
intervention was used to structure individual idea generation, followed by team evaluation
and clustering of the resultant concepts. While additional exploration is needed to validate
which DDC approaches may be most valuable in specific instructional settings or for classes
of design problems, it appears that multiple shifts between team and individual work, and
between individual and team framings, resulted in increased team alignment and
productive idea generation in this study. Of course, our analysis drew from a relatively
small sample in a single context, and may not be directly generalizable to a larger design
education population. In addition, specific aspects of the present study, such as the order
of method presentation, and which methods were carried out individually and in teams,
should be studied in future research. Future studies may include permutations of the order
of methods and individual or group work to validate particularly generative sequences
using the DDC model.
Conclusion
We have demonstrated one set of methods that encourages the dialectic movement
between problem framing and solution generation. The DDC model we have presented has
some similarities with techniques in individual and team research that take advantage of
differential strengths in individual and group processes, such as the Delphi method (see
Pahl, Beitz, Felhusen, & Grote, 2007 for a review relevant to design). The process of
working through the DDC appeared to be productive, both for teams that already enjoyed
team alignment, and for teams that needed to challenge and verbalize their latent
assumptions regarding the target problem space. Individuals were first encouraged to
narrow from their initial framing to a specific function through the generation of a
functional decomposition tree, selecting a function that would serve as a decisive
constraint. Following this convergent behavior, participants were then able to generate
ideas within a narrowed, yet purposefully divergent space using Design Heuristics. Finally,
the team affinity diagramming activity encouraged individuals within the team to relate
their concepts to those produced by other team members, a primarily convergent activity.
This final step required a rapid dialectic movement between individual concepts and the
broader goals of the team project, including problem statements, problem framings, and
observed synergies between individual concepts. The results of this study have a number
of implications for design educators, including: (1) additional ways to conceive of team
alignment early in the design process, which impacts motivation and, eventually, the
success of the design team; (2) the need for a series of robust design methods or other
empirically-validated tools for guiding the design process between divergence and
326
What Problem Are We Solving?
convergence stages; and (3) the value of responding to the ‘right’ question as a team by
proposing solutions directly addressing the target problem in idea generation, which is
contextualized through a shared awareness of the problem framing being utilized.
Acknowledgements: This research is funded by the National Science
Foundation, Division of Undergraduate Education, Transforming
Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and
Mathematics (TUES Type II) Grants # 1323251 and #1322552. We appreciate
the assistance of Justin Monaco throughout the data analysis process.
References
Biskjaer, M. M., & Halskov, K. (2014). Decisive constraints as a creative resource in
interaction design. Digital Creativity, 25(1), 27-61. doi:10.1080/14626268.2013.855239
Booth, J. W., Bhasin, A. K., Reid, T., & Ramani, K. (2014). Evaluating the bottom-up method
for functional decomposition in product dissection tasks. In Proceedings of the ASME
2014 Conference.
Christian, J. L., Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Seifert, C., & Gonzalez, R. (2012). Design heuristics
support two modes of idea generation: Initiating ideas and transitioning among
concepts. In American Society for Engineering Education. American Society for
Engineering Education.
Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18(3), 391404.
Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.
Cross, N., & Cross, A. C. (1996). Observations of teamwork and social processes in design.
In N. Cross, H. Christiaans, & K. Dorst (Eds). Analysing design activity (pp. 291-317).
Chichester, NY: Wiley.
Daly, S., Christian, J., Yilmaz, S., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012a). Assessing design
heuristics in idea generation within an introductory engineering design course.
International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), 463-473.
Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012b). Design
heuristics in engineering concept generation. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4),
601-629.
Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by design. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problemsolution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425-437.
Dym, C.L., Agogino, A.M., Eris, O., Frey, D.D., & Leifer, L.J. (2006). Engineering design
thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 34(1), 65-83.
Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Goel, V., & Pirolli, P. (1989). Motivating the notion of generic design within information
processing theory: the design problem space. AI Magazine, 10(1), 18-36.
Gray, C. M., Yilmaz, S., Daly, S., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (forthcoming). Supporting
idea generation through functional decomposition: An alternative framing for Design
Heuristics. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Engineering Design
(ICED). Milan, IT: The Design Society.
327
GRAY, YILMAZ, DALY, SEIFERT & GONZALEZ
Hanington, B., & Martin, B. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100 ways to research
complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Beverly,
MA: Rockport Publishers.
Hey, J. H., Joyce, C. K., & Beckman, S. L. (2007). Framing innovation: Negotiating shared
frames during early design phases. Journal of Design Research, 6(1), 79-99.
Holt, J. E. (1997). The designer's judgement. Design Studies, 18(1), 113-123.
Jackson, D., & Jackson, M. (1996). Problem decomposition for reuse. Software Engineering
Journal, 11(1), 19-30.
Kawakita, J. (1975). The KJ method—a scientific approach to problem solving.
Kotys-Schwartz, D., Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Knight, D., & Polmear, M. (2014). Evaluating the
implementation of design heuristic cards in an industry sponsored capstone design
course. In Annual Conference of American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE),
Indianapolis, IN.
Kramer, J., Daly, S., Yilmaz, S., & Seifert, C. (2014). A case-study analysis of design heuristics
in an upper-level design course. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of American
Society of Engineering Education (AC 2014-8452), Washington, DC: American Society for
Engineering Education.
Lamancusa, J., & Gardner, J. F. (1996). Product dissection in academia: Teaching
engineering the way we learned it. In International Conference on Engineering
Education.
Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press.
McPeek, K. T., & Morthland, L. (2010). Collaborative design pedagogy: An examination of
the four levels of collaboration. In Design & complexity: Design research society
international conference, Montreal, Canada. Retrieved from:
http://www.designresearchsociety.org/docs-procs/DRS2010/PDF/085.pdf
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an
unpredictable world (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., & Grote, K. -H. (2007). Engineering design: A systematic
approach (3rd ed.). London, UK: Springer Verlag.
Paton, B., & Dorst, K. (2011). Briefing and reframing: A situated practice. Design Studies,
32(6), 573-587.
Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1984). Planning problems are wicked problems. In N. Cross (Ed.),
Developments in design methodology (pp. 135-144). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Schön, D. A. (1985). The design studio: An exploration of its traditions and potentials.
London: RIBA Publications Limited.
Schön, D. A. (1990). The design process. In V. A. Howard (Ed.), Varieties of thinking: Essays
from Harvard’s philosophy of education research center (pp. 111-141). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Self, J., & Pei, E. (2014). Reflecting on design sketching: Implications for problem-framing
and solution-focused conceptual ideation. Archives of Design Research, 27(3), 65-87.
Stokes, P. D. (2009). Using constraints to create novelty: A case study. Psychology of
Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3(3), 174-180.
Stumpf, S. C., & McDonnell, J. T. (2002). Talking about team framing: Using argumentation
to analyse and support experiential learning in early design episodes. Design Studies,
23(1), 5-23.
328
What Problem Are We Solving?
Toh, C., Miller, S., & Kremer, G. O. (2012). Mitigating design fixation effects in engineering
design through product dissection activities. In Design Computing and Cognition.
Umeda, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1997). Functional reasoning in design. IEEE Expert, 12(2), 4248.
van Eck, D. (2011). Functional decomposition: On rationality and incommensurability in
engineering. (Unpublished dissertation). Delft University of Technology, Delft, NL.
Yilmaz, S., & Daly, S. R. (2014). Influences of feedback interventions on student ideation
practices. In 10th International Design Thinking Research Symposium (DTRS). West
Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
Yilmaz, S., Daly, S. R., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2011). A comparison of cognitive
heuristics use between engineers and industrial designers. Design computing and
cognition (pp. 3-22). Springer.
Yilmaz, S., Daly, S. R., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012). How do Design
Heuristics affect outcomes?. In M. M. Andreasen, H. Birkhofer, S. J. Culley, U.
Lindemann, and D. Marjanovic (Eds.), Proceedings of 12th International Design
Conference (DESIGN) (pp. 1195-1204). Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Yilmaz, S., & Seifert, C. M. (2011). Creativity through design heuristics: A case study of
expert product design. Design Studies, 32(4), 384-415.
329
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Katja THORING*a,b, Carmen LUIPPOLDb,c , Roland M. MUELLERd and Petra BADKESCHAUBa
a Delft
University of Technology; b Anhalt University of Applied Sciences: c Bauhaus University,
Weimar; d Berlin School of Economics and Law
*katja@thoring.com
Abstract: This paper is part of a research project that investigates the role of the
physical space, such as architecture, room layout, and furniture, on creative
work processes in design educational contexts. The particular focus of this paper
is to identify differences in the spatial requirements of designers in academia
(students and educators) and design practitioners who are working in corporate
contexts. Based on a research approach with cultural probes and a follow-up
focus group workshop with participants from academia and design practice,
characteristics of creative work environments have been defined, and different
requirements of both user groups were identified.
Keywords: Creative Space; Learning Environment; Co-Working Space; Design
Education and Practice
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
1 Introduction
Nowadays, the concept of co-working spaces that offer shared work environments for
heterogeneous groups of people, especially in the so-called creative industries, are
becoming more and more popular (Davies & Tollervey, 2013; Sundsted, Bacigalupo, &
Jones, 2009). However, these concepts of shared work spaces pose some challenges,
especially when people with different cultural, disciplinary, or professional backgrounds
share a space. A peculiar form of such co-working spaces are university-affiliated research
centers or incubators, in which educators, students, and professionals come together to
either work together or independently on (design) projects. The question how such a coworking space should be designed in terms of room layout, infrastructure, furniture, and
the architecture itself, is the focus of this paper. Of particular interest are the different
requirements of design professionals and educators that might cause challenges or even
conflicts between those two target groups.
The present study builds on previous work (Thoring, Luippold, & Mueller, 2012a,
2012b), in which we analyzed different environments in two different design educational
institutions. In these studies we were particularly interested in the perspective of design
students—how they would perceive their environment; what types of spaces they
considered necessary, what they found was missing, and how they would envision a
perfect creative workspace. Based on a research approach with cultural probes, 18
selected students from two different institutions provided their impressions and ideas
about the creative workspaces at their home universities: one being a traditional design
school, consisting of classrooms, separated workshop spaces, lecture halls, etc.; the other
one being an institution for design thinking education, focusing on team work through
dedicated team spaces, lots of whiteboards and writeable walls, as well as toys and games
on hand. The provided data from the cultural probes from both institutions were used to
develop a typology of creative spaces—indicating different types of spaces that were used
for creative work, as well as different functions such a space might facilitate. Although the
concrete characteristics and instantiations (furniture, room layout, architecture, materials,
etc.) of the spaces in both institutions were quite different, it became evident that the
types of work spaces for creative work processes, as well as the functions such a space
might fulfill, were similar in both institutions. This led to the development of a ‘Typology of
Creative Space Types and Functions’, based on the identified activities (also misuses)
within the provided spaces and the identified related requirements. The developed
typology suggests that a creative space system consists of a combination of five different
space types: the Solitary Space for personal withdrawal, the Team Space that allows
interactions with others, the Presentation Space in which people passively consume input
(such as lectures), actively give input themselves (such as presentations), or display their
work (e.g. in show cases), the Tinker Space that allows people to experiment and to build
stuff, and Transition Spaces that connect the other space types and provide opportunities
for resting, walking, or meeting people. The data from the studies also showed that these
space types can serve different functions:
A space can be a Source of Stimulation by providing sound, views, noise, or by
displaying work examples; it can serve as a Knowledge Repository by storing or displaying
information; it can have a Social Dimension that triggers interactions between people, it
331
KATJA THORING et al.
can be a Culture Indicator and express the way one should behave in it; or it can define a
Process Manifestation by guiding or enforcing the workflow (Thoring et al., 2012a, 2012b).
Since these two prior studies only addressed the perspective of design students, but
not the teachers’ perspective, nor did they provide any view from design practitioners, we
conducted an additional study, which is the focus of this paper. This third study served also
as an evaluation and verification of the previously developed typology. We invited 9
participants from different institutions and with different creative backgrounds (design
teachers and research assistants, independent design practitioners, founders of creative
start-up companies, and employees of global companies) to a focus group workshop. In
preparation for the workshop they were handed a set of cultural probes with several tasks
to document their respective work environments and to provide ideas and suggestions on
the question how to design a co-working space for various heterogeneous creative people.
In the following we describe the cultural probes method and the setup of the workshop
(Section 2). The results from the study are presented and discussed in Section 3. Section 4
summarizes the theoretical implications of the study and points out the differences
between the two target groups. We conclude by discussing the results and providing an
outlook to future work.
2 Methodology
Cultural Probes is a self-documentation method in which selected participants are
equipped with a predesigned set of questions and tasks that are supposed to be
independently completed over a specific period of time, see e.g. (Gaver, Dunne, & Pacenti,
1999; Mattelmäki, 2006; Thoring, Luippold, & Mueller, 2013). In our case, 9 selected
participants were given a poster-based cultural probes set (see Figure 1). The poster
format (size A0) was chosen to reduce the size and weight of the probes, because the
participants were distributed across various locations and the cultural probes set had to be
sent by postal mail. The lower part of the poster (placed inside an abstracted speech
bubble) was dedicated to the documentation of the status quo—the existing workspaces
the participants were working in. They were supposed to take pictures and place them on
the poster, according to written prompts and questions. Also, they were asked to provide
sketches or photos of things they find inspiring or annoying, as well as their typical work
postures. The upper part of the poster (placed into an abstracted think bubble) was
dedicated to the vision of the participants. Here they were supposed to provide ideas,
thoughts, and statements about their desired co-working space. Also, they could choose
one picture from a set of exemplary workspaces (sent along with the poster) that they
would prefer to have as their future workspace. Additionally, they were supposed to add a
wish list of equipment, furniture, and atmosphere for their envisioned workspace, as well
as a sketch of a floor plan for the envisioned co-working space, which they were supposed
to structure and design according to different creative activities.
332
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Figure 1:
Cultural probes poster (Din A0) that was sent to the participants for self-documentation
Along with the poster we sent some additional material, such as colored pens, a bar of
chocolate (with additional questions on the packaging), a USB flash drive for storing
additional pictures, a set of pictures of exemplary work spaces (showing a diverse range of
work spaces from traditional to futuristic, taken from other field studies or from books), as
well as an envelope with stamp for returning the material (see Figure 2).
Figure 2:
The Cultural Probes set: poster, colored pens, USB flash drive, pictures of exemplary
workspaces, chocolate, return envelope.
333
KATJA THORING et al.
The 9 participants were chosen with the goal to address a wide range of different
backgrounds and employment positions. Figure 3 shows an overview of the participants.
They had a total of 3 weeks for completing and returning the cultural probes set. We then
evaluated the returned data by extracting and summarizing the main insights from each
participant in preparation for the upcoming workshop.
Practice
P1
P2
P3
P4
Start-Up
IT / Software Engineering
Global Company Employee
Innovation Management
Global Company Employee
Team Organization
Self-Employed
Product and Textile Design
Education
E5
E6
E7
E8
E9
Figure 3:
Student
Educational Studies
Research Assistant
Business & Psychology
Research Assistant
HCI / Engineering
Research Assistant
Product and System Design
Research Assistant
Work Organization
Overview of Study Participants (code numbering: P= Practice; E=Education)
Afterwards all nine participants were invited to a focus group workshop to discuss the
insights from the cultural probes, and to evaluate their provided data in comparison with
the previously defined typology of creative spaces.
During the 1-day workshop, the participants were teamed up in pairs of two and each
team was asked to analyze their own two posters and explain the results to each other.
Each team was supported by one researcher who took notes or visual sketches from the
most promising statements and insights. Then each team presented their finding to the
entire group. Finally, they were asked to cluster the notes and sketches according to
different space types and spatial functions. Although they had been given a brief
presentation about our previously developed typology at the beginning of the workshop,
they were asked to define their own labels for space types or to create new ones, in case
that the provided structure would not suffice and they identified additional space types
and functions.
The cultural probes task allowed the participants to freely express their own
experiences and wishes regarding a creative workspace, without being influenced by input
from the other participants, whereas in the follow-up workshop arising ideas and
questions were discussed with the goal to share the different perspectives. The results of
the cultural probes and the workshop are summarized in the next section.
3 Study Results
Results of the Cultural Probes
The returned cultural probes from the nine participants were analyzed an evaluated by
the researchers. Figure 4 shows an exemplary cultural probe poster that was returned by
one participant. The participants provided impressions of their current work spaces, as
well as ideas and wishes about envisioned work spaces. The main insights from the posters
are summarized in the following.
334
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Figure 4:
Exemplary cultural probes poster returned by one of the participants.
Based on the provided cultural probes we were able to identify several spatial themes
or concepts that seemed to be of importance for the participants. Through manual coding
and clustering of the insights, we were able to derive 15 ‘themes’ that seemed to be of
importance for most or some of the participants. These identified themes (ordered
according to the number of mentions) include: 1) working zones, 2) physical activities, 3)
lighting, 4) style and atmosphere, 5) flexibility, 6) open space, 7) (coffee) breaks, 8)
electronic infrastructure, 9) knowledge storage, 10) access to materials, 11) outdoor
connection, 12) general storage, 13) privacy, 14) layering, and 15) facilitation (see Tables 1
through 15). While the first theme (working zones) was mentioned by 8 of the 9
participants, the last theme (facilitation) was mentioned by only one participant.
In the following we summarize the main insights from the cultural probes regarding the
identified themes, in order to identify correlations or contradictory statements between
the two target groups, practitioners (P) and academics (E).
1) Working zones for different work types: The possibility to choose between different
spaces for different work purposes was mentioned by all of the participants, except P2.
Among the major requirements were the possibility to change between team work and
single work (P3, E6, E7, E9), and to change between formal work and informal relaxation
(P1, P3, E5, E6, E7, E9), which could be distinguished by the comfort of the furniture.
Outdoor access was important for E5 and E7. P3 mentioned also the need for theater-style
lecture rooms for presentations, while P4 suggested a dedicated welcome area for guests.
335
KATJA THORING et al.
The idea to separate those zones through curtains was raised by P4 and E5. Table 1
summarizes the statements by the different participants.
Table 1:
Ref. #
P1
P3
P4
E5
E6
E7
E8
E9
Working zones
Statement related to working zones
Change between different work postures; chairs and sofas; relaxation area
Change between formal and informal meeting, small cells (‘cubicles’) for concentrated
single work; free space for dreaming and crazy ideas; change between single and
teamwork, theatre-style chairs for lectures and presentations, open space for
communication and (informal) collaboration with coffee and tea
Welcome area; curtains as room separators
Choice of different furniture for different postures (range from comfy hammocks to hard
stools); change between single and team work; make use of outside space (fresh air
breaks), outdoor equipment and furniture; curtains as separators and for light control
Space for personal withdrawal, phone calls; change between single work and social
interaction
allow change between single and teamwork; quiet space for personal withdrawal
(individual thinking); outdoor access
Allow working in small groups; elevated stage for presentations, storage space
underneath
Mixture of different spaces for different work types (active work and individual relaxation
and withdrawal areas
2) Physical activities: The need for creative activities that require both standing and
sitting postures was mentioned by P3, E5, E6, and E8 while the need for bodily activities for
inspiration purposes was mentioned by P1, P4, E5, and E7. E7 explicitly suggested sports
and game activities, while P4 pointed out the value of changing perspectives by moving
around. As a way to enforce such activities during creative work, E7 suggested medium
comfortable furniture, as well as E5 who suggested furniture that ranges from comfy
hammocks to hard stools. P5 had the unusual idea to project presentations towards the
ceiling to enforce a change of perspective. Table 2 summarizes the statements by the
different participants.
Table 2:
Ref. #
P1
P3
P4
E5
E6
E7
E8
Physical activities
Statement related to physical activities
Bodily activities support creative work, change between different work postures;
comfortable chairs and sofas
Change between standing and sitting postures
Allow and enforce bodily activities, movement, and change of perspective
Allow and enforce change of postures (standing, sitting, on the floor); movement as
source for inspiration; furniture that enforce movement (range from comfy hammocks to
hard stools)
Allow different work postures (ideation on sofa, concentrated computer work at desk)
Games and Sports are inspiring; furniture medium comfortable to enforce movement
Change of work postures (standing, sitting)
336
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
3) Light: Lots of light was an important requirement for P3, P4, E5, E6, and E7, from
whom P4 explicitly preferred natural daylight. P1 suggested customizable light colors and
temperature, while E8 had already a particular brand of lightning system in mind which
simulates natural daylight. E5 suggested curtains to regulate light intensity. Table 3
summarizes the statements by the different participants.
Table 3: Light
Ref. #
P1
P3
P4
E6
E5
E7
E8
Statement related to light
Customizable light color
Lots of light
Natural daylight
Light and friendly atmosphere, enhances clarity
Sufficient light and air; curtains as separators and for light control
Lots of light
Specific lighting (daylight-simulating Rentex Membran-Lighting systems)
4) Style and atmosphere: A natural environment with natural materials was desired by
P3, P4, E5, E8, and E9. Materials other than ‘wood’ and ‘concrete’ were not mentioned by
any of the participants. E5 explicitly expressed the wish for a warm and cozy atmosphere.
P4 and E9 particularly welcomed plants within the creative workspace. E8 highlighted the
importance of high quality materials. The educators E5, E6, E8, and E9 mentioned
attributes like playfulness, unexpectedness, imperfection, improvisation, or colorful
liveliness as a source of inspiration. E6 suggested a balanced atmosphere between colorful
and calm, while E5 preferred a cozy living-room atmosphere.
The practitioners expressed their wish for a more modern and representative
atmosphere (P3) with structure and order and a representative welcome area (P4). From
the practitioners, only P4 mentioned a surprising and unusual environment as a source of
inspiration. Background music was desired by P4 and E5. Table 4 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 4:
Ref. #
P3
P4
E5
E6
E8
E9
Style and atmosphere
Statement related to style and atmosphere
Modern interior; nature
Natural materials, organic interior; consider Ergonomics; unusual combinations,
surprising things (for inspiration); music, plants, order and structure, welcome area for
guests
Not cool and stylish but comfortable and cozy (living room atmosphere); music,
communication; wooden floor
Balance between colorful liveliness and calm structure
High quality and natural materials; playful interior
Imperfect, improvised character for inspiration (lead to new ways of thinking; take risks);
natural and raw materials (wood, concrete); green plants
5) Flexibility: The requirement for flexible furniture that allows for different postures
and work purposes was mentioned from educators and practitioners in the same way. For
most of them, flexible or modular furniture was suggested as a solution for theme 1), the
337
KATJA THORING et al.
possibility to divide the space into different zones for different work types, or for theme 2),
the enforcement of physical activities by providing height adjustable furniture or furniture
that allows sitting and standing postures. Table 5 summarizes the statements by the
different participants.
Table 5:
Ref. #
P1
P2
P4
E5
E7
E8
Flexibility
Statement related to flexibility
Flexible furniture, modular systems that allow combinations for different work purposes,
chairs, sofas, bean bags, different configurations, rectangular tables that can be arranged
to larger table areas
Flexible furniture (on wheels)
Modular and flexible furniture for different work purposes; several layers (different
perspectives)
Mobile and flexible work spaces, height-adjustable furniture
Allow different postures, standing and sitting
Mobile furniture units, flexible usage; additional mobile equipment (moveable beamer)
6) Open space: The concept of open space was mentioned by practitioners and
educators alike, but partly in a different manner. The educators E6, E7, and E9 mentioned
the concept of open space in terms of mental space for dreaming and developing ideas.
The practitioner P3, however, distinguished between the need for separated cells for
concentrated work (e.g. ‘cubicles’) and open space for informal exchange in the kitchen.
P4 suggested transparent glass doors to give some feeling of open space while limiting
access through electronic control at the same time, which is quite the contrary of the
concept expressed by the educators. P2, E6, and E9 expressed the need for lots of open
space for displaying ideas and information to exchange with others. Table 6 summarizes
the statements by the different participants.
Table 6:
Ref. #
P4
P2
P3
E6
E7
E9
Open space
Statement related to open space
Glass doors (transparency)
Huge walls and boards to display ideas and thoughts
Free space for dreaming and crazy ideas, open space for (informal) collaboration with
coffee/tea, small cells (‘cubicles’) for concentrated single work
Lots of free/empty space to fill with ideas; not too packed/crowded
Allow daydreaming; lots of space for work materials and ideas (temporarily), large tables
Lots of free space
7) (Coffee) breaks: Some sort of kitchen or a dedicated space for a coffee break was
important for 6 participants. This aspect was mentioned by the educators as a possibility to
refresh and recharge between phases of intensive work (e.g. through fresh food as
mentioned by E5), while the practitioners emphasized the possibility for informal meetings
(P2 and P3). Table 7 summarizes the statements by the different participants.
338
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
Table 7:
Ref. #
P1
P2
P3
E5
E6
E7
(Coffee) breaks
Statement related to (Coffee) breaks
Coffee available
Kitchen to refresh and recreate and for informal meetings
Open space for communication and (informal) collaboration with coffee and tea
Fruit as ‘brain-booster’
Breaks are important
Coffee and snacks
8) Electronic infrastructure: The need for state-of-the-art electronic equipment and
infrastructure was mentioned by practitioners and academics alike. Among the mostly
desired equipment were beamer and projection walls, good scanners and printers,
computer workstations accessible for everyone, and Wireless LAN. Table 8 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 8:
Ref. #
P1
P2
P3
P4
5E
E8
Electronic infrastructure
Statement related to electronic infrastructure
Projection wall, Beamer, large monitor, WiFi
Projection wall, Scanner, Computer work stations
State of the art equipment
Projection space/wall (ceiling for new perspective); state-of-the-art equipment and
infrastructure (Skype, printer, etc.), audio system
Beamer, Computer, big touchscreen display; mobile (Computer-) workstations
Additional mobile equipment (moveable beamer)
9) Knowledge storage: Many of the participants mentioned the desire for knowledge
repositories within the space that could be accessed by others. P1, P2, E5, and E7
requested entire writeable walls, and P2, E5 and E9 also mentioned more conventional
flipcharts, chalk boards, or pin boards. Table 9 summarizes the statements by the different
participants.
Table 9:
Ref. #
P1
P2
E5
E7
E9
Knowledge storage
Statement related to knowledge storage
Writeable walls
Knowledge repository; ideas and information displayed on walls facilitate exchange; huge
walls to display ideas and thoughts, pin boards, flipcharts
Writeable walls, chalkboard or whiteboard
Writeable walls to exchange ideas
Pin boards
10) Access to materials: The presence of work materials, books, videos, games and toys
as a source of inspiration was mentioned by 4 participants, equally from academia and
practice. However, both practitioners (P2 and P4) mentioned also unusual aspects for
inspirational input, such as field trips, or access to digital (material) libraries. Table 10
summarizes the statements by the different participants.
339
KATJA THORING et al.
Table 10: Access to materials
Ref. #
P2
P4
E5
E7
Statement related to access to materials
Source of stimulation: books, videos, music, field trips, exhibitions; material on hand
(moderator’s kit)
Materials for modelmaking on hand and visible for tangible inspiration; access to digital
material libraries; analog material library, magazines; gadget library (hats, wigs, toys)
Games and toys as a source of inspiration
Books and videos for inspiration
11) Outdoor connection: The need for fresh air was only mentioned by the academic
participants. E5 and E7 explicitly mention the need for outdoor access and the possibility
to connect to remote spaces, e.g. through provided bikes. Table 11 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 11: Outdoor connection
Ref. #
E5
E7
E8
Statement related to outdoor connection
Sufficient light and air; make use of outside space (fresh air breaks), outdoor equipment
and furniture; bikes available to connect to other spaces
Outdoor access
Fresh air, good climate
12) General Storage: Storage was only mentioned by the academic participants, either
for storing work materials (E5, E8) or for personal belongings (E7). Table 12 summarizes
the statements by the different participants.
Table 12: General storage
Ref. #
E5
E7
E8
Statement related to general storage
Lots of storage space for work materials, second layer, high rack
Closets for storage of personal things
Elevated stage for presentations, storage space underneath
13) Privacy: The request for privacy, access control, and data security was very
important for the practitioners, only. P1, P2, and P4 envisioned a digitally controlled access
system of the co-working space only for members. P4 even suggests a fingerprint scan.
This concept results in a conflict with theme 6—open space, which suggests more of an
open and accessible workspace, and also with theme 7—knowledge repository, which
suggests an open and visible sharing of ideas and knowledge. Table 13 summarizes the
statements by the different participants.
Table 13: Privacy
Ref. #
P1
P2
P4
Statement related to privacy
24/7 Access only for members
Privacy, limited access
Schedule for access and usage; access through electronic glass doors, fingerprint scan
340
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
14) Layering: The concept of a space that is divided through several (horizontal) layers
was suggested by 3 participants. While both educators (E5 and E8) suggest layering in
order to gain more storage space, the practitioner (P4) emphasizes the importance of a
change of perspective and to activate bodily activities through the different layers. Table
14 summarizes the statements by the different participants.
Table 14:
Ref. #
P4
E5
E8
Layering
Statement related to layering
Several layers for a change of perspective, physical activity
High rack, additional layer for storage
Elevated stage for presentations, storage space underneath
15) Facilitation: The need for a responsible person (a facilitator) who takes care about
the co-working space in terms of cleanliness, order, and supply (e.g. paper or toner), was
mentioned by practitioner P4 (see Table 15).
Table 15: Facilitation
Ref. #
P4
Statement related to facilitation
Facilitator who is responsible for the space; order and structure is important for creative
work
Results of the Workshop
While during the evaluation of the cultural probes posters several interesting aspects
showed up, it was not clear whether the identified aspects were based on individual
preferences or actually related to different requirements of academics and practitioners.
Hence, we tried to clarify these arising questions through an in-depth discussion with the
participants in the follow-up workshop. Additionally, we tried to match the resulting
insights with our previously developed typology of creative spaces, in order to validate it.
During the one day workshop the participants discussed their respective cultural
probes posters in teams of two (or three, respectively). The main insights were captured as
notes and sketches, which was facilitated by one researcher per team. Afterwards, the
emerging insights were presented to the group, discussed, and prioritized. Any arising
controversies were discussed with the group until a common understanding of the
different perspectives was reached.
As a first step, the identified requirements and ideas were clustered by the participants
according to the five space types team space, solitary space, presentation space, tinker
space, and transition space, as suggested by the researchers. Blank labels for any new
category emerging from the data itself were provided to encourage also defining new
categories. All of the five suggested categories were identified by the participants to
different extents. Particular emphasis was given to dedicated solitary spaces and to the
transition spaces—all the participants agreed that a possibility for personal ‘alone time’
was very important, as was the possibility for coffee breaks or to get some fresh air, inside
or outside the room, as well as to connect to other areas on site (e.g. by provided bikes).
The tinker space, on the other hand, was identified as important, but it was agreed upon
that this was supposed to be located somewhere outside the main workspace to avoid
disturbance through noise and smells. This remote tinker space should consist of an
341
KATJA THORING et al.
analogue prototyping workshop with tools and materials, but also state-of-the-art digital
equipment, such as 3d printers. Inside the actual work space large tables should be
provided to allow for smaller prototyping tasks, e.g. using paper and cardboard.
Presentation spaces and team spaces were also identified as important space types by
all participants. There was mutual consent that these spaces should be flexible and allow
for a change between different work types and postures.
In addition to these five suggested space types, one additional category was defined by
the participants: the virtual space that would provide digital connection to ‘the outside
world’. This virtual space should provide the required technical equipment, such as (video)
conferencing hard and software, smart boards, or virtual meeting rooms in the internet.
Also, virtual marketplaces for ideas, experts, coaches etc. or the access to digital (literature
and material) libraries should be considered. The welcome space that was mentioned by
P4 in the cultural probes proved not to be of importance for the other participants. We
suggest that this could be classified as a transition space, since it is not a designated work
space but more a connection to the ‘outside world’.
In the second step, the spatial functions that emerged from the participants’ data were
compared to the five spatial functions suggested by the researchers (knowledge repository,
stimulation, social interaction, culture, and process manifestation). These five functions
were also validated in general.
According to the participants, the culture of the envisioned co-working space should be
expressed through a playful atmosphere, a use of high-quality and sustainable materials,
and it should somehow encourage out-of-the-box thinking and crazy ideas. This should be
achieved by providing toys and gadgets and through the implementation of unusual room
setups and the use of raw materials and an improvised overall character. A controversial
discussion emerged around the question of privacy. The practitioners emphasized that the
security of their data was critical and a lack of the same would be a criterion for not
participating in that particular co-working space. They suggested a so-called closed
developer space with prepared NDA templates, as well as electronic access control to the
space. The academics, however, felt almost offended by this approach and would prefer a
culture of open source and open access. The discussion could not be led towards an
agreement nor a compromise for the two target groups.
The aspect of ‘housekeeping’ was also discussed as a question of culture. Rules should
be defined that regulate cleaning and other responsibilities. A facilitator was appreciated
by some participants.
The knowledge repository was mainly envisioned as whiteboards or writeable walls to
display and share information. However, also here the practitioners suggested for example
the use of curtains to prevent unauthorized access to the information, for example
through the window view. Knowledge should also be accessible through analogue and
digital libraries for both—books and materials. External experts should be available
through expert data bases.
The spatial function of process manifestation describes the ability of the space to
enforce or prevent specific workflows. In general, this was considered not as desirable as a
flexible workspace. Mobile or adaptable furniture and equipment (foldable or on wheels)
were preferred over fixed furniture. For example, a fixed stage for presentations was
considered less desirable than a mobile or modular presentation area that could be
adapted on demand. Although the need for different work types and purposes was
342
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
acknowledged by all participants (e.g. switching between group work and more private
phone calls), but fixed spatial separators (such as separate phone booths or cells) were
rejected by most participants.
Again, the question of access control was discussed controversially. The practitioners
suggested closed and secure knowledge repositories that would regulate access through
electronic identity control systems, as well as screens on windows, which was negatively
received by the academics as too much of a spatial and mental barrier for the creative
workflow.
The space as a source of stimulation was recognized by all participants. However, the
perception of the quality of possible stimulations was quite different. While some
participants felt highly inspired by the presence of plants or pets, this was absolutely not
acceptable for others, because it would cause too much of a distraction. The same applied
to sound and noise. While for some background music and natural working noise would be
inspiring, for others this would mean a disturbance. Asking further revealed that these
were actually personal preferences and could not be related to the different requirements
of academics and practitioners. There was mutual consent about the inspirational quality
of window views or of visible materials and gadgets.
Space as a social dimension was considered one of the most important functions of a
co-working space for all participants. Social events, such as regular meet-ups, should foster
social interactions. But also the space was considered an important aspect for this goal:
informal meeting points (e.g. coffee corners, a kitchen, snack vending machines, or
information boards) should be established to enforce incidentally ‘running into each
other’. Open access to the co-working space (24/7) was desired by most of the academic
participants.
4 Theoretical Implications
Validation of the Typology
The suggested typology of creative spaces and functions (Thoring et al., 2012a, 2012b)
was mainly validated through the presented study. The only additional space type
identified by the participants was the so-called virtual space. Although we were mainly
interested in the role of the physical environment, the virtual space seemed to be
important for most of the participants and hence merits further research. However, we
consider the virtual space a specific characteristic of the technical infrastructure, and not a
space type in itself. Such a virtual space could be either a team space (e.g. a virtual
meeting room), a solitary space (e.g. a Blog for personal thoughts), a presentation space
(e.g. a prerecorded video lecture), a tinker space (e.g. a so-called sandbox to build digital
prototypes), or a transition space (e.g. Skype or other video conferencing systems that
provide a connection to other remote locations). Hence, we consider the virtuality more of
a characteristic of a space rather than a space type of its own.
Also the five spatial functions (Thoring et al., 2012a, 2012b) were validated through the
study. Although different characteristics of each function were identified by the different
participants, the main five categories of spatial functions from our typology were also
identified by the participants. Again, they suggested one additional function, which was
related to data privacy (the so-called ‘closed developer space’)—the possibility to hide
343
KATJA THORING et al.
data in locked file cabinets or behind blinds was a very important aspect for some of the
practitioners. However, we considered this not an additional function of a space, but a
characteristic (dimension) of the ‘knowledge repository’ function—which can be either
locked or accessible, or a characteristic of the ‘indicator of culture’ function of a space—
which can be either open or proprietary).
Hence, the previously presented ‘typology of creative spaces’ was confirmed through
this study.
Different Spatial Requirements in Education and Practice
The main research question that we want to answer through the present study is
whether creative practitioners and academics have different requirements regarding a
shared co-working space. Although the limited number of participants does not allow for a
statistical analysis of the results, some preliminary insights have been identified through
the cultural probes that could partly be further clarified in the follow-up workshop.
One of the most distinct requirements that only applied to practitioners was the
demand for privacy, access control, and data security. The educators, on the contrary,
were focusing more on an open space concept. While both target groups were
emphasizing the need for informal meeting points, such as a kitchen or coffee corner, the
educators were interested more in its recreational functions, whereas the practitioners
regarded such spaces as workspace extensions. Outdoor access was originally only
mentioned by the educators, but during the discussions it became evident that this was an
important issue for the practitioners as well. The demand of storage was mainly raised by
the educators. A lack of storage space (e.g. for personal items) seems to be a problem in
educational contexts. While all participants were appreciating high-quality materials, the
educators saw the additional value in raw materials and improvised atmospheres, to foster
creativity. For the practitioners, a representative style of the space was more important,
along with the possibility to welcome guests.
5 Conclusion
Contribution
The present study with nine participants from academia and practice is regarded as a
first step towards the understanding of different spatial requirements of creative
practitioners and educators. There exists only limited number of scientific literature about
spatial requirements for co-working spaces. Spinuzzi (2012) analyzed what is co-working,
who co-works and why people co-work. However, he did not analyze the co-working
space. Lumley (2014) looked at how co-working in a library could facilitate entrepreneurial
activities. Bilandzic et al. (2013) presented an information system for co-working spaces
that shows the skills and needs of the people who checked in. Only few papers discussed
the spatial characteristics of co-working spaces, for example, Parrino (2013) looked at the
effect of proximity on knowledge sharing in co-working spaces. However, peculiar
requirements might apply to co-working spaces in university-affiliated research centers or
incubators, where educators and practitioners work together in a shared space. This
particular situation is the focus of our study. To the best of our knowledge such an analysis
has not been conducted, so far. The present study contributes to the discussed literature
344
Workspaces for Design Education and Practice
by analyzing the spatial requirements of co-working spaces and by identifying the different
needs of practitioners and educators.
Limitations
This paper describes a qualitative study with its immanent limitations. Our study
involved only a small number of participants. But through the in-depth research and
discussions some promising insights were raised that warrant further investigation.
Future Work
The presented study focuses on identifying differences between spatial requirements
of practitioners and academics. Other possible influences (e.g. preferences based on
gender or cultural background) were disregarded at this point. Future research might focus
on these aspects. As the next step we are planning to analyze different spatial
requirements based on cultural differences. Moreover, we are going to conduct expert
interviews with architects, interior architects, educators, and spatial designers to gain new
insights on the actual influence of spatial characteristics on creative co-working.
Acknowledgements: Part of this work was supported by UniKasselTransfer.
References
Bilandzic, M., Schroeter, R., & Foth, M. (2013). Gelatine: Making coworking places gel for
better collaboration and social learning (pp. 427–436). Presented at the Proceedings of
the 25th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference: Augmentation,
Application, Innovation, Collaboration, OzCHI 2013.
Davies, A., & Tollervey, K. (2013). The style of coworking: contemporary shared
workspaces. Munich: Prestel.
Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. Interactions, 6(1), 21-29.
Lumley, R. M. (2014). A Coworking Project in the Campus Library: Supporting and Modeling
Entrepreneurial Activity in the Academic Library. New Review of Academic Librarianship,
20(1), 49–65.
Mattelmäki, T. (2006). Design probes (PhD Thesis). University of Art and Design, Helsinki.
Parrino, L. (2013). Coworking: assessing the role of proximity in knowledge exchange.
Knowledge Management Research & Practice. http://doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2013.47
Spinuzzi, C. (2012). Working Alone Together Coworking as Emergent Collaborative Activity.
Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(4), 399–441.
Sundsted, T., Bacigalupo, T., & Jones, D. (2009). I’m Outta Here: How Co-Working Is Making
the Office Obsolete. Brooklyn: Lulu.
Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2012a). Creative Space In Design Education: A
Typology of Spatial Functions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on
Engineering and Product Design Education. Antwerp, Belgium.
Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2012b). Where do we Learn to Design? A Case
Study About Creative Spaces. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Design
Creativity. Glasgow, UK.
Thoring, K., Luippold, C., & Mueller, R. M. (2013). Opening the Cultural Probes Box: A
critical reflection and analysis of the cultural probes method. In Proceedings of the
345
KATJA THORING et al.
International Congress of International Association of Societies of Design Research.
Tokyo, Japan.
346
Architecture: Teaching the Future/Future of Teaching
Gemma BARTON
University of Brighton
G.Barton@Brighton.ac.uk
Abstract: Driven by a need to examine the trajectory of architectural education
and staffing, this paper questions academic recruitment and education strategy
in relation to the 2015 Royal institute of British Architects (RIBA) education
forum in the UK. Interviews with key academics actively challenging the future of
higher education models were undertaken; London School of Architecture, AA
Little Architect scheme and Free School of Architecture showcase detailed and
reactionary approaches to the changing relationship between education,
industry and the marketplace. An international survey was conducted gathering
data from academics, the findings of which indicate a lack of clarity and
consistency in the transition from architectural education into academia. The
paper analyses the context of the results and proposes improvements to
recruitment and staffing strategies both inside and outside of the traditional
university framework. This research contributes to the wider discussion around
future development and employment in arts education. If the discipline lies in the
hands of the educators, then the future of the discipline lies in the hands of the
future educators. To be truly forward thinking about the direction of practice we
must first address our approach to academic recruitment, with a specific focus
on early career academics.
Keywords: architecture, pedagogy, academic recruitment, academic pathways
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
GEMMA BARTON
The Academy
An Introduction
‘A university is not a machine for achieving a particular purpose or producing a
particular result; it is a manner of human activity.' (Oakeshott, 2001)
The identity of the architect is being questioned, the relevance of the profession is
under scrutiny and the structure of its education and establishment are in flux. March
2015 saw the RIBA (Royal Institute of British Architects) hold a comprehensive examination
of UK architectural education. The reform meeting was a part of the RIBA’s two-year
review, setting an agenda for changes in structure, content and delivery of UK architectural
education. In the run up to this a panel discussion took place at the Architecture
Foundation in London about the future of architectural education. Sitting on this panel
alongside myself was Professor Neil Spiller, Professor Robert Mull and Professor Peter
Clegg we discussed wide-ranging topics such as education as commodity and the need for
radicalism. On 24th March 2015 the RIBA Council engaged SCHOSA (The Standing
Conference of Heads of Schools of Architecture), UK schools of architecture, progressive
practitioners and statutory bodies in a day long review at Portland Place, London where
the council voted and agreed proposals to modernize the education structure in line with
other European countries. In short, this means eradicating the previous three-part system
and replacing it with a seven year integrated system enabling graduates to reduce the time
it takes to qualify as an architect by up to three years.
This has been the most rigorous and collaborative review of architectural education in
fifty years via an extensive consultation with architects, students, academics and
clients.’ (Hodder, 2015)
Methodology
Whilst the RIBA review is a step towards streamlining and equalizing ground for the
UK’s aspiring architects, it is focused on modifications to existing education convention and
does not specifically consider the role academic staff recruitment plays in determining
quality learning experiences. The case studies featured in this paper exercise more lateral
approaches to the requirement for modernization and consider a variety of staffing
strategies. The Free School of Architecture, London School of Architecture and AA Little
Architect Programme are at this very moment are challenging the future of architectural
education, each of which are responding uniquely to current social and fiscal
circumstances. The future of architecture and the future of architectural education are
inextricably linked to the role of university and of the lecturer. To truly develop
educational strategy one must implicate academic staff recruitment into the conversation.
This paper presents an analysis of data collected and proposes solutions for clarifying and
introducing new routes into architectural academia. An online survey questioned sixty
academics globally who were asked ten simple questions, the most prevalent being ‘Do
you think more should be done to encourage architecture students/graduates to consider
academia as a career path?’ Of the sixty respondents 60% answered YES highlighting a
growing concern amongst academics about current staffing procurement, with a specific
focus on early career academics. Other answers provided by the respondents showcase
348
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
the multiplicity of entry routes into academia including traditional postgraduate
conversion courses, mentoring/recommendation and entry via practice.
[1] REACTIONARY EDUCATION MODELS
Current debate about the value of higher education is dominated by talk of debt and
income rather than learning and welfare. Teaching in this commodified space stigmatizes
and confuses the role of the educator; it affects both the abilities and perceptions of staff
and students alike. It marketizes what should be a ‘fail, fail and fail better’ process of
iterative learning – design courses are suffering more than most in this marketized climate
as one-to-one tutoring is relatively expensive when compared to lecture theatre teaching.
The three case study projects (Figure 1) and interviews that follow have developed in part
as a response to the changing relationship between education, industry and the
marketplace, and have been selected for analysis on this basis. Each case study takes a
different approach to teaching and staffing policy, such as disassociating architectural
education from the university, embedding education within practice and reconditioning by
educating primary school children with architectural principles
The Free School of Architecture founded by Phil Watson based in Wales is an ongoing
venture focused on liberating the teaching of architecture from the traditional and
commercial university framework. The Free School has been evolving slowly for more than
a decade as a reaction against the path-of-least-resistance trajectory that the discipline
seems to have followed - Watson believes this lack of fortitude and foresight has seen
architecture become dismantled, The Free School hopes to reinstate it’s future, in the
future.
London School of Architecture (LSA) founded by Will Hunter is a new education
establishment intent on providing an alternative RIBA Part II experience focused on
practice-based placements and self-directed learning. The program is currently seeking
ARB approval and is due to welcome its first cohort September 2015. Hunter and his team
established the streamlined LSA in response to the rising cost of higher Education in the UK
and the introduction of the £9000 fee structure for all university students in a hope that
architectural education can be more accessible and affordable.
Architecture Association (AA) Little Architect Programme founded by Delores Garrido is
part of the AA, the first school in the UK to offer a structured program of architectural
instruction. Little Architect is an education and learning platform for teaching architecture
in London’s primary schools. Established in January 2014 the program seeks to teach
holistic learning practices through the vehicle of architecture, as an intentional move away
from subject-based compartmentalization.
349
GEMMA BARTON
Figure 1
Reactionary architectural education models.
350
Source: Author
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
a) DISASSOCIATE - Free School for Architecture
Figure 2
The Persephone Project
Source: The Free School of Architecture
Phil Watson is an established academic with firm opinion on the current state of
architecture and it’s education. We met to discuss these opinions as well as his Free School
of Architecture venture that propagates the removal of architectural teaching from the
traditional university set up.
‘I’m interested in how to take architecture out of the institution, because all these
young people come here for a label. They don’t need these institutions to become
good designers in fact they often get flattened out by the demands of the systems and
the professional bodies – they are haunting them for recognition to enable the
certificate/piece of paper. They all have to jump the same hoops. The Free school is
about none of these things, it is about how to think, how to be human. I have been
doing something similar with masters students for about 15 years now, since before I
was teaching you. We take 6 weeks away in the summer and the students stay on my
land in Wales. About 10 students, we meet every evening, talk and speculate and build
and generate. We cook together. They stay on our properties but the students don’t
pay. In the Free School they will pay for the accommodation but not the teaching.’ I
asked Watson, ‘So why formalise this now?’ he responded ‘People aren’t doing the
interesting stuff any more, being less and less understanding about things like
philosophy. So now is the time to make the world more exciting and interesting. I see a
lot of students who are victims of the institution, destroyed by poor teaching practice,
its shameful.’ (Watson, 2015)
351
GEMMA BARTON
When asked to sum-up at the Architecture Foundation panel discussion, I posed
questions about the real need and value of assessments, curricula, learning outcomes and
grading (which was met with solemnity) I asked the audience of educators and students,
how would you teach/learn if the output were not predetermined? I extended this
conversation with Watson, we discussed the need for architecture and it’s (over)
classification. Watson says in response ‘Pedagogy for me is about engaging the imagination
and how you can bring materials and ideas into somewhere else. The Free School is about
setting up enquiry, making in roads with speculative imaginations about methods and
tactics not geared towards the piece of paper, not marked and with no assessment criteria.
A group of people working together to fashion out new ideas about what architecture
might become.’ (Watson, 2015)
‘Architecture has become a victim because people have not pushed on the subject in
the way they should have. It has fallen behind. The subject has to be totally redefined.
The classical notion of what the subject is has been completely dismantled. You can
have maybe 15-20 different types of architects, not necessarily architects but which
have a role to play. With the move from materialism to synthetic materialism the
philosophical debate about prescriptive morphologies brings in to questions how we
manufacture architecture and out of what. We are still working on the perception that
someone manufactures a façade out of inert material – fixed and rigid – with no
plasticity and no motion – it is just a cave.’ (Watson, 2015)
I asked Watson about the admissions process and the selection criteria for staff at the
Free School, he tells me ‘We don’t want people to just come in and think they can play
with architecture with us!’ (Watson, 2015) The Free School does not (as yet) have a
website, Watson’s reputation is likely attraction/justification enough for staff and students
but whether this informal and closed approach towards recruitment might be an act of
protection against dilution and over complication remains to be seen. This bottom up,
hands on, active approach is admirable but one might question the scalability and
sustainability of such an (currently) inward looking model. This is unfortunate because this
speculative inability to grow could halt its ultimate societal and educational progress. Will
such a selective environment ever successfully contribute to the larger debate around
architecture to the extent it desires?
b) EMBED - London School of Architecture (LSA)
‘I don’t think that routes into academia are unclear: the path of doctorates and
publishing is both well trodden and institutionalized. If very talented people are being
deterred, I suspect the prospects are not sufficiently attractive to them. I think it is
unhelpful to set up academia and practice in binary opposition to each other; the
future of the discipline is something that everyone involved in architecture should be
concerned with.’ (Hunter, 2015)
352
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
Figure 3
Vision and Mission for LSA Source: LSA Part 2 Handbook
Practice and academia should be mutually inclusive; students should be introduced to
all career options whilst studying, without too heavy an emphasis on preparing graduates
solely for practice employment. Choice is the key, architecture as an industry is wide
ranging with disciplines on the thresholds of many fields of interest. Therefore as
educators we should prepare our students for that very wide choice, which must include
academia. With regards to teaching, the LSA handbook states, ‘The quality of teaching staff
is the single greatest factor to developing intellectual creative capital in students.’ So I
asked Hunter how do you define teaching quality? He responds, ‘We see one of our
primary responsibilities as a school as ‘developing intellectual creative capital in students’.
We measure our success on the impact we make in generating debate and change within
the profession and discipline of architecture and, ultimately, what our graduates go on to
do.’ (Hunter, 2015) In Year One at LSA the students spend their time in practice placement
(from one of the fifty practices in the practice network) learning from real life projects and
working in the realities of an office environment, essentially blurring the line between
educator and practitioner. I asked Hunter how he hopes to govern the quality and equality
of the tuition and guidance given to the students who will be spread across London
receiving disparate learning experiences. He responds, ‘There was an open call for
Expressions of Interests from practices (a formal process) and other collaborators, and I am
very proud that the LSA has – as a start-up – managed to launch with such a diversity of
talents. Everybody has been selected for their ability to contribute to our mission and
values.’ (Hunter, 2015) Working within/for the Practice Network will be a unique and
rewarding opportunity for all students assuming training is provided and regular
quality/assessment reviews are planned and undertaken.
This model of education is lateral and practical in many ways; taking the university out
of the estate managed core as a response to fiscal pressures (the LSA has no buildings
instead it ‘borrows’ and arranges the use of space with London based institutions thus
significantly reducing the cost to the student) and embedding it within the realities of
353
GEMMA BARTON
practice. ‘By forming a closer bond with practices in London, we have created a lower cost
educational model that seeks to attract talented students into architecture – regardless of
their ability to pay – and created a place for practices to collaborate and experiment
beyond project-specific work.’ Says Hunter. ‘We are not going to ignore the market (as that
isn’t helpful), but it is not what is driving the school’s agenda: we are primarily interested
in the spatial implications of how the world is changing and architecture’s role within it.’
(Hunter, 2015) One might question whether in tying the education model at the LSA so
tightly to the practice of architecture that it places an unequal focus on one career
trajectory, practice. On the other hand Will Hunter and the London School of Architecture
should be credited for stepping out and standing up, challenging our ingrained systemic
vision of higher education. It will likely inspire universities to consider how they might
develop in the future, a critical model which will no doubt change the way architecture
schools view the structure of architectural learning.
c) RE-CONDITION - Architecture Association (AA) Little
Architect
Figure 4
Source: AA LITTLE ARCHITECT PROGRAMME
The world of Architecture can be said to be egocentric: the industry, the education
system, and the illustrious nature of the lone genius. Few people channel their time and
passion to the benefit of the industry as a whole, rather than for personal/individual
benefit. Delores Garrido of the Little Architect programme, an early career academic, is
focusing on our future, helping to create an architecturally aware youth for the benefit of
the world as a whole, not just our industry. We discuss the benefits of tapping into
children’s positivity and can-do attitude with regards architecture and design and the
opposing compartmentalization of primary and secondary education in the UK. This
354
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
integrated teaching approach is not new, but bringing it in early, through the vehicle of
architecture could be very beneficial for society but also for the future of architecture and
design education.
‘We are not letting the children express their ideas, we are narrowing their faculties,
everything is linked, life does not take place in separated boxes like the taught subjects.
We have to change that aspect in education and architecture is a perfect way to do
that - the city integrates everything, from the tiniest insects passing through the
buildings to humans and our needs. I am focusing the teaching on the improvement of
children as citizens; I think that through teaching architecture and urban issues we can
make them more aware of their present and their future. I aim to approach the
government and try to get architecture (with my methodology) included in the
curriculum. What I am developing allows me to teach any of the statutory topics as a
frame: Past-Present-Future.’ (Garrido, 2015)
Should Garrido’s plan be rolled out across UK schools then societies generational
understanding of the built environment will completely shift. A greater knowledge of mass
citizenship will have a huge impact on the way we teach the future, in the future. During
an interview with Head of School of Architecture at Greenwich University, Neil Spiller
argued against the RIBAs (then) proposition to streamline the seven-year accreditation
process, arguing that the complexities of the profession should warrant the education to
be longer if anything, not shorter. But here we see an alternative, if the base knowledge of
society as a whole has risen; a shorter, more economical education system may be
achievable, with the power to create a pool of knowledgeable, engaged and ambitious
future educators.
As a young activist challenging the definition of the traditional academic, Garrido says ‘I
don´t think I could be teaching this programme in a public university, I would probably
need a number of papers published in journals, probably a PhD and/or years of experience
in academia.’ Garrido is a good example of new wave academics that do not focus just on
developing new content for teaching but have the capability and vision to completely
reinvent the structure of architectural instruction.
‘Universities should focus more on how learning contributes to wider social functions
such as active and ethical citizenship and shaping a democratic civilised and more
sustainable society, which is crucial if they are to play an active and responsible role in
an increasingly complex and uncertain world.’ (Sodha, Universities must place more
emphasis on teaching quality, 2015)
[2] THE PATHWAYS
Common Pathways into Architectural Academia (Figure 5) was created to disseminate
information collected via an online survey. January to April 2015 saw the collection of sixty
responses from academics around the globe holding various contracts in architectural
teaching, from Heads of School to teaching assistants. The flow diagram describes three
main pathways – a) PhD in Architecture, b) Recommendation and c) Practice – it highlights
the elements at play in progressing into and navigating through architectural academe.
355
GEMMA BARTON
Point of least clarity
Figure 5
Common Pathways into Architectural Academia
356
Source: Author
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
The routes are not mutually exclusive as the pathways are inherently fluid and person
dependent but they help to provide an insight in to timeframes and trajectories. The
survey questions touch on role, stage and length of teaching practice and personal
experience of negotiating the academic track. In formulating the questions I hoped to be
able to gauge whether/what more might be done to encourage architecture
students/graduates to consider academia as a career path. Thirty-six of the sixty
respondents (60%) believe that universities need to do more to highlight teaching as a
valid and exciting alternative/addition to the practice of architecture. Respondents were
asked to provide detailed accounts of their journey across the threshold from student to
academic and the following sub-sections highlight, through direct quotes, the three key
routes experienced; PhD in Architecture, Recommendation, Practice.
PhD IN ARCHITECTURE
‘I was offered a full-time teaching position that comes with a full scholarship to do a
full-time PhD.’ (anon. survey entry)
‘When I was working on my PhD I taught one day per week during term time in the
studio as a way of funding my research.’ (anon. survey entry)
A post graduate qualification has not always been a necessity to enter into the
academic profession, but as the career has become more professionalised over the last
few decades in many subjects you would now find not holding a PhD a severe barrier to
entry. According to an article written on the leading academic jobs website in the UK, Dr.
Catherine Armstrong explains ‘you will need a good bachelors degree (2:1 or above)
possibly a Masters and for almost all disciplines a PhD in the relevant field.’ (Armstrong,
2008)
‘There is also the problem of the ‘Fortress Academy’, a term I use to describe the very
few number of actual ‘openings’ in universities for a younger generation of scholars
who are all but obliged to ‘have or be close to completing’ a PhD, as well as ‘research
potential’ if not a ‘research record’: that is, publications.’ (Garland, 2014)
Undertaking a PhD in Architecture in the UK is expensive, it takes dedication and
money (or funding) bearing in mind the significant cost of an extended education in
architecture. The issue of postgraduate finance has risen to political prominence in the last
few years. According to the Higher Education Statistics Agency in 2010 only 19% of UK PhD
holders were working in higher education three and half years after obtaining their
doctorate. As the modern understanding of research is changing, slowly but intently, we
are seeing progress; as little as twenty-five years ago PhDs were neither preferred nor
essential as an entry into academia, nor were there such variations on the traditional
doctorate including PhD by practice and PhD by publication, which have opened up the
academic track to a greater number of people.
With the addition of further internal accreditations, as an early career academic you
are encouraged to have a PhD in Architecture to make your access more streamlined, yet
many within the institutions believe this does not constitute an ability to teach. You may
also be required upon entry to complete an internal teaching qualification (Post Graduate
357
GEMMA BARTON
Certificate of Education in the UK) - which few within architecture academies are reported
to value - you are also expected to be a gifted educator, which does not always go hand in
hand. The requirements seem to be vague and ever changing, so navigating these options
can be overwhelming, the uncertainties at the heart of this process often acting as a
barrier to both application and entry.
RECOMMENDATION
‘After doing a couple of reviews for friends/former tutors […] my name was put
forward for some teaching cover. The students then voted to extend my contract for
the rest of the year.’ (anon. survey entry)
‘I started teaching as a studio assistant while studying for my masters. I worked as a
Visiting Lecturer for four years and built up an excellent reputation. Once qualified as
an architect I got a full time post teaching Interior Design. I worked my way up to
Course Leader and then was head hunted to run the Masters in Architecture for nine
years before becoming the Head of School.’ (anon. survey entry)
Some students/graduates are recommended by (former) tutors to partake in critiques,
identified as effective mentors for other students and as such begin to develop
appropriate skills in the dissemination of information. Attending design reviews on a
regular basis often develops into a more official relationship and these (ex) students are
asked to assist on studio projects with an academic-lead, this usually forms the seeds of
the Visiting Lecturer agreement. This pathway has been around for decades and has reared
many excellent educators and will hopefully continue to do so but it has its flaws. It leaves
a great deal to chance; it is not a fair and transparent system and relies heavily upon a
given network of connection and understanding that many graduates will not possess at
such sa young age. Early career academics are be encouraged and championed, their
placement amongst other more established academics is vital for diversity and growth - to
be embedded within the system without requiring postgraduate PhD or similar
qualifications rather than being resigned to exist on the peripheries as Visiting Lecturers.
The Visiting Lecturer (also known as Hourly Paid Lecturer or adjunct in the US) track is
popular in the UK for many reasons, not least the relative remuneration to administrative
responsibility. Visiting Lecturers are a very important part of the academic make-up and
traditionally this route is popular with young graduates but it is not easy to navigate.
Equally, converting this interest and experience into an academic contract is difficult and
time consuming (it personally took me seven years) and after a similar amount of time in
education, cumulatively this for many is not a conceivable route. In the UK there is an
increase in young people with the desire to affect change, both in the institution but also
in the industry. As yet they have remained on the edge as a result are not able to make
more valuable contributions to the development of the curricula. By stifling youthful,
driven future-academics we are doing a dis-service to the future of the education system
and the industry as a whole.
‘I am engaged because I think one should do something worthwhile with one’s life.
There’s nothing heroic about it. It’s just that you have to do it, to be human.’ (Bello,
2008)
358
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
PRACTICE
‘I started teaching design studios through my practice, with my architect colleagues,
teaching at the university they had done their undergraduate degrees at. But my
'proper' role came from someone who ran the course seeing me talk at an
academic/practitioner crossover event at a time when she was thinking it would be
good to have a practitioner teaching on the course.’ (anon. survey entry)
If your work is being published in the national and international architectural press and
you are creating a buzz in the industry, seen to be active and involved in the life of the
profession and have connection to academia (no matter how loose) you are very likely to
be invited to take part in student tutorials/reviews and possibly as a studio tutor as a
Visiting Lecturer (VL) or Hourly Paid Lecturer (HPL). Teaching experience is not essential,
nor is being a qualified architect, however that might hold you back should you wish to
progress up to Head of School level.
Working as a para-academic in this way, with a foot in architectural practice and a foot
in architectural academia is a position of advantage, for the individual, the practice and the
student body as whole. It is a great mode of exchange, and up to the minute relationship
and exchange of information – a healthy balance for all involved. Institutions such as the
London School of Architecture mark a new route into education (outside of the institution)
for practitioners.
THE FUTURE
The three pathways identified in Figure 5 are neither perfect nor redundant, the system
requires more structure, validity and security - clarification and transparency of these
routes - and a consideration of alternatives and possible improvements (Figure 6). Such a
development of the current system requires visionary students, academics and
management.
‘To find really talented educators, talented educators must be able to take time to find
people […] especially the young. This means personal contact. There is in principle no
system that can help choose, decide, select. It is human, which cannot be replaced in
the final assessment with a surrogate technical system. As such it is very simple. Time
must be taken.‘ (Anon. survey answer)
The survey data was inconclusive at best, but the sixty/forty spilt shows this subject is
very topical and that, given the changes at the hands of the RIBA now is the right time to
be discussing the future of educators as well as the future of education. The passion in the
responses both for and against a greater university involvement in developing future
academics was welcome. Some of the comments are concerning, for example, one
respondent says ‘Architecture is about making things in the built environment happen.
Until you’ve done that what value do you offer? I find this unsettling and would like to
refer the respondent to academics and practitioners who work in the realms of visionary
and ‘paper’ architecture such as Archigram, Lebbeus Woods and Perry Kulper, all of whom
have contributed richly to the wider discussions around architecture. ‘There is a form of
architecture that aims at not getting built.’ (WAI THINK TANK, 2013)
359
GEMMA BARTON
Figure 6
Prospective improvements to the process of entering academia
Source: Author
360
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
What does the future hold for aspiring architects and educators? In analyzing
respondents’ answers I have been able to identify potential strategies for improvement
both inside and outside of the traditional academic institution, outlining how universities
could/should improve on current strategies as well as forming a more defined route, with
formal qualifications so that the process is more transparent and ‘real’ for applicants. Does
the responsibility lie with the individual or the establishment and to what extent can
systems be put in place outside of the institution? Many of the respondents claim quite
rightly that as individuals they are already doing their utmost to open the student
population to the academic track by publishing students’ work in their own books and
journals, by offering help and advice on publication and career options as well as making
connections and networking within the tight discipline, making recommendations. This at
the moment seems to be happening from the bottom up, rather than a top down
approach. So universities as a whole have a wider responsibility; to support their staff
members doing this work in their own time; a shared goal with a shared responsibility.
‘The real teacher, in fact, lets nothing else be learned than learning. His conduct,
therefore, often produces the impression that we properly learn nothing from him, if
by ‘learning’ we now suddenly understand the procurement of useful information. The
teacher is ahead of his apprentices in this alone, that he still has far more to learn than
they—he has to learn to let them learn.’ (Heidegger, 1968)
In recent years there has been a move away from this Heideggerian thinking, as
curricula become more involved, learning outcomes expand and accreditation processes
get checked, assessed, reviewed and double-checked – the administration of teaching is at
risk of diluting the organic process of letting-learn. As part of the document A Marked
Improvement: Transforming assessment in Higher Education, the HEA make a case for
assessment methods to be diversified ‘to improve their validity, authenticity and
inclusivity, making them clearly relevant and worthwhile in the eyes of the students.
Grading would focus on fewer and more challenging summative assessments’ (Higher
Education Academy, 2012). Just as students are assessed on learning outcomes and
procedures, staff and universities are also assessed and accredited by statutory bodies.
The establishment is conditioned to value assessment over learning, wellbeing and
progress.
‘How do we, as academics, students, activists, teach and learn in an institution that no
longer encourages learning for learning’s sake, and which does not prioritise learning
that is accessible to all? […] With the increased marketisation and commodification of
higher education in the United Kingdom, now more than ever we need to consider the
ways in which we learn and teach, both as university educators and as members of
communities.’ ( (Wånggren & Milatovic, 2014)
Having been an architectural educator for nearly a decade I have at times felt distain at
the assumption that the myriad of industry woes all be laid at the feet of education, such
as the contentious claim that architectural education does not appropriately prepare
students for practice - I have written extensively about this misunderstanding in the
architectural press (Barton, 2015) – however more recently I have been elated by the
realization that if industry considers education to be a key part of the problem then by a
similar virtue it must also be considered a key part of the solution. From the interview with
361
GEMMA BARTON
Will Hunter we can disseminate that it is vital in any learning establishment to provide a
variety of voices and opinions; this is not the home of the lone genius or the master and
the apprentice. Age does not always equal experience and youth does not always mean
energy and vitality. We need to be passionate in our employment, we need to think
beyond the CV and see around the corners of credentials, the recruitment process of our
future educators requires a hiring panel of visionaries willing and ready to enable letlearning.
A system that is too tight and rigid is risky, it leaves no room for change and adaptation
and this has been the case for many decades in some architectural academies, those that
have flourished both economically and professionally can be said to have flexible thinkers
at the helm. Playing it safe is also risky, having youth on the team does however bring
familiarity as the most important moments of learning quite often go unnoticed, which is
exactly why they are so important. All future alternative education models, regardless of
manifestation, will require educators - our duty by being active within the system is to care
for the future of education through focusing now, on the future of our future educators.
We can do this by engaging statutory bodies and institutions about putting some of
these suggestions into practice, starting with those inside of the university establishment.
It is time to take responsibility, as students, as staff and as a university. If universities are
to attract, encourage and secure the best future educators, the process needs to be clear,
transparent, structured and rewarding (financially and socially) for applicants. The
university must take responsibility for widening the conversation about post-graduate
options and be encouraging and supportive of those keen to explore teaching. The
University must also support individual lecturers who are already vocal and proactive in
this way. Recommendation and nepotism must be replaced by fair recruitment strategies
where all vacancies are advertised effectively.
There is scope, outside of the institution, to develop public programmes to promote
academia, celebrate its influence and endorse its future educators. If the discipline lies in
the hands of the educators, then the future of the discipline lies in the hands of the future
educators. To be truly forward thinking about the direction of practice we must first
address our approach to academic recruitment, with a specific focus on early career
academics.
‘When we know something, we are already not conceiving anything any longer.’ (Lacan,
1988)
Acknowledgements: I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the
following people who graciously devoted their time for interviews; Will
Hunter, Phil Watson, Delores Garrido. I would also like to acknowledge the
following people for their time and advice on such matters - Anne Boddington,
Ruth Morrow, Raymond Quek, Harriet Harriss, Elisa Lega and Neil Spiller. As
well as all of the kind individuals who saw fit to complete the online survey to
enable me to gather the data needed to formulate elements of the content
expressed in this paper. The survey is still online (link) and I encourage more
architectural educators to complete the questions enabling further analysis.
362
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
References
(n.d.). From London School of Architecture: http://www.the-lsa.org
Abbing, E. R., & van Gessel, C. (2010). Brand-Drivven Innovation. In T. Lockwood, Design
Thinking (pp. 131-143). New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Armstrong, D. C. (2008, April). How to become a lecturer. Retrieved Jan 11, 2014 from
jobs.ac.uk: http://www.jobs.ac.uk/careers-advice/working-in-highereducation/1057/how-to-become-a-lecturer
Barton, G. (2015, Feb 05). Universities are not in the business of producing faster horses.
Retrieved Feb 05, 2015 from Architects Journal:
http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/gem-barton-universities-are-not-in-thebusiness-of-producing-faster-horses/8678031.article
Bello, W. (2008). Wy am I Engaged? Antipode.
Brown, J. B. (2015, Feb 01). The Future of Architectural Education, Episode 3. Retrieved Feb
04, 2015 from Arch Ed Podcast: http://www.archedpodcast.com
Buchanan, R. (1989). Declaration by Design: Rhetoric, Argument and Demonstration in
design Practice. In V. Margolin, design Discourse. History, Theory, Criticism (pp. 91-109).
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Caputo, J. (n.d.). ‘Education as Event: A Conversation with John D. Caputo’ . Journal for
Cultural and Religious Theory 12.2. (W. Dickinson, Interviewer)
Cross, N. (2011). Design Thinking. Oxford: Berg.
Department, R. E. (2013). Education Statistics 2012-13. London: RIBA Publishing.
Du gay, P., Hall, S., James, L., & Negus, K. (1997). Doing Cultural Studies: The Story of the
Sony Walkman. London: Sage Publishers.
Eger, A., Bonnema, Maarten, Lutters, E., & Van der Voort, M. (2013). Product Design. The
Hague: eleven, international publishing.
Futures in the Making Panel Discussion. (n.d.). From Architecture Foundation:
http://www.architecturefoundation.org.uk/programme/2014/futures-in-themaking/future-of-architectural-education
Garland. (2014). In Withers, & Waldrop, Para-Academic Handbook (p. 77). Hammeron
Press.
Garrido, D. (2015, Jan 17). Principal AA Little Architect Programme. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Gownder, J. (2014, Januar 17). http://blogs.forrester.com. From
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables:
http://blogs.forrester.com/jp_gownder/14-01-17googles_smart_contact_lenses_extend_the_long_tail_of_wearables
Heidegger, M. (1968). What is Called Thinking? London: Harper & Row.
Higher Education Academy. (2012). AMarked Improvement: Transforming Assessment in
Higher Education.
Hodder, S. (2015, March 25). RIBA COUNCIL AGREES SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS TOWARDS
EDUCATION REFORM. Retrieved April 01, 2015 from
http://www.architecture.com/RIBA/Contactus/NewsAndPress/PressReleases/2015/RIB
ACouncilagreessignificantprogresstowardseducationreform.aspx
Hooks, B. (1994). Teaching to Transgress: Education as the Practice of Freedom. London:
Routledge.
363
GEMMA BARTON
http://visc.gov.lv/en. (2015, January 28). From http://visc.gov.lv/en/hobby/:
http://visc.gov.lv
http://www.healthcare.philips.com. (2014). From
http://www.healthcare.philips.com/main/about/future-of-healthcare/:
http://www.healthcare.philips.com
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov. (2014, September 5). From
http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/DataStatistics/FindDataByTopic/DentalCaries/DentalCariesAd
ults20to64.htm: http://www.nidcr.nih.gov
https://www.youtube.com. (n.d.). From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFydzXFcA-Y:
https://www.youtube.com
Hunter, W. (2015, Feb). Founder London School of Architecture. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Jones, J. C. (1992). Design methods. New York: John Wley&Sons, inc.
Joy, E. (2012). ‘Two Roads Diverged in a Yellow Wood, and I, I Took the One Less Travelled
By: Why I Resigned My Professorship’ In the Middle.
Jump, P. (2014, Sep 18). Priced out of Postgraduate Education. From Times Higher
Education: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/priced-out-ofpostgraduate-education/2015722.article
Lacan, J. (1988). The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book II: The Ego in Freud’s Theory and in
the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. (J.-A. Miller, Ed., & S. Tomaselli, Trans.) New
York: Norton.
Little Architect Programme. (n.d.). From Architecture Association:
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/VISITING/littlearchitect/
Lockwood, T. (2010). Design Thinking. New York: Allworth Press, DMI.
Marrs, C. (2015, Feb 02). Universities not equipping architecture students for the real
world. Retrieved Feb 02, 2015 from Architects Journal:
http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/report-universities-notequipping-architecture-students-for-real-world/8677848.article
Mootee, I. (2013). Design Thinking for Strategic Innovation. New Jersey: Wiley.
Moreno , K. (2014, March 3). http://www.forbes.com. From
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2014/03/25/the-67-people-as-wealthy-asthe-worlds-poorest-3-5-billion/
Neil Spiller, N. C. (2014). Educating Architects: How Tomorrow's Practitioners will Learn
Today. Thames & Hudson.
Oakeshott, M. (2001). The Voice of Liberal Learning. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
RIBA to hold Education Reform Meeting. (n.d.). From RIBA:
http://www.architecture.com/RIBA/Aboutus/Whoweare/RIBACouncil/RIBAtoholdeduca
tionreformmeeting.aspx
Rittel, H. (1972). On the planning crisis: systems analysis of the first and second generation.
Bedriftsokonomen , 390-396.
Rolfe. (2014). Para-Academic handbook: A toolkit for making-learning-creating-acting. In
Withers, & Waldrop. Hammeron Press.
Sodha, S. (2015, Jan 11). It's time to reinvent what Universities must be. Retrieved Jan 16,
2015 from The Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/commentis
free/2015/jan/11/our-universities-must-adapt-modern-world
364
Architecture: Teaching the Future/The Future of Teaching
Sodha, S. (2015, Jan 18). Universities must place more emphasis on teaching quality.
Retrieved Jan 18, 2015 from The Guardian:
http://theguardian.com/theobserver/2015/jan/18/the-big-issue-university-educationfees-teaching-employers
Spiller, N. (2015, Jan 21). Dean Greenwich School of Architecture. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Stevens, G. (n.d.). A history of architectural education in the West. From
http://www.archsoc.com/kcas/Historyed.html
The Economist. (2009, November 17). Triple bottom line. It consists of three ps: profit,
people, planet. The Economist , p. http://www.economist.com/node/14301663.
Ulrich, K., & Epinger, S. (2004). Product Design and Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.
WAI THINK TANK. (2013). A Manifesto. Retrieved Jan, 2015 from WAI Think Tank:
http://www.waithinktank.com/filter/Manifesto/Narrative-Architecture-Manifesto
Wånggren, L., & Milatovic, M. (2014). Para-academic Handbook. Hammeron Press.
Watson, P. (2015, Jan 21). Founder Free School of Architecture. (G. Barton, Interviewer)
Wrigley, C., & Bucolo, S. (2013). Teaching New Product Development to Design Led
Innovation. DRS//CUMULUS 2013, 2nd International Conference for Design Education
Researchers (pp. 1843-1855). Oslo: DRS//Cumulus.
365
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and
Pleasure
Miguel NAVARRO-SANINT*, Lina M. ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, Carolina ROJASCESPEDES and Annelie FRANKE
Universidad de los Andes
*mi-navar@uniandes.edu.co
Abstract: The Design Challenges are learning activities for design students. The
students (either in teams or individually) receive different briefs according to the
topic and follow a Design Thinking approach to solve a design task in 24 hours.
So far 6 different topics have been part of the Design Challenges: Wiring,
Illustration, Viral, Builders, Junk and Type. Each one of these Challenges will be
presented on this paper, focusing on the method, the brief and the outcome.
After more than 10 challenges, with a total participation of around 400 students,
we expose the advantages of group work in a challenging environment, and the
results of keeping the pressure during a design project. We also present the
possibilities of these kinds of dynamics when creating learning environments and
supporting learning communities.
Keywords: design, challenges, learning, communities
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
What are the Design Challenges?
The Design Challenges are learning environments where students discover the role of
media in design projects. Each Design Challenge focuses on a different design topic, and
creates a space for students to explore a full loop in the design process starting from
observing and understanding the situation proposed by a given brief, and ending in a
working prototype that manifests their design idea.
The origins
The Design Challenges started on 2011 at the Universidad de Los Andes as the result of
a bachelor degree final project that presented an approach for learning interaction, design
thinking and media, based on closed briefs and short times, to design and build tangible
interactive prototypes using the Wiring platform (Wiring. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26,
2015, from http://www.wiring.org.co).
Wiring Challenges were designed as a learning experience around interactive media,
with the purpose of supporting and contributing to learning and creative environments;
not only by immersing participants in a short design process using closed briefs, but also by
spreading knowledge and building a community around these explorations of interactive
media in art and design.
Since 2011, more than 6 Wiring challenges have been developed at the Universidad de
Los Andes, in which more than 200 students, supported by the Wiring Challenges team,
explored interactive media. Participants spent around 24 hours together designing and
building tangible interactive prototypes based on different topics that seek to enhance or
enrich the experience of the educational community in different places of the campus.
As an outcome of those experiences it was possible to understand that the challenges
were a perfect excuse to enable teamwork relationships -building community- and to
enhance skills and understanding of a medium in design.
The above, considering that the experience of the challenges should be lived during
short time periods to keep the working pressure and to get early and fast iterations in
research, ideation and prototyping stages. Thus, students not only designed and built a
physical and functional prototype in each Challenge but also learned, shared and had fun
living this experience.
With this background and because of particular interests of the Department of Design
of the Universidad de Los Andes, in 2013 emerged the idea of creating other challenges
using the same principles of its origin -creating learning communities and keeping the
pressure in short time projects- Illustration, Viral, Builders, Junk and Type were added to
the challenges to involve new students and participants through different design media by
spending a night together to develop plenty of interesting and fun design projects.
The background
From these previous experiences emerged the framework of the Design Challenges,
composed by three important concepts: pressure, motivation and learning communities, in
a creative practice environment. We consider that these three concepts are essential in
any design project.
367
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
We can agree that every design practitioner has felt the pressure produced by the
apparently or not unlimitedness of creativity that is only restricted by time. Some authors
have already studied the impact of pressure in creative working environments (Amabile et
al., 1996; Gutnick et al., 2012). Both, Amabile et al. and Gutnick et al., recognize a
difference between two different kinds of pressure:'excessive workload pressure' and
'challenge'. The first one being recognized as having a negative impact on creativity, and
the second one as having a positive impact on creativity. According to Amabile et al.
(1996), the pressure that is perceived as a 'challenge' in the workplace has a positive
influence on motivation and creativity, contrary to 'excessive workload pressure' that
diminishes creativity by bringing up the pressure to an undesirable level. In these
challenging situations, pressure is perceived as ‘a necessary concomitant of an important,
urgent project’ (p. 1162). It is this ‘urgent, intellectually challenging nature of the problem
itself’ that sets the conditions for the situation to the perceived as a challenge (p. 1161).
Some other authors have also studied the role of pressure in learning environments.
Although they use the word 'stress' instead of 'pressure', they partially refer to the same
concept if we consider stress as ‘an individual's psychological response to a situation [that]
taxes or exceeds the individual's capacity or resources’ (LePine et al., 2004, p. 883).
LePine et al. (2004) established that stress can have a positive relation with motivation
in learning situations. They expose two different perceptions of stress, being the first
'challenging-beneficial', associated to a high motivation to learn; and the second
'threatening-harmful', associated to a low motivation to learn. If during the learning
process the learner identifies the challenging situation as positive and changeable, he
invests more resources and effort, directing his behavior and increasing the intensity and
persistence towards learning (LePine et al., 2004). The main risk in this process is that
students start to feel that their resources are depleted, resulting in a lack of energy, and
entering into a state of exhaustion (p. 884). When students enter into this state their
motivation diminishes and therefore their learning performance also decreases (p.884).
However, some authors have explored the implications of the basic concepts of the
Design Challenges in learning situations, it is important to remark that, even if there is few
documentation in literature around the exact topic of learning design spaces under
pressure (or Design Challenges), there have been some practical explorations around it.
The 'Research Derby' of Favaro et al. (2013) is defined as a pressure cooker for creative
and collaborative science. Different groups of researchers meet to compete around a
research challenge related to 'ecology and evolution'. At the end, the best research project
wins. Favaro et al. define two key aspects of these challenges: (i) a maximum amount of 4
researchers on each group, between junior and senior members, making clear that they
will all have the same influence in the group and that they have to be open for all ideas; (ii)
time has to be less than what participants think they need. The authors concluded that this
pressure cooker environment can result on stressful group dynamics because people who
had never worked together had to quickly converge into a team detonating role conflicts
due to role ambiguity. This finding is consistent with LePine et al. (2004) affirmation of a
negative relation between stress associated to group dynamics and performance.
Also, the Design Council has explored with a similar kind of projects, under the same
name that we use: 'Design Challenges'. The Design Council works with partners to identify
a challenge. Then, they create an open 'Call for Ideas', on the search for better solutions
through better design products and services. Based on that they select the best teams and
368
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
finance and support them, so they can achieve a real social impact. The outcome is then
monitored and measured to have feedback about the real impact. In their approach time
pressure is not a key aspect (Design Challenges. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/design-challenges).
Similarly, The Real World Design Challenge (RWDC) in the USA is an annual competition
that convokes high school students to create teams and face a real challenge that leading
industries also face. Each team can find on the website and on their mentors a set of
resources that gives them the necessary resources to go through the design process. At the
end, the results are judged and the best solutions are selected to earn a prize (Real World
Design Challenge. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.realworlddesignchallenge.org/).
In both cases the challenge arises, as defined by Amabile et al. (1996, p. 1161), from
the challenging conditions of the problematic situation itself. The Design Council and the
RWDC work as a leaders/mentors that support the different teams, reducing pressure.
Likewise, The Museum of Science in Boston has workshops that introduce visitors in
engineering design cycles by creating learning spaces of participation in which visitors
design, build and test a prototype that responds to a given problem. They present these
Design Challenges as being a fun and engaging experience (Museum of Science, Boston.
(n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from http://legacy.mos.org/designchallenges/). Here
challenges are used as motivating and creative learning environments (LePine et al., 2004).
The Challenges
We can argue then that well managed pressure in the form of a challenge, can impact
positively on motivation, creativity and learning performance in a fun and engaging
environment. This supports our definition of the Design Challenges as creative and
motivating learning environments where students can explore diverse media through
design projects.
In the same way, an essential goal of the Design Challenge is the support of learning
communities in the bachelor program of design and in related networks, e.g., the Wiring
Community; assuming that those learning communities can generate in the students more
engagement and a higher intellectual and social development. Correspondingly, this would
reflect on more time and effort dedicated to academic and educational goals and more
responsibility towards their own learning, impacting on the student experience and his
grades and lowering the risk of student desertion (Zhao and Kuh, 2004, p. 124). To achieve
this, we recognize the importance of creating a feeling of identity with the different
practices of the learning community, paired with the assurance of the reproduction cycle
of the community by integrating old students with new students so that they can exchange
their knowledge and learn from each other (Jonassen and Land, 2000).
We define several conditions as basic to every Design challenge:
As initial conditions:
Any student of the Bachelor in Design can register, even if there is a priory on the
registration of first year students, this way we ensure the reproduction cycle of the
learning community.
369
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
The challenge is free for every student who wants to participate. The only expense is
from buying materials that will be used during the challenge.
Each student and guide receives a bracelet of a distinctive color with the name of the
challenge in which he is participating to achieve the above mentioned feeling of
identity.
All the challenges start in the afternoon and end in the afternoon of the next day, this
gives the students the night for working when there is less risk of exhaustion as a
consequence of pressure: at the beginning of the challenge.
During the project development:
Some roles are predefined: the role of the guide and the role of the student. Each
Challenge has two or more guides who are in charge of giving the initial instructions
and keeping the pace of the design process. Each guide works as a leader who brings
‘informational and emotional support’ (Grutnick et al., 2012, p. 196), and brings his
knowledge to reduce stress and keep the feeling of 'challenge' in each student or
group of students, keeping motivation and creativity, e.g. During the Wiring
Challenge there is a team of experienced designers and engineers balancing the
technological complexity of the challenge.
The students are not pushed to work and can work at their own pace as long as they
respect some key moments when they have to show the state of the project.
Food is provided during the challenge to support the work of the students.
The result:
The challenges are not graded.
There is no requisite for the quality of the outcome. The final outcome is not judged.
At the end of each challenge a certificate of participation is handed in to each
participant. These certificates strengthen the feeling of support from the university
towards the students and recognize their work.
Based on this we present 6 Design Challenges with a wide range of topics. The Wiring
Challenge focuses on new media and information, the Type Challenge on creating personal
symbols and individual characters, the Illustration Challenge centers on imagery and
storytelling, the Junk Challenge centers on materials and reuse, the Builders Challenge
focuses on structures and team work, and the Viral Challenge on replicability of
unconventional ideas. All these challenges had a considerable participation of students
with a total of 154 participants in 2014, from a total of around 1000 students registered on
the design bachelor program (Table 1).
Table 1
Number of participants per Design Challenge session.
Builders Challenge
Illustration Challenge
Junk Challenge
Type Challenge
Viral Challenge
Wiring Challenge
TOTAL
April 2013
0
0
0
0
0
94
94
September 2013
45
24
0
40
0
20
129
370
March 2014
30
25
40
0
30
29
154
TOTAL
75
49
40
40
30
143
377
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Wiring Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This challenge introduces students to the use of new technologies and new media in
interaction and experience design.
Each team of 5 students had to observe, analyse and propose an information system on
which interactive media is an essential part. Then, each team had to use Wiring
(wiring.org.co) to make a tangible element that exposed emotions present in a specific
context of the university. For that each team had to identify an emotion that was already
expressed in the context and use it as the input for the proposed information system, and
then define a coherent emotion to use it as the outcome of the system.
T HE METHOD
At the start of the challenge, the guides presented a basic amount of theory to the
students to introduce them to new media and basic programming (Figure 1). Then the
brief was presented to the students to start with the design process.
Figure 1
Initial presentation at the Wiring Challenge Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2013).
Teamworking
First, the students constituted 3 teams of 5 students. This happened naturally and
without hesitation, anyway, it was just a short project with no long term consequences. All
the teams had students from different profiles. Even if all of them were part of the design
bachelor program, some of them were also part of the computer engineering; some of
them were in first year and some of them were in four (last) year.
Identify & observe
Then, each team of students had to identify and observe a context of their choice
where, according to them, they could find interesting emotions that could be revealed.
371
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
Using bodystorming (Martin et al., 2012) the students understood the emotions and
experiences where those emotions arise. In the same way, the students had to use
bodystorming to explore the different emotions that could be coherent with the input
emotion and the context. This process was supported by video recording to create a video
scenario (Binder, 1999) that exposed the expected experience and the behavior of the
information system. Based on this video scenario, each team explored the possibilities that
the different sensors gave them for expressing emotions. Correspondingly, the students
had to choose the actuators that could be used to express the emotion that they chose
before as the output emotion. Apart from the video scenario that was used to
communicate the experience and behavior, the students used diagrams to represent the
relation between the input emotion and the output emotion. These two elements (video
scenario and diagrams) were the basis for the communication between the design team
and their guides.
Build
Figure 2
Building the final protoype Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2015).
The guides, experienced designers and engineers, helped the students to build the
circuit and the code that was going to be used to transform the input into output; and to
create the working prototype (Figure 2). Finally, the team of students recorded another
video scenario with the final working prototype. This video was presented to the other
teams as a closing activity.
T HE OUTCOME
Most of the teams managed to have a working prototype at the end of the challenge: a
vibrating computer screen that reacts to the stress of the student during a computer based
372
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
exam (more stress equals more vibration), and a couple of lamps for cafeteria tables that
expresses the emotion of loneliness when nobody is on the table and the emotion of
warmth when someone is there; with a script that compares the table with more people to
trigger the one with less people to call for attention. These lamps were later presented in
an exhibition of students’ projects at the university.
Type Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This Challenge was a part of the cooperation project FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS, a
collaborative exploration of visual language that unites students, teachers, scholars, and
ideas from 6 cities across 4 continents. All participating academic partners come from
design or art schools and share the thrive to teach visual literacy, which is based on the
idea that pictures, in the broadest sense, can be read and communicate meaning through
the process of reading. (FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS, 2014)
This Challenge had a previous introduction, the day before the challenge dynamic,
where the guides presented to the students some theory related to the project to
contextualize the students. Based on the Phaistos Disk the purpose of the workshop was to
develop in 24 hours a character string composed by 45 symbols that have to do with a
‘personal reality’. Existential themes such as body, life, society, politics, culture were
starting points for the development of symbols (Franke, 2014), e.g. 45 symbols to explain
to an alien complexity of our world, 45 symbols describing the origin of humanity
beginning with Adam and Eve, 45 symbols to define discrimination, etc.
The Phaistos disk could be used as a source of inspiration from the meanings and
descriptions of the 45 symbols embedded on the disc. Similarly, it was also possible to
move away from the disc and seek other sources of inspiration.
T HE METHOD
Within two days the students researched and discussed the 45 symbols looking forward
to create their own interpretation and finally design a private set of symbols. This process
was divided into three steps:
Define
Professor Olivier Arcioli of the Academy of Media Arts in Cologne Germany gave a brief
theoretical overview of the Phaistos disk and visual codes and its communication, which
showed the context in which the students had to be dealing with.
Explore
The 45 symbols matrix shows interpretations of each symbol and suggests questions to
ask in order to define the meaning for the chosen entity. The output at this point was a list
of words and no visualizations yet. There were no right or wrong answers; it really
depended on the working group and personal background. The output was a set of
brainstormed words for each of the 45 symbols in relation to the entity.
After figuring related words the students had to draw with black ink their own symbol
for each word. Aproximately 700 symbols occurred and were stocked to the wall and
discussed.
373
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
Visualize
Figure 3
Students working on their symbols. Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2013)
The students designed 45 symbols following the meaning and answers created in the
step before (Figure 3). The symbols should have the same voice and tone in order to create
a connected set of icons.
T HE OUTCOME
The workshop concluded with the development of a set of very individual and free
characters, using signs, notations, letters, graphic shapes, photographs and means of
artistic expression.
At the end of the two days the students designed more than 1500 Symbols that were
hung up and discussed at the design department. The entire process was published at
Designblogs of Universidad de los Andes and on the 45 Symbols platform.
After the workshop some students improved their 45 symbols in their Typography class
until they became a symbol family. Based on this symbols the objective was to bring them
into 3-dimensions for an exhibition which took part in Cologne in KunstStation Sankt Peter
in Germany in June 2014, also resulting into improved symbols that were later part of a
publication of the Forty Five Symbols Project (FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS, 2014)
Illustration Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This challenge focuses on developing contents of publications through clear a
convincing storytelling by using imagery and representative illustrations. By the end of the
374
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
challenge the students had to create a Fanzine style publication (Pawson, M. Comic & Zine
Reviews.); the result of expressing the sensibilities within an aesthetic and thematic field.
The Zine prototype (an autonomous and versatile mean) includes design, production and
finishing within a practical mean of expression that includes analog and digital media for
drawing, layouts, printing and putting together the publication that was distributed at the
end of the challenge.
T HE METHOD
Introduction
After introducing the main themes that are necessary for the challenge, e.g. illustration
as a narrative technique for short stories and fanzines as a coherent editorial support for
illustrated contents, the guide explained the proper theoretical and practical tools that
provided the necessary vision for a proper development in every stage of the challenge.
Development
The process began with the definition of the topics and the creation of the contents
that would make part of the publication. For this purpose, the students came up with
some questions to produce some ideas as answers to those questions. These
interrogations had no limit; it could be something platonic, fantastical, magical, illogical,
complex or simple, e.g. Why does the earth tremble? Why is the sky blue? What is the
purpose of silence? Why do cats purr? From a metalogue point of view, not only the
problem itself was discussed, but the whole structure that surrounds it, so it became a
great support in the process.
According to Gregory Bateson (Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind:
Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. University of
Chicago Press.) the metalogue or meta-dialogue is a dialogue about dialogue itself (analog
to meta-language), meaning that it is a communication form where implicitly and maybe
explicitly, it talks about how we communicate, while at the same time some other of the
author's matters for concern are being discussed. In an analogous manner to the platonic
dialogue and the renaissance colloquium, the metalogue is a combination of rhetoric and
didactics, which seeks to make a certain topic comprehensible in a dynamic way.
Storytelling
After the questioning phase, the students formulated the topics. They developed the
story's narrative for each publication. To do so, an answer must be given to each question
through the publication itself taking its format into account, i.e. that if it was an eight-fold
sheet, the questions must be answered in eight steps, but if the format is booklet style
with sixteen pages, the story is told in those sixteen frames.
In some cases, only one answer was recorded, so the student distributed the
corresponding story according to that sole question using the different available spaces in
the publication. In other cases, the student proposed several answers that were resolved
in each page or fold of the sheets.
Illustrate and visualize
After creating the story the media type the students defined the format, the technique
and the materials that were coherent with the essence of the stories and the
375
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
characteristics of the exercise; immediacy and quality of fluency were needed for these
academic challenges.
Once the narrative concluded, and the format was selected, the students had the task
to illustrate the proposed situations. For this purpose, they worked analog techniques that
involved the use of precision methods, e.g. ink, technical pens and markers, and worked
using only one color ink (black), so that at the end the printing would be at a low cost and
easily reproduced in black and white.
Build
After finishing the illustrations, the participants continued with the technical
digitalization process, with the purpose of touching up and refining their designs as well as
making a layout that follows the narrative logic for each page.
At the end the layout process, editorial design, and other components along with the
corresponding printing and paper selection tests, according to the proper quality needed
in the printing and folding of the expected publication, were finalized. The design process
for the publications was completed, followed by its reproduction and distribution to each
person involved in the challenge.
T HE OUTCOME
Each student completed the design of Illustrated fanzine style publication that
answered to the challenge of creating a story, drawing, touching up, printing and puting
together an individual edition. They experienced the work role in its entirety, learning to
make decisions, manage techniques and proper linking of analog and digital media,
enabling them to visualize different possibilities, build images and create a publication
quickly and diligently.
The exercise contributes to an interesting insight on producing an illustrated book using
experimental formats and published independently, important topics to those interested
on this media. Likewise, this practice has helped to understand the essence of illustration,
the meaning of interpretation and the dynamic of working with multiple purposes of
communication.
Viral Challenge
T HE BRIEF
This challenge explores different topics around branding, consumer experiences,
communication strategies, etc. The challenge was to explore the idea of the 'cell concept',
creating a tangible representation that spreads through a network; following principles of
'guerrilla marketing' (Levinson, 2007): low cost, easy replicability and use of
unconventional channels.
T HE METHOD
After a short presentation of the key concepts and a wide range of references the
students were asked to create groups, and explore different topics of interest and the
available possibilities of intervention by observing and analyzing different contexts. Then,
after some small tests of their concepts, the students planed and executed a bigger
intervention.
376
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
T HE OUTCOME
Each team of students intervened a different physical or virtual space. Some of the viral
interventions took place on twitter and were supported by people outside the challenge,
other interventions were on the physical space of campus intervening sculptures, stairs,
elevators, etc.
Builders Challenge
T HE BRIEF
Create together a structure based on folded cardboard. The cardboard structure had to
be modular and had to sustain itself. The final result had to be a combination of different
modules created by different participants.
T HE METHOD
This Challenge started with a presentation of collaborative structure for public spaces,
followed by a short introduction into folded paper structures.
Each student had to use these bases to create scaled models of structures using paper.
The students had a restriction on the initial shape, meaning that each structure had the
same amount of polygons, having all of them a different shape, but keeping the proportion
between all the different creations. Subsequently, the students selected some structures
to build together a scaled model by connecting them.
The following step consisted on a collective creation of the structure. All the students
built a real size structure using cardboard.
T HE OUTCOME
All the students together built a structure made out of cardboard. This resulting
cardboard structure was self-supported although not so stable, with five pillars and a roof
that could shelter all the participants. The structure was finally assembled in an open space
of the university's campus.
Junk Challenge
T HE B RIEF
This Challenge was based on the reuse of junk, extending their function or altering it
completely to create new objects. Each group of students had to create a lighting device
using the available junk that the integrants of the group brought to the workshop.
T HE METHOD
Each group started by an exploration of the concept of the lighting device that they
were planing to build. Each student produced a considerable amount of drawings that
could respond to the brief. The guides helped the students to express their ideas giving
advices and exploring technical ways of communicating their ideas, and pushing the
students to explore more concepts. Afterwards, the students explored in groups the
possibilities of the junk they had for building one of the creations that they had previously
drawn. During this construction the guides helped with crafting abilities to achieve a final
prototype, resulting from the conversation of the students' idea and the affordances of the
377
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
junk in a process similar to the one exposed by N. Frishberg (2007) with the concept of
junk prototyping.
T HE OUTCOME
The outcome was a wide range of lighting devices that used shades, reflection and
refraction to play with light using hacked junk in a wide variety; from hanging lamps, to
lighting water fountains.
What did we learn?
Among the challenges we recognized 3 different kinds of work:
The Illustration and the Type Challenges requested mostly individual work from the
students. The Junk and the Builders Challenge used mixed dynamics between individual
and group work, starting with individual work that was then joined as a source for
inspiration to produce team work. The Viral and the Wiring Challenges requested the work
to be done by teams.
In all the cases the difference between working in teams or working alone was
noticeable. In some cases, like the Type Challenge, even if the outcome was relevant and
the students were proud of what they achieved, some of the students did not work until
the end of the challenge and abandoned during the night because of exhaustion. In
contrast, when the students worked in teams, pressure was a reason to trust on their
colleagues. The students started a dynamic of passing the pressure to the more capable
one of facing it at that moment. This could be essential for supporting learning
communities on the design program as it creates links between students that could be
extended to other practices.
Also, we recognized two different approaches to each challenge in terms of time and
pressure. Some of the challenges had a 9 hour break for going home and sleeping, some
other challenges did not. This marked a difference between keeping the pressure during
the process and releasing it for some time. In the case of individual work, keeping the
pressure diminished creativity and motivation; in that case a long break during the night
could avoid exhaustion allowing the students to maintain their learning motivation. In
contrast, in the case of group work, keeping the pressure works because the students rely
on each other and share their resources avoiding exhaustion and keeping group
motivation and creativity.
In a context of pressure, exhaustion is really likely to happen, specially when working
straight during 24 hours. Group/team work is essential for facing each challenge. When
one of the group members looses all his resources, another team member comes up to
replace him. In contrast, during the Type Challenge, a considerable amount of students
abandoned the challenge during the process because of exhaustion as there was no team
member to support the work.
378
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Figure 4
Student wearing several bracelets from different years. Source: M. Navarro-Sanint (2015)
But, this team dynamic has also other implications apart from supporting in case of
exhaustion, it can also strengthen the community. Many students still wear their bracelet
identifying themselves as part of the community. Above that, from all the participants, 29
students participated in at least 2 different Challenges (Figure 4), this shows an interest
from some of the students for participating in these dynamics. Even if this is not a clear
proof that the Design Challenges are supporting learning communities, we understand
these as indicators of interest from the students towards complementary academic
activities, that could evidence the existence of a learning community around the
Challenges. If we take into account that the participation of students in out-of-class
activities creates connections with affinity groups of peers and that this is important for
‘student retention, success and personal development’ (Zhao and Kuh, 2004, p. 116), these
Design Challenges could increase the integration of students to the university and reduce
student desertion.
Likewise, the presence of students from different years of the design program created
an interesting dynamic when working in teams. The less experienced students had support
from more experienced practitioners and had the chance to learn from them, not only
from their specific design abilities, but also from their ability to face pressure and to deal
with the uncertainty of a design process.
In the same way, each Challenge builds on the experience of the participants so they
feel that they have enough knowledge to face the challenge. In case that they do not have
the required knowledge, some assistants are available, e.g. the inability to program on
Wiring is compensated by the Wiring Team, an experienced group of designers and
engineers that helps the students to write the code. This prevents the students from
seeing the proposed challenge as a threat, risking motivation and creativity.
We also identified that quality pressure is stated by the students among them even if
the Challenges guides did not established any quality requirements. A sort of competition
arises between the different teams and between the students, when working individually.
379
M NAVARRO-SANINT, L ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, C ROJAS-CESPEDES & A FRANKE
This competition leads to an improvement off the quality. Likewise, students also try to
give the best of themselves just because of the challenging context, without any need for
imposing a quality standard to the outcome. Time pressure in a challenging context and
competition seems to generate an increase on the quality.
These Design Challenges have produced many interesting dynamics and might been
transforming the design community of the Universidad de los Andes. We consider that
these challenge dynamics can also work with students coursing master programs and that
these would enrich a lot more the team dynamic. With the participation of private
companies, the Design Challenges could also be a good source for innovation in other
contexts as they can be a source for generation of creative ideas in short periods of time.
Acknowledgments: Thank you to all the students who participated in the
Design Challenges and all the teachers and voluntaries who guided the
challenges. Thanks to all the supporters for making these challenges a reality
every year.
References
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work
environment for creativity. Academy of management journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
Antolinez Benavidez, L. M. (2011). Wiring challenges.
Design Challenges. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/design-challenges
Martin, B., Hanington, B., & Hanington, B. M. (2012). Universal methods of design: 100
ways to research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective
solutions. Rockport Pub.
Binder, T. (1999, May). Setting the stage for improvised video scenarios. In CHI'99
extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 230-231). ACM.
Favaro, B., & Braun, D. C. (2013). The ‘Research Derby’: A pressure cooker for creative and
collaborative science. Ideas in Ecology and Evolution, 6(1).
Franke, A. (2014, February 19). Tipografía Experimental. Retrieved May 11, 2015, from
http://designblog.uniandes.edu.co/blogs/dise2607/category/type-challenge/
Frishberg, N. (2006). Prototyping with junk. interactions, 13(1), 21-23.
FORTY FIVE SYMBOLS. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from http://45symbols.com
Gutnick, D., Walter, F., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. (2012). Creative performance under
pressure an integrative conceptual framework. Organizational Psychology Review, 2(3),
189-207.
Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments.
Museum of Science, Boston. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://legacy.mos.org/designchallenges/
LePine, J. A., LePine, M. A., & Jackson, C. L. (2004). Challenge and hindrance stress:
relationships with exhaustion, motivation to learn, and learning performance. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 89(5), 883.
Levinson, J. C. (2007). Guerrilla Marketing: Easy and Inexpensive Strategies for Making Big
Profits from Your SmallBusiness. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
380
Design Challenges: Learning Between Pressure and Pleasure
Real World Design Challenge. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from
http://www.realworlddesignchallenge.org/
Wiring. (n.d.). Retrieved February 26, 2015, from http://www.wiring.org.co
Zhao, C. M., & Kuh, G. D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student
engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115-138.
381
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Philip REITSPERGER*, Monika HESTAD and John O’REILLY
Central Saint Martins College of Arts and Design
*mail@philipreitsperger.com
Abstract: The term Design Thinking has been given increasingly more attention
in existing and forthcoming MBA postgraduate courses. The paradigm set is that
management students will profit from practices used in design by approaching
management problems like design problems. Design Thinking, however, still
seems to be an enigmatic concept, in which attention is clearly focused on
‘designing for non-designers’ notably in management education rather than in
design education. As it is likely there is applicability of Design Thinking in both
management and design education, this paper investigates interviews with
students with design background from MA Innovation Management at Central
Saint Martins London, a course at the boundaries of both fields, and how they
received Design Thinking during their education. With Interpretative
Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) the authors identified four emerging fields: (I) a
shift of ownership in a plurality of interpretations, (II) a shift in self-interpretation
between creative and/or analytical mind-sets, (III) a common language shared
by several discourses, and (IV) the importance of exploration and pace. The
results of the interviews are reconnected to the body of literature around Design
Thinking and illustrate insights about the possible positions of designers in a
non-design specific context.
Keywords: design thinking, innovation management, learning experience,
phenomenology
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Introduction
In reaction to an ever more complex world in which organisations have to navigate an
opaque and uncertain environment the term Design Thinking has been given increasingly
more attention as a promising way to engage with the future (Berger, 2009; Brown, 2008;
Martin, 2009; Neumeier, 2009; Lockwood, 2010; Hobday, Boddington, and Grantham,
2011 and 2012). Opposing the paradigm of analytical scientific thinking (Golsby-Smith,
2007), Design Thinking was implemented in organisations, businesses and eventually
education; especially in existing and forthcoming MBA and MA postgraduate courses of
the past five years (Dunne and Martin 2006; Glen, Suciu and Baughn, 2014; Kimbell in
Cooper, Junginger, and Lockwood, 2011; Hestad and Brassett, 2013; Wastell, 2014). This
has led to an increased interest in how designers are educated to think, as this seems
particularly relevant to organisations that seek to change their long and short-term
strategies for developing new products and services (Vogel, 2009 p. 17). The premise is
that management students will profit from practices and behaviours used in design within
a decision-making context through three principal means. Firstly, in the perspective of
frame creation through the investigation of themes (Dorst, 2011). Secondly, by adding
design practices of observation, collaboration, visualisation, rapid concept and prototype
development to already existing management practices (Lockwood, 2010). Thirdly, in a
process-focused aspect by which managers approach management problems the same
way designers approach design problems (Dunne and Martin, 2006).
As it is likely that there is applicability of Design Thinking in both management and
design education, understanding students’ experiences of engaging with Design Thinking
holds insightful implications for developing a curriculum between the edges of
management and design. Design students today are confronted with a constant shift of
their theoretical as well as professional practices (Yee, Jefferies and Tan, 2013); concepts
and approaches taught in the environment of universities become as quickly obsolete as
the short period in which an MA course passes. The recent development of design in
moving to a more strategic foundation for business indicates that future
design practitioners will work in a distinctive different setting than what
designers experience today. This means that people involved in the disciplines of Design
Thinking, especially those with design backgrounds, have to have a vision of where they
need to dissolve between their craft based and theoretical skills, push through edges, and
where to regroup and reorder in new emerging forms (Brassett, 2013b, p. 7).
In order to explore the dynamic of Design Thinking a good model for the study of such
boundaries is the MA Innovation Management course at Central Saint Martins London,
which is situated between MBA and Design Management programmes (Brassett 2013a,
p.16). The course has several distinctive elements. First, the student cohorts are composed
from diverse professional and cultural backgrounds creating multidisciplinary teams for
student projects; second, its unique location in an art and design college influences its
design-driven approach as well as its practitioners who study in a community working and
learning environment similar to notions of the ‘design studio' (Lawson and Dorst, 2009, p.
224-250); third, its curriculum is designed to allow students to develop their
theoretical and practical skills in an interplay of tasks; and fourth, the recognition of Sir
George Cox’s definition of innovation from 2005: the successful exploitation of new ideas
(cited in Brassett, 2013a, p. 13) allows students to explore innovation beyond the
383
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
generation of profits and new revenues. Design Thinking, among others, is taught and
developed during the course and defined as: ‘an integral part of working as an innovation
manager (Hestad et al., 2013, p. 2033)26.
This paper’s concern with Design Thinking is therefore to show how students with
design background in the course of MA Innovation Management give meaning to Design
Thinking in its particular applicability in a course composed from various actors and
various professions. First, the paper provides a short overview in the from of a literature
review of perspectives on Design Thinking to set the stage, second, it describes in a
phenomenological study the students’ and their peers’ experiences with Design Thinking.
With Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) the authors identified four emerging
themes: (I) a shift of ownership in a plurality of interpretations, (II) a shift in selfinterpretation between creative and/or analytical mind-sets, (III) a common language
shared by several discourses, and (IV) the importance of exploration and time in the
process. Finally, the findings of the interviews are reconnected to the body of literature
around Design Thinking and illustrate insights about the possible positions of designers in a
non-design specific context.
Design Thinking – Ownership From Various Perspectives
Students today encounter Design Thinking from two points of origin, namely
management and design. In these two perspectives several, sometimes opposing,
discourses declare ownership of the term; the consequence is that Design Thinking is
received as an enigmatic concept with various meanings that allow different definitions
and viabilities. Johansson-Sköldberg, Woodilla, and Çetinkaya (2013) showed in their
comprehensive discourse analysis on the literature of Design Thinking that the ambiguity
of approaches is a result of the multifaceted meanings of design itself and the missing
connection of managerial Design Thinking to design theory, or what they call ‘designerly
thinking’. Throughout the past six decades design has been conceptualised from various
perspectives: (I) as a human activity – changing existing situations into preferred ones
(Simon, 1996, p. 111), (II) as an iterative reflective practice and profession (Schön, 1983),
(III) as a liberal art concerned with ‘wicked-problems’ (Buchanan, 1992), (IV) as
an individual approach of designers yet with certain recurrent themes (Lawson and Dorst,
2009), (V) as a matter of meaning creation (Krippendorff, 2006) and in means of innovation
in the business context (Verganti, 2008).
Additionally to these epistemological different perspectives on design JohanssonSköldberg et al. (2013) identify distinctive approaches on Design Thinking from the
26
The course focuses on the need to develop professionals, who have the ability to analyse critically,
synthesise creatively and successfully manage innovation. The first Unit emphasises working in
teams on projects that are collaborative, culturally and experientially diverse, to build a foundation
of knowledge and skills that are needed in Innovation Management. In the second Unit each student
undertakes a major, self-directed research project in form of a 15,000 - word dissertation, which
includes a 15-week filed-research activity with a host organisation outside of the university. Through
this students have the opportunity to develop their creative and technical capabilities, the
presentation of themselves and their work, the realisation of projects or goals; as well as more
intangible attributes such as confidence, sense of personal direction, understanding of their values
and own motivations (Brassett, 2013a, pp.16-19).
384
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
perspective of management that have accompanied the field and shape of the discourse.
First, Boland and Collopy's (2004) investigation of the ‘design attitude’ and its relevance for
management, second, the design company IDEO’s way of working and Tim Brown’s
description of the process bringing together desirability, viability, and feasibility
(Brown, 2008 and 2009), and third, Design Thinking as a necessary skill for practicing
managers of analytical qualities as well as intuitive originality in an interplay of tasks and as
an organisational resource (Dunne et al., 2006; Martin, 2009; Neumeier, 2008).
Design and Design Thinking therefore is a vast territory, which not only for students of
design and management is an arduous area to conquer. Due to MA Innovation
Management’s multi-disciplinary approach, students of the course can develop their own
understanding of Design Thinking and it relevancy to their practice. Therefore not one
approach but a plurality of interpretations is made accessible. As design practices shift and
evolve in direct response to market needs, the recent accelerated development has
allowed designers to contribute in a more strategic way to organisations as businesses
need to rethink how they engage with the world (Yee et al., 2013, p. 232) as well as
managers to declare ownership of design specific skills like visualisation and prototyping.
This has fostered a debate about what Design Thinking really is. Hestad et al. (2013) build
on Kimbell (2011) in concluding that a more differentiated perspective on Design Thinking
might be insightful: ‘[…] any ‘design thinking’ should not merely instruct in how to use a set
of prescribed techniques or methods, but should be open to both a range and depth of
situated intellectual and practical acts.’ Design Thinking therefore, should be better
understood as not one but many approaches, used by various people with various
outcomes – a complex network students concerned about innovation have to navigate.
Design Thinking Meets its Critics
According to Martin, Design Thinking should be included in MBA education to change
management practice:
It [Design Thinking] means, first, getting MBAs to think in terms of projects where you
solve wicked problems using abductive reasoning, in addition to deductive and
inductive skills. Second, MBAs have to learn collaborative skills. They have to learn to
listen to other people and understand their reasoning process. […] Third, a great design
school would have the student go much, much deeper on understanding the user and
the user experience than we do in business schools. (cited in Dunne et al., 2006, p.
514)27
Most managerial Design Thinking conceptions today recall Herbert Simon’s normative
definition of design from 1969: ‘Everyone designs who devises courses of action aimed at
changing existing situations into preferred ones’ (1996, p.111). Simon’s definition
resonates very well with the practice of management as well as other practices and allows
a multitude of professionals especially form non-design background to join the field of
design. It is notable, however, that it took fifty years from Simon’s conceptions of design
27
Abduction is a form of reasoning first explicated by C. S. Pierce in generating a new hypothesis to
explain observed phenomena partly by guesswork or speculation. (Abduction. (2011). In The
Cambridge Encyclopedia of the Language Sciences. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge
University Press.)
385
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
until academic and popular management publications began to argue in favour of design’s
value; most of them missing elaboration of the meaning of expertise involved in the design
processes but showing a simplified and generic Design Thinking approach.
A number of articles and books stressed the issues of simplification of Design Thinking
in the managerial discourses (Brassett, 2013b, McCullagh, 2010, Nussbaum, 2013, Yee
et al., 2013). Moreover former advocates became more critical about Design Thinking.
Fred Collopy, co-author of the book Managing As Designing (Boland et al., 2004), stated: 'I
cannot help thinking that we are selling our ideas short given the momentum behind the
current choice of language. And I wonder, how much designing and/or thinking has
actually gone into ‘design thinking’’ (Collopy, fastcompany.com, 2015). Design Thinking
also meets critics in the design-community. Kevin McCullagh, founder of product strategy
consultancy Plan, argued for a more elaborated use of the approach. For McCullagh (2010,
p. 38) Design Thinking in a codified form is merely a design approach for non-designers
that might work well with managers but loses 'the pivotal importance of talent and
craft'. Banny Banerjee, founder and director of Stanford ChangeLabs, addresses these
power struggles between perspectives:
Design Thinking is certainly becoming democratized, and people with varying levels of
experience, talent, education and skills are using it with different levels of expertise.
However, complex challenges of difficult design tasks demand a level of expertise that
only comes with extensive training and experience. (cited in Yee et al. 2013, pp. 194195)
The problem might be rooted in design's simplified reputation as a problem solving
activity. According to Kees Dorst (2006, p. 10) design is a much more complex combination
of activities and cognitive processes. For Dorst fixed design problems do not exist at any
stage of the design process, but are a matter of a co-evolving process between problem
and solution that eventually fix in an emergent bridge between both. Thomas Lockwood
(2010, p.xi), past president of the Design Management Institute, defined Design Thinking
as an emerging human-centred innovation process that uses tools essential to the design
process: observation, collaboration, visualisation, rapid concept and prototype
development. Comparably, the authors and designers Ambrose and Harris (2009, p.12)
saw Design Thinking practiced by designers in seven stages: definition, research, ideation,
prototyping, selection, implementation, and learning. To perform and use these tools and
behaviours, however, a combination of mental processing and physical acts is required.
According to Lawson et al. (2009) design consists of several interlinked skills: formulating,
representing, moving, evaluating, and reflecting. Although the skills named here are
presented in a sequential way they fluently overlap and should not be seen as separable
from one another. In order to be effectively applied designers often need years to
develop and master them. Design Thinking is therefore, from the designer's point of view,
a network of experiences and embodiments of skills; a complex form of thinking in an
interplay of analysis, synthesis, reflection, and creativity leveraging inductive, deductive,
and abductive reasoning patterns. According to Bryan Lawson (2004, p. 84) this positions
the designer in a conversation with the situation. Lawson refers to Donald Schön’s
reflective practitioner (1983) arguing that Design Thinking may be conversational in
nature and therefore described it as a reflective conversation between problem and
solution in which actors, objects, practices and language constitute a temporarily reality.
386
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
Methodology
The thematic purpose of the research was to discover how students with design
background receive the concept of Design Thinking during their course at MA Innovation
Management. The methodological aim of the study was to use phenomenology and
further Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis; an approach especially relevant for
exploring in detail how participants make sense of their personal and social world from
qualitative psychology (Osborn and Smith in Smith 2008, p. 53). Kvala
defines phenomenology as:
‘[…] the sense of understanding a social phenomena from the actors’ own
perspectives, describing the worlds as experienced by the subjects, and with the
assumption that the important reality is what people perceive it to be.
[…] Phenomenology was founded by Husserl at the turn of the [last] century and
further developed as existential philosophy by Heidegger, and then in an existential
and dialectical direction by Sartre and by Merleau-Ponty'. (Kvala, 1996, p. 52)
The approach of IPA was chosen because at the time of the research the principal
author was himself a student of MA Innovation Management with design background and
had a unique position in investigating the theme. The process of IPA emphasises that the
research exercise is a dynamic process with an active role of the researcher who tries to
get close to the participants’ world to take an insider perspective (Smith et al., 2008, p.53).
This allowed the researcher to create links of the IPA study to his own professional and
educational experiences as well as to the extant literature around the research topic
(Smith et al., 2008, p.56). In that sense a two-stage interpretation process, or double
hermeneutic, was involved; participants made sense of their own world and the
researcher was trying to make sense of the participants trying to make sense (Smith et al.,
2008, p. 53).
At the time of the research two cohorts of students were studying at MA Innovation
Management involving about 25 people with design background. Eight interviews were
conducted; four with second and four with first year students. The interviewees came form
various cultural backgrounds: Australia, Columbia, England, Estonia, France,
the Netherlands, Norway and Thailand; as well as from various design professions: graphic
design, industrial design, design management, and architecture with different levels of
expertise. The small sample size of eight interviews in connection with IPA seemed
adequate since IPA aims to identify detailed accounts of the participants’ world in a
sufficiently defined group for which the research question is significant (Smith et al., p. 5556).
The semi-structured interviews included a sequence of themes covered and derived
from the literature review and the principal author’s experiences during his study. The first
set of questions for the interview were tested in a pilot interview – conducted to ensure
the ability of the interviewer to create a safe and stimulating environment (Kvale, 1996, p.
147; Wragg, 1973, p. 15) and were then constantly developed and adapted throughout the
process. In order to pay attention to ethical implications which arose during the interview
process for students and their learning environment (Kvale, 2007, p. 25-31) interviewees
were briefed about the purpose of the interviews and confidence was given as the
interviewees’ names were excluded and transcribed interviews were signed by the
participants before publication.
387
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
The interviews were recorded digitally and transcribed in a strict verbatim form by a
research assistant for two reasons. First, the cultural diversity and mixture of languages
involved affected the interviews, hence the protocols were used for clarification, and
second, IPA studies are concerned with the semantic level of texts, therefore all the words
spoken, significant pauses, laughs, chuckles and other significant features were
analysed (Smith et al. 2008, p.65).
IPA follows an inductive reasoning pattern and is not a prescriptive approach, however,
it provides a set of guidelines that can be adapted by the researcher to fit the relevant
research aims (Smith et al., 2008). The structure adopted in this study followed several
interlinked steps. Firstly, descriptive comments in a free textual analysis
were developed for each interview looking at explanations, emotional responses and
linguistic style. Secondly, interpretation of the descriptive comments led to emergent
theme titles that were sorted and connected in an analytical and theoretical ordering – this
process was continued through all eight interviews; and finally the convergences and
divergences in the data of all interviews were mapped which led to the identification of
master themes.
Results
The result section is organised in four interlinked themes emerging from the
interviews:
Identity/ownership in a plurality of interpretations.
Self-interpretation between a creative and/or analytical mind-set.
A common language through discourses.
The importance of exploration and pace.
Identity/ownership in a plurality of interpretations
The workshops in MA Innovation Management allow students to explore Design
Thinking as an approach of ‘learning by doing’. Intrinsic motivation is a precondition of the
course; the workshops aim to empower the students and give them the possibility to
explore and test their own assumptions, hence the students are not given any explicit
definition of Design Thinking. This leads to several interpretations and power struggles of
the participants.
The students observed that Design Thinking from a design, as well as from a
management perspective, was only a marginal topic in their prior education. Some
students encountered Design Thinking in management literature before the course;
however, most had no explicit knowledge about it and came in contact with Design
Thinking during the workshops the first time. Students with extended experience in design
before the course, connected Design Thinking closely to their own design approach and
perspective:
As a designer it's [Design Thinking] something that I've been doing all my life. […] Now
after reading these books I realise that you can show this to other industries so they
can be more creative and think outside the box.
Other participants perceived Design Thinking in a more differentiated manner. Some
students saw it as a possibility to combine their craft-based design skills with more
388
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
strategic and social skills. One participant described the course as offering her the option
to explore the approach beyond its ‘commercial’ orientation as a ‘deeper concept’ –
showing her hope of discovery for a redefinition. All participants clearly reflected,
however, that having a design education is beneficial in order to meaningfully make use of
the approach. This reflected the positive attitude of all participants and how they see their
involvement in the discourse of innovation:
I think we [designers] can do everything, we are open minded and creative, we can
understand different perspectives of the world and this can be mixed with other kinds
of different professions.
Creating meaningful outcomes was essential for all participants. The students,
therefore, connected Design Thinking closely to their own identity showing strong
subjectivity in the reception of the approach. Some participants were anxious how Design
Thinking affects design and further their future profession. Nevertheless, the exploitation
of design in other areas was described as a positive shift:
I think that is really good [for other professions without designers to practice Design
Thinking] – if they can achieve that. That's the thing. Design Thinking is the way of
thinking by designers, I'm not sure if everybody can do it but a lot of people claim that
anyone can. You don't have to be a designer to be creative. It would be great. I think a
lot of businesses would profit from that.
The urge to be meaningful was furthermore closely associated by all participants with
being creative. The students saw creativity as a main asset in Design Thinking and
identified themselves strongly connected:
The idea of provoking it [creativity] in people, who sort of don't see themselves as
creative is quite new to me. But that's why I like the idea of Design Thinking
[…] because I think it can put the designer out of the stereotype of design studios and
agencies.
Participants also expressed their confusion that Design Thinking was not described in
the workshops in a simple linear form. This left some students puzzled, arguing for a more
conclusion focused teaching approach in order to be able to create tangible roles and
hierarchies in pursuit of a fixed linear design goal for each project. One participant
observed: ’Students don't understand what Design Thinking is. Except the designers, I
don't know if they [students without design background] know how to apply
the approach’. Another student stated that the term Design Thinking itself might be
misleading within the course:
I think it should be something else. I don't like that it's been given the name Design
Thinking. I think it's something that should be a more natural part of the process.
Instead of putting pressure on getting results based on Design Thinking, the process
should just be used as a tool to get yourself or your team thinking for new material for
any kind of ideas.
The plurality of interpretations of Design Thinking in the course therefore, blurs the line
of its two-origination points (design and management); and whilst students redefine its
389
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
purpose by practicing it, idealistic as well as pragmatic perspectives constantly reshape its
foundation and aims.
Self-interpretation between a creative and/or analytical mindset
In addition to an environment of plurality where students are encouraged to find their
own definitions, analytical and creative practices play an important role in MA Innovation
Management since both are necessary for new and successful solutions – the MA
Innovation Management Course Handbook 2013/14 states:
This is what some call the ‘abductive’ abilities of design thinking (Martin, 2009;
Neumeier, 2010). Add to this the need to locate innovation in its contexts (sociocultural, organisational, etc.) and you have the qualities of an Innovation Manager that
we wish to promote’ (Brassett, 2013a, p. 15).
All participants described creativity as a main asset of design in the context of MA
Innovation Management and as justification of their importance in the process. Asked,
however, whether they would position themselves in a creative area, an analytical area or
between the two, the participants related how they had experienced a disruption in their
self-interpretation during the course. This resulted in a range of emotions expressed by the
participants. One student, who already had an educational background in economics and
product design before the course explains:
I am definitely both. It’s horrible. You don't know how to define yourself really – it's
really terrible. Sometimes I try to define myself as someone who is an economist and a
product designer […] I think that designers are very protective of their field and I think
it's the same with artists […] they are kind of looking at you switching from different
fields and say 'Well you are not a designer, you studied something else before',
sometimes you feel excluded.
Although analytical qualities were recognised as important in the course, students
struggled to define and describe them. One participant explained that she separates work
life in creativity and private life in analysis unable to draw a line between both areas.
Another student observed: ‘I think you've got to mix a bit of the both. You need to be
analytical … but sometimes creativity comes out of the analytical side’. One more student
on the other hand separated the conceptual and design process:
I wanted to say creative but then … I don't know because I don't see myself as an
analytical person … but when I did my [former] design course I was the one analysing
for four months and then designing for one month. […] I mean I like to create strong
concepts and then you only have to design them.
A main ambition for another participant was to position herself at the crossroad of
both areas: ‘My goal in studying MA Innovation Management is to work from the creative
part to a more analytical aspect […] I think this is good because I think I approach problems
in a more holistic way’.
In the study one group of the participants described their aim as to position themselves
in the middle between creativity and analysis as gate-keepers, while the other group
described themselves as travellers between both areas that stressed the importance of
390
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
extremes for certain tasks and situations. Interestingly, however, none of the participants
described creativity and analysis as inseparably linked in their work. The multi-disciplinary
context of Design Thinking in the course therefore, shifts the designer’s thinking and
practices. Similarly the literature on Design Thinking originates around two distinctive
streams that have yet not come together.
A common language shared through discourses
The first two themes explained that students had several different ideas on Design
Thinking as well as that their self-recognition was disrupted during the course between
creativity and analysis. Student described their main engagement with Design Thinking
during the workshops but did furthermore not conclude if Design Thinking was leveraged
as an approach during the group work for student projects or not. One student
commented: ‘We haven't been very disciplined in trying out or repeating the techniques
we've done in the workshops on the projects’. Another student elaborates:
I think in our first project we did it (Design Thinking), without knowing what it was. […]
We started just playing around and brainstorming which is a big part of Design
Thinking. The group collaboration and feeding off each other's thoughts is something
that was really important. We did this project really well. I'm not so sure if I can define
this as Design Thinking.
All the students were aware that even though misunderstandings and different
perspectives aggravated the process, they shared a common language with other
stakeholders, especially managers, involved in the collaborative work. Design Thinking in
that sense was interpreted as puzzle of symbols and semantics that can be spoken from
various perspectives. Several students, however, observed that managers had less interest
or were less willing to contribute to the more creative tasks and described that dealing
with people from non-design backgrounds was more difficult. Nevertheless, all participants
experienced the discussions with non-designers as beneficial for their own perspective:
It was good [in the project] that indeed designers approached that way of thinking but
we couldn't have done it without the people who were actually studying management.
[…] Because they brought us down which we needed at this stage. We are not free
designers anymore … we cannot go crazy … so they brought us down and then they
actually also backed up our idea.
Another student observed:
I think it's [Design Thinking] a good way of opening things up. Because usually people
have their own idea of something and if you use Design Thinking it's very easy to sort of
crowd source what other people are thinking.
Even though some students criticised the workshops for not presenting fixed tools and
processes of Design Thinking this allowed the participants to create and test their own
assumptions and learn form their peers. Collaboration and communication were
recognised as key assets in any, not only the Design Thinking, processes. One student
described:
391
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
I guess it's a good way [Design Thinking] of involving people early and creating
ownership in the process, especially with the people who are not necessarily designers
themselves. It's an inclusive process so they feel like they are taking part of the process.
[…] For a lot of the Design Thinking techniques the results are open ended… you don't
know where you and other stakeholders are going exactly, but if you involve them in
the process early on you should hopefully get to the end point together.
Open ended, explorative, processes can create an uncomfortable amount of
uncertainty, difficult to manage. The participants described that Design Thinking, whatever
it was, set a common language for all of them to do so. Designers, managers and other
professions, were able to contribute to the process and therefore formed a common, if
fragile, set of terms and definitions across and around the topic of innovation
management.
The importance of exploration and pace
In addition to collaboration and communication all participants of the study were
concerned about the importance of exploration and pace of Design Thinking. Participants
described their struggles working with linear and non-linear approaches with their peers.
One student explained regarding the work with managers: ‘They [non-designers] just like
to get the first idea that sounds good and run with it really quick – I don't really like that.
[…] I think this causes some tension [in the group] because people with design background
really like to explore and prototype’. From an opposite perspective another student who
reflected on his own working pattern observed:
As a designer I think you sometimes strike the idea straight ahead and you're not
always able to let go of it. In Design Thinking, well it depends on how it's done, you're
almost not allowed to do that until you've gone through a few other processes of
research and failure beforehand.
Although all participants acknowledged that designers approach projects distinctively
differently than managers or non-designers, some recognised that both management and
design mind-sets are beneficial for each other and show interesting implications. Other
students, however, encountered this combination of mind-sets as disruptive. One student
stated that managers were especially unwilling to immerse themselves in the research and
ideation process but would rather separate the creative and the management work for
their project. The problem of exploration and pace was further reflected on the level of
project briefs constructed by MA Innovation Management. One student suggested that the
project brief itself might be the problem and wondered whether the brief could be
changed in the Design Thinking process or not:
I mean the brief is really an important part of Design Thinking, right? Reconsidering the
brief […] – I think maybe we should first teach the people that bring us the brief before
we actually start designing.
Exploration and pace, of course, are not only of relevancy for Design Thinking. In the
interviews, however, all participants had a strong affiliation towards the ‘not known’ and
were deeply concerned how different actors involved in the course approach the black
392
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
box. Various interpretations of Design Thinking therefore, led to various appliances of the
process in which the exploration phase, or research, was managed in different accounts.
Beyond the Glory and Insignificance of Design Thinking
The aim of this paper was to explore how students with design backgrounds in a course
at the boundaries of management and design receive and give meaning to Design Thinking.
Some limitations in this study have to be considered. The course of MA Innovation
Management is an unusual environment in which designers and non-designers work
together at the nexus of disciplines. The students involved in the course constantly shift
their interpretations, as agility of critical reflection is a key factor in the discourse of
innovation management. The study therefore only illustrates a snapshot in time. It
captures the concepts and thinking derived from the way Design Thinking was taught in
the course between 2013 and 2015 to students with design background, and while it does
demonstrate through the interviewees’ responses the fluidity of the discourse, it cannot be
drawn upon to speculate about future patterns of Design Thinking as a discipline. Due to
the changing curriculum of the course, different cohorts might reflect the approach in
different ways. Moreover Design Thinking is also only one part of the study of MA
Innovation Management; the students involved in the study, as well as the principal author
who conducted the interviews, are only at the beginning of their professional careers.
Although eight interviews are a good basis for a first exploration, some of the statements
would be better served by a larger foundation of interviews.
The interviews revealed, however, several interlinked emergent themes, which
both support discussions in the literature and show possibilities for further research. First,
for design students involved in the course Design Thinking does not have the same label,
but means different things to different people. Johansson-Sköldberg et al. (2013) showed
that several discourses get involved when Design Thinking is discussed. The missing
connections between managerial Design Thinking and design theory, however, do not
seem to be particularly relevant as students in the course shift their practices more quickly
than Design Thinking literature is published. While students from a design background
claim ownership over Design Thinking as coming primarily from a design perspective of
their own embodied thinking (Lawson et al., 2009), they also share an inclusive perspective
for other actors involved. Although students did not conclude if Design Thinking was part
of their group work they definitely did share their process and perspectives with other
participants showing that perhaps not Design Thinking but designers and their practices
are important in an environment at the boundaries. The various responses of the
interviewees showed that Design Thinking was received as collaborative act between
diverse contributors in which either management or design skills are adopted and
redefined. Design Thinking, therefore was not instrumentalised as an operational process
but constantly redeveloped and reshaped.
Second, encounters with Design Thinking during the course shifted the students’ selfinterpretation between an analytical and a creative mind-set. Although creativity was still
described as one of design’s greatest assets, students began to reposition themselves
between both areas. Formulating, representing, moving, evaluating, and reflecting –
interlinked skills of design discussed by Lawson et al. (2008) therefore were experienced
differently by the participants in the heterogeneous environment of MA Innovation
Management. This is not only a consequence of Design Thinking taught in the course, but
393
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
of the general theoretical orientation that allows the academically trained designer to
reflect on his usage of inductive, deductive, and abductive reasoning. Analytical rigour was
described as a key asset that students are willing to learn and master in order to deliver
beyond their aesthetical qualities (McCullagh, 2010). Furthermore creativity 28 is more than
Design Thinking (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013) – and certainly not only linked to design. The
navigation of individuals between analysis and creativity is additionally not limited to
Design Thinking as Paulus and Nijstad show in their collection of essays about Group
Creativity (2003). Further research on the combination of other discourses, not only design
and management, might hold insightful ideas in how far various perspectives can create
successful frameworks for innovation.
Third, students in the course today have a common language they share whether they
agree what Design Thinking is or not. IDEO and other organisations set the stage by
opening design to various areas and making Design Thinking central to their approach. Yet
designers have practiced co-creation for longer than IDEO’s rise as an innovation
organisation and open innovation has been discussed for more than a decade (McCullagh,
2010). The general acceptance of design in other areas has benefited from this movement.
Design Thinking however, is more than brainstorming, or group work. Lawson (2004, p. 84)
argued that the designers’ Design Thinking is conversational in nature. Design Thinking
sometimes decentred the designers during the course as the main agent of design and
opened the dialogue to others, fostering a collaborative reflection upon the problems and
solutions that emerged. Tony Golsby-Smith stated:
In the analytic paradigm, language is descriptive. It is a tool to put labels on the world.
Its role is passive: it merely enables communication. Little wonder that the analytic
world has now passed the baton of power to mathematics as the underpinning tool of
trade. But the rhetoric road operates from a fundamentally different and emerging
belief that language creates new realities, it does not just describe them. (GolsbySmith, 2007, p. 27)
In light of this, Design Thinking in MA Innovation Management is not only a
compendium of definitions, tools, algorithms and processes but also a new temporary
reality of interlinked materials – a reality shaped by its actors who jointly shape its
meaning. The students involved in the study showed that they were able to re-design
themselves and their practices; therefore becoming something else beyond the promoted
design thinker. By identifying relevant insights from the perspective of an insider observer,
this paper hopes to contribute to their journey, and to that of other students concerned
with Design Thinking. They, as future practitioners, will define their own approaches to
deal with a diverse and complex environment in an intense conversation with other
disciplines – showing that the on-going discussion about the relevance of Design Thinking
and the ownership of the term is only one side of the coin.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank the students involved in the
interviews for their energy and honesty.
Csikszentmihalyi showed using his ‘flow’ method (study of conditions that make life meaningful
and enjoyable) that creativity is a complex set of processes by which people generate new ideas.
28
394
Design Thinking Stretching at the Nexus
References
Ambrose, G. & Harris G. (2010). Design thinking. Basics Design 08. Lausanne: AVA
Academia.
Berger, W. (2011). Glimmer: how design can transform your business, your life, and maybe
even the world. London: Random House.
Boland, R., & Collopy, F. (Eds.). (2004). Managing as designing. Stanford, CA: Stanford
Business Books.
Brassett, J. (2013a). MA Innovation Management Course Handbook 2013/2014. Central
Saint Martins London College of Arts and Design.
Brassett, J. (2013b). Networks: open, closed or complex. Connecting philosophy, design
and innovation, part 3. Proceedings of the 2013 Tsinghua International Design
Management Symposium ‘Design-Driven Business Innovation.’ Retrieved from
http://www.tsinghua-dms.org
Brown, T. (2008). Design Thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and
inspires innovation. New York, N. Y: Collins Business.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.
doi:10.2307/1511637
Collopy, F. (n.d.). Thinking about ‘Design Thinking.’ Retrieved February 2, 2015, from
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1306636/thinking-about-design-thinking
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013). Creativity: the psychology of discovery and invention (First
Harper Perennial Modern Classics edition). New York: London: Harper Perennial
Modern Classics.
Cooper, R., Junginger S., & Lockwood T. (Eds.). (2011). The Handbook of Design
Management. Oxford: Berg.
Dorst, K. (2006). Design Problems and Design Paradoxes. Design Issues, 22(3), 4–17.
doi:10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.4
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’ and its application. Design Studies, 32(6),
521–532. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design Thinking and How It Will Change Management
Education: An Interview and Discussion. Academy of Management Learning &
Education, 5(4), 512–523. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2006.23473212
Golsby-Smith, T. (2007). The second road of thought: how design offers strategy a new
toolkit. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(4), 22–29. doi:10.1108/027566607107690917
Hestad, M., & Brassett J. (2013). ‘Teaching ’design thinking’ in the context of Innovaiton
Management–from process to a dialogue about principles’. DRS Cumulus Oslo 2013:
2033-2047
Hobday, M., Boddington, A., & Grantham, A. (2011). An Innovation Perspective on Design:
Part 1. Design Issues, 27(4), 5–15.
Hobday, M., Boddington, A., & Grantham, A. (2012). An Innovation Perspective on Design:
Part 2. Design Issues, 28(1), 18–29.
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design Thinking: Past,
Present and Possible Futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.
doi:10.1111/caim.12023
395
PHILIP REITSPERGER, MONIKA HESTAD & JOHN O’REILLY
Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. Boca Raton:
CRC/Taylor & Francis.
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand
Oaks, Calif. ; London: Sage.
Lawson, B. (2004). What designers know. Oxford: Architectural.
Lawson, B., & Dorst K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford: Architectural Press.
Lockwood, T. (Ed.). (2009). Design thinking: integrating innovation, customer experience
and brand value. New York, NY: Allworth Press.
Martin, R. L. (2009). The design of business: why design thinking is the next competitive
advantage. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business Press.
McCullagh, K. (2010). Stepping Up: Design Thinking Has Uncovered Real Opportunities.
Design Management Review, 21(3), 36–39. doi:10.1111/j.1948-7169.2010.00076.x
Neumeier, M. (2009). The designful company: how to build a culture of nonstop innovation:
a whiteboard overview. Berkeley, Calif: New Riders.
Neumeier, M. (2010). ‘The Designful Company’ in Design Thinking: Integrating Innovation,
Customer Experience, and Brand Value, edited Lockwood T. (Ed.). 15-22. New York:
Allworth Press.
Nijstad, B. A., & Paulus, P. B. (Eds.). (2003). Group creativity: innovation through
collaboration. New York ; London: Oxford University Press.
Rowe, P. G. (1987). Design thinking. Cambridge, Mass. London: MIT Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. New
York: Basic Books.
Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (3rd ed). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Smith, J. A. (Ed.). (2008). Qualitative psychology: a practical guide to research methods
(2nd ed). Los, Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Verganti, R. (2009). Design-driven innovation: changing the rules of competition by
radically innovating what things mean. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.
Vogel, C. M. (2009). Notes on the Evolution of Design Thinking: A Work in Progress. Design
Management Review, 20(2), 16–27. doi:10.1111/j.1948-7169.2009.00004.x
Wastell, D. (2014). Archarios: A Dialogue Between Socrates and a Novice Manager on the
Relevance of Design to Management Practice and Education. Academy of Management
Learning & Education, 13(4), 641–652. doi:10.5465/amle.2013.0169
Wragg, E. C. (1982). Conducting and Analysing Interviews. Rediguides : Guides in
Educational Research / Edited by M. R. Youngman 11. Nottingham: Nottingham
University School of Education.
Yee, J., Jefferies E., & Tan L. (2013). Design transitions: inspiring stories, global viewpoints,
how design is changing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: BIS Publishers.
396
Structuring the Irrational: Tactics in Methods
Philip D. PLOWRIGHT
Lawrence Technological University
pplowright@ltu.edu
Abstract: The ability to successfully teach design in a studio environment
requires some clarity over process as well as aligning various action with
expected or possible outcomes. This paper examines the structure and purpose
of introducing self-identified ‘artistic’ or ‘irrational’ tactics into
architectural/urban design design process. The context was a large, multi-faculty
design studio lead by a master practitioner and spanning architectural, interior
and urban design disciplines. This paper used a cognitive framework approach to
design methods in order to examine the tactics that emerged through
instruction. They were analysed for their thinking structure through their
operations, product and use. The research found all irrational tactics to be either
divergent or divergent-convergent based, operating in the same capacity as
more normative design operations that share this structure. The irrationality
came from abandonment of defensibility to disciplinary values and the way the
tactics handled relevancy, delaying or deferring this point of judgement in order
to allow unexpected relationships to emerge.
Keywords: design methods, cognitive processes, irrationality, design tactics
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
Introduction
Teaching design in a studio environment requires some ability to communicate the
various processes, information sources, priorities and particular actions in a clear structure
and persistent set of relationships and effects. This allows students to access to design
thinking processes as their primary operation to achieve their desired outcome rather than
relying on hit-or-miss intuitive habits. Addressing design as deep thinking structure allows
an increase in the ability of structured self-reflection so students can refine their practice.
It also leads to an understanding on the part of the novice designer when one aspect of the
process can be adjusted or replaced by another so to change the possible range of the final
outcome.
Presenting design methods through cognitive approaches works well when handling
disciplinary standard, and historically evolved, techniques (Plowright 2014). These are
fairly well understood as approaches and directly access the various physical tools that a
design discipline uses – normative 2D drawing types, 3D drawing types, 3D model types,
and various evolved digital processes. One has to remember that the general physical
representational tool – the drawing, diagram or model – is fairly inert, only presenting a
range of possibilities of visualizing a type of information rather the actual conceptual
process. It is the not until the physical tool is aligned with certain types of content through
cognitive tactics that it takes on any sort of specificity. For example, the perspective holds
human viewshed information while the section engages spatial volume interaction – both
these are standard tools which allow the designer access to that content but don't dictate
what to do with that information.
When faced with the introduction of non-standard techniques, it can be confusing to
students to understand how these relate to core values and traditional processes. This
paper explores the intentional use of declared ‘artistic’ tactics within historically structured
design frameworks, examining the cognitive structure and expected conclusions in order
to determine why these are defined as artistic and how they relate to more standardized
tools and tactics.
Baseline Tools
In order to discuss non-standard tactics, it is important to quickly outline what are
baseline tools and tactics. This is easiest discussed in regards to a single discipline,
architecture in this case, as tools have evolved to meet certain disciplinary needs. The
priorities in architecture (projection of future formal state of the human environment),
and thus the tools that have developed to address those priorities, are necessarily
divergent to other design disciplines. This is due to the nature of disciplines as discrete and
defined territories of knowledge (Foucault 1971, 56). Other disciplines, even those closely
aligned with, or emergent from, architecture have their own priorities, primary
information sources and standards of relevance (where the outcome matches the effect).
Tools and tactics they use have evolved to be successful in the context of the discipline
(Plowright 2014, 16), and these are being referred to as baseline.
There are two types of baseline tools – cognitive tactics which limit, focus or isolate the
type of information the design process is using and physical tools which are used to
represent the cognitive content. To be slightly reductive, the primary tools of architecture
398
Structuring the Irrational
connect social and environmental information sources to formal responses. Physical tools
are primarily variations of the drawing (plan, section, diagram, map) and the model. There
is an inherent scale assigned to disciplinary content – the reason why the traditional scale
in architecture provides offerings from 3/32’=1'-0’ to 3’=1'-0’ (1:2500 to 1:1). Outside
these scales, the priority of the body diminishes and the territory overlaps with other
disciplines. However, the architectural values – the way the discipline sees and uses
information – do not change. This is why an architect pursuing urban design still thinks
with architectural priorities of the object even through the urban scale is well beyond the
sense of the individual body, but also why other professions working in urban design don't
share the same values and reach different outcomes (Adhya, Plowright & Stevens 2010;
Adhya & Plowright 2012, Adhya & Plowright 2015). Since the primary responsibility of
architecture is to manifest and refine the relationships between objects in space and the
human body, baseline tools bridge the gap between thinking and action.
An example of a baseline cognitive tactic selected by a primary organization source and
engaging the physical tools can be seen through an example of a pattern based framework,
reductive diagrams and content categories. Pattern approaches in architecture use
composition and formal relationship between objects to represent social relationships.
When teaching pattern approaches to students, what is called typology or typomorphology
in architecture and urban design, standard methods require an analysis of existing
conditions that align with the needs for the new design. So studying the formal
organization for a library, theatre, hospital, neighbourhood or city centre would return
experiences as persistent formal patterns of use. These patterns are traditionally social or
environmental in content – circulation, public-private divisions, massing, grain structure,
relationships between program elements, light access, light quality and so on. The
cognitive tactic used is pattern development through reduction, while the physical tool is
the diagram, which represents reduction well (Figure 1). These three aspects have a
traditional relationship to each other – pattern is the way to approach architectural design
(framework); exploring patterns requires reduction of complex environments to formal
arrangements to expose their essences (cognitive tactic); access and transferral of those
essences comes through the physical action of diagramming (physical tool).
Figure 1
The analysis of circulation patterns in school typology and the reduction to an essential
pattern or rule. Source: Courtesy of Nicholas Mighion.
399
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
The key is that traditional and baseline tools are chosen for their relevance to a context
as well as the type of information they uncover and document. As part of the decision
making process, the type of knowledge is predetermined by the tactic and tool, although
the results of that knowledge is unknown until the process has run. This is content that is
prioritized by a discipline as part of its value and application. When looking at design as the
flow of information, there is a consistent relationship between the application of the tool
and the type of informational that is persistently returned.
Art, Design, and Science, Oh My
While baseline tools are well integrated, and often unconsidered in normative practice,
can we address tactics borrowed from another discipline – an art to design transfer in this
case? This opens a huge debate about territories of ownership, personal identity, politics
of cultural status and so on, leading to those unresolved questions such as the difference
between art and science with their relation to design. These definitions are not necessary
as overarching categories when examining practices from the point of cognitive processes
as differences between these concepts don't exist at that scale. However, the term ‘art’ is
often thrown around in the design disciplines, especially my own of architecture, so some
exploration of the relationship of the term is warranted.
The relationship between architecture and the fine arts (painting, poetry, sculpture)
extends as far back as documentation of the priorities of the discipline, although the
blurring an art practice with a design practice was formalized in the 18th century French
schools (Kruft 1994, 141-65). It isn't until Modernism, however, that there becomes a
serious effect on design methods rather than just a general cultural alignment between
the two. This is not, however, in a positive way. Modernist practitioners were clear about
the separation between architecture and art as disciplinary categories but, at the same
time, completely inconsistent about the separation of the role of each (Gropius 1965,
Gropius 1974, Rudolph 2008, Plowright 2015). In addition, design was considered a
subcategory of both art and science as knowledge approaches, as in ‘Good planning [as
design] l conceive to be both a science and an art. As a science, it analyses human
relationships; as an art, it coordinates human activities into a cultural synthesis’ (Gropius
1974, 142). Yet, art was also seen as an aspect of design, for as Gropius wrote, ‘Virtuosity
in drawing and handicrafts is not art. The artistic training must provide food for the
imagination and the creative powers. An intensive 'atmosphere' is the most valuable thing
a student can receive’ (Gropius 1974, 28-9). In the end, the notion of art was used to
obscure the role and definition of methods in architecture. Gropius and Rudolph, as two
generations of self-identified Modernists, expressed a belief that new approaches for
design must be developed while also stressing the need to understand and apply methods.
Yet, both constantly referred to art as the mechanism in design which held non-technical,
social content, while also acknowledged that this process was indescribable and
unstructured – meaning that methods could not to be known (Plowright 2015).
There continues to be debates to whether design is art. Recently Patrik Schumacher,
director of Zaha Hadid Architects, extended a critique of the issue in a social media post,
stressing ‘Architecture is NOT ART although FORM is our specific contribution to the
evolution of world society’ (Schumacher 2014). All this shows is the continued debate and
confusion between the boundaries of the disciplines. Is art a meta-discipline, a subdiscipline or a parallel discipline to design? If there is a persistent meaning and owned
400
Structuring the Irrational
content (i.e. it is a discipline in Foucaultian terms), then the term can not operate in all
areas while still maintaining defensible boundaries. What is most likely occurring is a single
term is standing in for multiple meanings at multiple scales both linguistically and
conceptually – making the concept vague. Instead of challenging the disciplinary
boundaries and traditional ownership of territory, we can look at both art and design as a
practice at the level of events or see them as a series of associated operation and
information biases. As such, it becomes interesting at the cognitive tool level – applied
tactics that operate on information as core values in the design method.
The tactics, as conceptual and physical actions within a larger design method, that are
of interest to this paper are self-identified by those who use them as irrational (Jovanovic
Weiss 2014a). When considering processes and methods at the cognitive level, what is
important is the focus both areas have as part of creativity. James Woodfill, a Kansas City
artist and educator admits this on consideration of his own process, stating ‘I (and many
artists) often use 'design' processes within our art practices. By that I mean that I often use
both divergent and convergent tactics as equivalents to many other formal concerns
within the process of composition. As a public artist I fully engage this artistic practice to
solve design problems. As we get close to defining the line, it gets fuzzy.’ (J. Woodfill,
personal correspondence, July 30, 2014).
The Anatomy Of Design Thinking
The key to understanding the tactical level of design is to consider how information is
handled in the process. Based on the studies in creativity, design, business and psychology
from the 1970s onwards, design has been theorized to operate through two thinking styles
(Jones 1973, Rowe 1987). These are an exploratory, divergent or expansive type of
thinking (creative) combined with a reductive, convergent, evaluative (analytical) type of
thinking. J. Christopher Jones called the styles ‘divergence’ and ‘convergence’ in his early
studies (Jones 1973). Divergent thinking is involved when people use brainstorming,
questioning or other techniques to generate a series of options or information around an
idea. Divergence is non-judgemental and based on generating as many ideas as possible,
even those that seem outlandish or unexpected. Convergent thinking is the opposite –
meant to narrow choices and to make a selection. It generally occurs after divergent
thinking as it uses the cloud of ideas generated by the exploration in order to reduce that
content to a choice. At the end of a convergent process is a decision or selection. Actually
making the selection requires some more structure – a goal, a bias, an association with
other selection elements within the design and so on – but the basic operation of design is
the deployment of these two thinking patterns. As cognitive processes, divergence and
convergence are at the centre of human cognition – these operations are not unique to
design disciplines.
Based on this, one might postulate that there is no such thing as a ‘design method’.
There is, instead, an association of process tools – tactics in the form of applications that
manipulate information – that are aligned with an information source which is filtered
through judgement criteria. While this structure is persistent, each of the particular
deployments is adjustable within a range – making the visible methods seem unique and
complex. A method is simply a collection of cognitive exploratory and analytic tools, set in
a sequence, aligned to a value-set and supporting certain outcomes. All disciplines have a
401
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
naturalized way of thinking about their core content and easier access to some
information than others. This means that will be natural gravitation towards some
processes rather than others by the way they support core values or relevance of the
informational outcomes.
If the act of designing is moving through divergent-convergent couples, when we
introduce declared irrational processes, do they operate in a different way with different
concerns?
The Irrational: Analysis of action
The need to clarify the structure and use irrational approaches occurred when teaching
an advanced graduate architecture studio in which multiple faculty (4), Fellows (8) and a
large student population (71) grouped into eight competitive teams were involved. In this
educational setting, it became important to be able to communicate the use of particular
tactics as well as clearly communicate the design approach. As the context was a
charrette-style studio organized around three (3) intensive three week projects,
transparency of approach was critical due to short turn around times for a high quality of
work. An external master practitioner, Srdjan Jovanovic Weiss, was invited to frame the
studio and clearly required the process to engage what seemed to be random actions
although the studio brief described these only as ‘artistic approaches’ (Jovanovic Weiss
2014a, 2014b, 2014c). The studio required the ‘a matching, or an amalgamation between
three major visions of Western architecture and archaeology of late socialist architecture
(pre-post-socialist) in the East’ (Jovanovic Weiss 2014a) and stressed memory, ideology
and projected aesthetics as focuses. The charrette briefs all required a clear method of
approach to be followed, combining an historical Utopian aspect (Constant's New Babylon,
Yona Friedman's Spatial city and the geometry of Anne Tyng), formal objects, a future state
and particular restrictions of operations in making choices that stressed volume,
organization and surface. In studio instruction and lectures by Jovanovic Weiss, the master
practitioner presented clear and persistent ‘artistic approaches’ that emerged as a set of
tactics by which to pursue the design work. These tactics were not discretely presented as
a ready made package of actions in the brief but only communicated through oral
instruction and diagramming in the studio critique process by the studio lead as his
idiosyncratic approach to architectural design. They became more formalized as clouding,
versioning, erosion, eating, stacking, juxtaposition, swapping, and distortion.
Regardless to the tactics, the underlying framework in which they were deployed was
immediately recognizable as the historic structure of typology (Plowright 2014, 133-58).
This such, the major source for information was based on existing content reduced to an
abstraction which still held the essence of the ideas. The design approach was to then look
for variations and relationship between the essence to proposal a new synthesized whole.
All methods based on the pattern-based framework use this approach and the Jovanovic
Weiss instance, while using unique tools and tactics, is in perfect conceptual alignment
with the use of existing and past socio-spatial environments to map to a new proposal
(Figure 2). In addition to the existence of the pattern-based framework, there is another
theoretical standard in any design process – any activity within the process based on
generating possibilities will be a divergent technique, while any reduction or analysis of
content will be a convergent technique. The following discussion explores the structure of
the non-irrational tactics. All examples are from in situ process documents based on the
402
Structuring the Irrational
same project brief and focused on the same tactics. As such they are unedited, internal
documents by designers using them as tools rather than presentation documents meant
for an external public.
Figure 2
Pattern-based framework structure based on reduction to essences and repetition with
variation. Source: Author (2014, p. 145).
Clouding and versioning were recognizable as being fairly straightforward divergent
processes based in generating possibilities based on an origin point. While they were
presented as part of an alternative approach to design, both are well established as a
technique in architectural design with aspects found in historical processes of the psychogeographical mapping technique of the Situationist dérive to the parametric/digital theory
and techniques presented 2002 AD publication titled ‘Versioning’ including work by ShoP,
Rick Joy, William Massie and Office dA (SHoP 2003). It could be said that clouding and
versioning are also based on fairly normative and commonly used processes. They
represent the act of designers running through variations of possibilities in a context to
produce content for analysis – the basis of all divergent techniques. Unlike divergentconvergent techniques in other disciplines, both design-focused instances used graphic
information rather than text-based exploration. There were differences between the two
structures themselves as well as further divergence from standard divergent techniques
besides the modality. Both clouding and versioning were focused processes while still
being exploratory. There was an intentional inclusion of a bias or latent choice to influence
the type of information selected in the exploration. In both tactics, the boundaries were
set by one of the layers of the brief – for clouding it was motion and travel while for
versioning it was volume and surface.
Clouding was a process of free association, a type of visual brainstorming which applied
no judgement but documented possibilities. Just as the dérive mapped the latent
hierarchy of social space in a city by letting interest and awareness guide selection
(meaning movement wasn't random but based on latent rather than explicit decisionmaking), clouding also had the ability to uncover priorities. In this case, clouding was
applied to a path of travel between two nearby cities (65 miles/104 km apart) in order to
identity possible sites of activation for the proposal. The first phase of clouding was to just
experience the path of travel. Then one application of the tactic linked images by
geolocation (Figure 3) while a second presented groupings based on recurring patterns of
403
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
materiality and infrastructure (Figure 4). This is an example of designer's project framing
affecting the content of the outcome but not the actual tactic. The role of framing
uncovered that the tactic was not strictly a divergent technique – not simply visual
brainstorm – but included some form of analysis and organization. While not a fully
convergent technique distilling a cloud down to a single choice, there was analysis and
selection as part of the arrangements of associating collected data. This suggests that it
was a coupled divergent-convergent (or semi-convergent) process where the end of this
tactic was a range of choices and possibilities leaving decision-making open for further
interpretation. This tactic was only used in the first early moves in the project which
allowed the distillation of a complex situation down to a general thesis statement.
Figure 3
A clouding process randomly capturing images across a territory then linking back to
geolocation. Source: Photograph by Author; expansive mapping by Irsida Bejo [lead],
Stephen Bohlen, Ryan Kronbetter, Amin Toghiani, Alexis Blackwell-Brown, Breck Crandell,
Shuang Wu, Christina Jackson, Nicole Gerou, Christopher Bartholomew.
404
Structuring the Irrational
Figure 4
A clouding process randomly capturing images across a territory then organizing by
material and infrastructural categories. Source: Photograph by Author; cloud exploration
by Charlie O’Geen [lead], Irina Dwyer, Paul Eland, Randi Marsh, Scott Newsted, Devika
Sangurdekar, Laura Schneider, Christopher Theisen, Ashley Brenner, Kanqi Zhu
Versioning was presented as creating a series of variations on a pattern, acting more
like an evolutionary process of fuzzy repeatability (Plowright 2014, 136-7). There was a
difference to baseline applications that are based off the same idea. The standard
parametric (rational) version stresses distortion due to external pressures like the fitness
of an organism to environment creating a strong relationship between context and the
form. The typology-based version requires holding to the essential pattern that is usually
socially (movement) or environmental (light) relevant, as in Figure 1. Versioning as it was
applied in this process as a irrational tactic ignored any sense of context and stressed the
formal over the social (Jovanovic Weiss' volume-organization-surface basis). It selected for
image value and interest rather than responsibility. The instruction for use the tactic also
applied a series of random actions to increase the volume of possible outcomes and to
explore non-linear variations. There was also no analysis performed during the tactic –
making this a purely divergent technique. The basic tactic could also be applied in several
ways but always limited to purely formal moves. One instance isolated the sectional
outline of a fragment of a post-Soviet monument (Figure 5). As a type, the shape was then
maintained rigidly but versions created through multiplicity and assembly. The possible
outcomes where then used to move into the next phase of the design, accepted as simply
a new context. Other variations of the tactic applied a series of formal actions to a starting
state (Figure 6). In this case, the stating state was a three dimensional letter (E,F & H)
randomly chosen. Each sequence of versioning consistently distorted the previous state
with a set of self-generated rules, and then accepted the new form as the start point of the
next action. These included Z-axis projections, single line extrusions, x-y axis mirroring, 9square point extrusions and so on. The rules for each action in the versioning sequence
405
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
were rigidly held to but there was no deeper purpose behind the variations other than
what possibilities where opened.
Figure 5
Versioning using the formal outline of monument a to run permutations of composition.
Source: Anirban Adhya & Alina Chelaidite [Leads], Steven Mcmahon, Eleana Glava, Adam
Wakulchik, Jeremy Adams, Gregory Wood, Jinhan Liu, Christopher Siminski, Jonathan Tull,
Tra Page.
Figure 6
Versioning using sequential actions to explore possible formal resolutions. Source:
Photographs by Author; diagrams by Amy Swift [lead], Nick Cressman, Kirk Stefko,
Christopher Stefani, Jonathan Selleck, Guanyi Wang, Sarah Saleh, Jerry Carter, Jon Krdu,
Abhimanyu Lakhey
Moving way from iterations to single object or image based outcomes, the related
tactics of stacking and juxtaposition explored similar operations. In each process, sensible
or expected relationships were purposefully suspended and each object was treated as
separate factors of volume, organization and skin (surface). In stacking, one element was
simply placed upon another with no attempt to negotiate the relationship between them
or smooth the boundary (Figure 7). The only constraint was the interest or instinct of the
designer making the action and judgement was confined to the possibilities that were
perceived through the result of the action. There was a necessary and useful tension
created through the alignment of the dissimilar as a tactic for exploring unexpected
406
Structuring the Irrational
possibilities – this is the core operation in the divergence in this tactic. While often only a
few outcomes occurred, these were created by an exploratory, non-judgemental actions in
which the conclusion was not predetermined but allowed to emerge through the process.
The stacking did not need to be massed vertical but could also be horizontal or sectional
(Figure 7, right). In these cases, one form is simply interrupted by another without too
much reasoning or purpose. However, once it occurs, the result can be analysed for
potential and opportunities after the tactic is complete. Each orientation of stacking has its
own advantages and affects occupation.
Figure 7
Stacking submerses a fragment or object into a greater whole. Source: Photographs by
Author; model (left) by Irsida Beja et al; drawing (centre) by Aaron Jones, Wesley Taylor
et al; and diagram (right) by Stewart Hicks, Allison Newmeyer et al.
Juxtaposition was very similar to stacking as it also suspended known relationships
through physical proximity. However, where stacking had only small to no tolerance
between the parts and created a sense of a new whole, the instruction for juxtaposition
associated objects in space allowing them to maintain their sense of discreteness (Figure
8). In this tactic, there was no sense of bearing or pressure between the associated
elements, mostly orchestrated by physical distance (Figure 9). In the two dimensional
version of the tactic, there could be some confusion between stacking, juxtaposition and
the more transition medium of collage. However, neither stacking or juxtaposition works
with the intention of creating a predetermined whole out of the parts. This creates a
conceptual difference in purpose. Collage, as a technique or tactic, was not addressed
either in briefs, instruction or critique as the intention was not to create a comprehensive
composition. Both stacking and juxtaposition where operational through relational
content rather than representational through visual content. In addition, both tactics were
exploratory, placing a series of objects and images next to each other in order to gauge the
effect.
407
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
Figure 8
Juxtaposition allows objects to maintain their own identity but challenge possible
relationships. Source: Photographs by Author; model (left) by Aaron Jones, Wesley Taylor
et al; diagram (right) by Maria Simon et al.
Swapping, when examined, was also a purely divergent technique using a tactic of
replacement and axial mirroring to create a series of possible outcomes (Figure 9). It is also
another formal technique that operated on models and images. Swapping, like stacking
and juxtaposition, also imposed in the relationship between variations without any
consideration for nuances or smoothing the relationships – often causing disruptions in the
proposal. This was the embedded non-judgemental exploration, encouraging maximum
random exploration. The tactic operated through the boundaries of taking one element
and replacing it completely by another, or by ‘swapping’ one parameter with another. The
swap would be successful if the parameter has been found to introduce some advantage
or interest. The benefit of the swap came in the disruptions and the opportunities created
by this point of unexpected difference. In the example below, the form created by stacking
(see Figure7) was then operated on through swapping. First, one of the stacked plates was
removed and replaced by another object of equal height but radically different depth
(segment swap). Then the entire object was mirrored vertically (axial swap) to see if this
created any further possibilities. The later versions of this project accepted the possibilities
from the swap and began to map the disruptions as sites of opportunity (Figure 10).
Many of the previous tactics stressed the object or drawing as site and content, being
almost exclusively formal divergent operations that would then be integrated back into
architectural or urban content. Distortion required occupational or functional content as
its driving information. To use the tactic, an activity, program or use was imposed on
another activity, program or use but the interaction could not overlap or superimpose. This
meant that the introduction of an activity in an area which was already filled by a different
activity must distort the composition based on adjacency – pushing and swelling the
expected composition. Instruction on the use of this tactic stressed volumes within
volumes, sectional deformation and maintaining firm boundaries of identity for each of the
activities (Figure 11). This definition of boundary meant that an interior volume would
swell to adjust to new occupations while maintaining the core use relationships.
Exploration of how to distort physical volume, including floor plate or slab disruptions,
penetrations and interruptions, allowed the design unexpected formal results. It is difficult
408
Structuring the Irrational
to see this as a irrational process as it maintained and maximized optimal occupational,
making the tactic hyper-rational rather than irrational (i.e. the position is extreme but
logically defensible).
Figure 9
A sequence of swapping where one plate is exchanged for a different object and then the
object is mirrored vertically. Source: Photographs by Author; models by Irsida Beja et al.
Figure 10 Development of the possibilities created by the swapping tactic moving back into
architectural content. Source: Irsida Beja et al.
409
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
Figure 11 Instruction to students on how to think about distortion as a tactic. Source: Photograph
by Author; notes by Srdjan Jovanovic Weiss.
Figure 12 Visualization of a distorted grid with second program threaded through proposed
structure. Source: Amy Swift et al; Photograph by Author (below).
410
Structuring the Irrational
The use of the distortion tactic in operation required a starting position, usually a host
environment. In the example (Figure 12) the host is a structural grid which represented
one type of occupation. A second activity was introduced, considered as a bounded
volume. This, more often than not, was a conflicting or non-aligned use creating a sense of
discreteness and conceptual separation between the original and the additional volumes.
The host volume would then have to shift and distort to allow both volumes to co-exist.
Figure 13 Erosion tactic where the typological patterns of plaza, market, and street where used to
remove aspects of each other. Source: Anirban Adhya, Alina Chelaidite et al.
The final tactic documented through the studio was erosion or eating. While originally
the terms were used separately by Jovanovic Weiss, it became clear that both erosion and
eating described the same operation. The instruction for use presented the tactic as an
opposite approach to distortion. The intention of distortion was to maintain the identity of
the intersecting volumes while erosion stressed the dissolution of one aspect of the project
into another. Erosion, as such, was a tactic of removal rather than addition or shifting. In
this operation, aspects of the project were randomly removed by their intersection with
other aspects, much like a Boolean operation. This ‘uncovers’ what lies beneath, either in a
literal or metaphoric way and works even when the operators don't share the same
format. The basic technique was divergent, exploring possibilities of a new composition
but on a limited scale, similar to distortion. There was also some convergence present, as
the expectation of a refined outcome was part of the tactic. The variations generated are
quickly assessed for possibility and either accepted or abandoned focusing the tactic on a
single resolution but exploring multiple dimension. Also like distortion, the focused
outcome made erosion more surgical in its opening of possibilities rather than a bruteforce approach. The other similarity between distortion and erosion is that they both use
architectural content to operate – volume, occupation, skin, organization and so on (Figure
13). Many of the brute-force tactics, those that generated large volumes of options, were
411
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
also more architecturally simplistic, stressing only single modality generally formal/object
based.
Discussion & Conclusion
All of the tactics identified as ‘artistic’ fell into known cognitive patterns. Clouding and
versioning were brute-force divergent tactics with some minor convergent-based
clustering operating in the sorting of the content. These both focused on generating a
large volume of options in the classic style of brainstorming but using graphic content and
integrated graphical layout as a mode to undercover possibilities. Stacking, swapping and
juxtaposition were purely divergence-based but focused on smaller volumes of possibilities
discovered through accidental alignments. All five of these tactics had explicit operations
and clear instructions for use that focused the exploration, a factor that made them
discrete and repeatable processes within a larger design method. Erosion and distortion
were structured as a divergent-convergent couple, producing a single outcome but still
engaging the generation of a variety of unexpected arrangements in the divergent phase.
There were no tactics that were only convergent – a fact that was not surprising as
irrational approaches are expected to generate unexpected or unusual content rather than
be an analytic operation.
There were two interesting observations from the documentation, analysis and use of
these tactics. These emerged from an examination of the presented design processes
clearly structured and identified through the instruction when compared against
normative and historically grounding cognitive frameworks found in the architectural
discipline. Using the focus of cognitive process and informational sources as a basis of
evaluation, the first observation was that the ability to put a tactic in a category of
‘rational’ versus a ‘irrational’ came down to the defensibility of the move. The irrational
tactics communicated through the studio created random acts in order to explore
possibilities but they were still structured by the actions if not by the content. By evoking
the tactic, there did not need to be a defence to what occurred. However, there was little
explicit purpose behind them in relation to either the context or the overall architectural
values. One of the tactics which was self-identified as irrational, distortion, was more
correctly classified as hyper-rational. This was due to the alignment of form to purpose
through logical but non-normative relationships – something that didn't happen in the
other tactics. Irrational tactics, as a category, did not have any greater reason behind them
except designer interest.
The second observation was that all the irrational tactics operated through the delay of
relevance. In normative, disciplinary design processes, tools have developed to have a
strong correlation with the type of information that is desired as a return. In this way,
relevance is pre-determined as tools extract information from context in a way that
ensures the result has a relationship to its use. Architectural methods and tools stress
human movement and spatial occupation, environmental quality and scalar relationships.
The tactics explored in this study did none of these things while in operation. It was only
after the completion of the tactic application that the results were analyzed for their
potential and alignment with core architectural values. Ultimately, all of these processes
were about creating alignments that have not existed before and opening possibilities
through suspending both local context and disciplinary values. This attitude is reinforced
412
Structuring the Irrational
by comments from artists reflecting on their practice. While not a general statement of all
art-based processes, there is a strong support for actions that create possibilities through
experimentation. As Woodfill says, this aligns with ‘[...] how I think as an artist - the
deconstruction of a situation (site), the use, reuse and misuse of the debris that results
through stacking, sorting and forming relationally shifting contexts. In the studio I don't
seem to search for a resolution so much as I want to stir up a PACE.’ (J. Woodfill, personal
correspondence, July 30, 2014). The value in deferred relevance can be found in the
concept of emergence. Through the delay, space is opened for relevant discovery that is
not aligned with expected values yet also not aligned with simple intuition. At the
conclusion of the tactic, the results were still evaluated through what possibilities they
opened up, guided by disciplinary values of the refinement of spatial quality.
While the original purpose in the introduction of these tactics was to bring art
processes into a design context, they are best described irrational rather than artistic.
While it is common to use disciplinary container terms (design, art, science) to label a
process, those terms bring many adjacent content and relationship entailments. Art, in
particular, is a territory made of many disciplines, each with their own priorities, histories
and value structures. When looking at the tactic level of method, these disciplines do not
exist. Rather, it is the structure and information focus of the tactic that denotes its
membership in a larger family of aligned tools. In the end, the use of irrational tactics
within an architectural process centres not on the object but on how decisions are made –
in this case, the suspension of logical associations and chains of disciplinary specific values.
Post-tactic, irrational design events are then integrated into disciplinary values by ‘making
it work’ and reattaching relevance. The tactics have been shown to operate through
standard divergent and convergent thinking styles – just as any other design process. The
irrational, artistic approach is still a structure of decision making, not of formal expression.
In an educational environment, the implications suggest that the stress on student
learning should be on the awareness of information alignment, value judgements and
decision making in addition to, or as a structure for, graphic skill development. This moves
away from considering methods as independent and personal due to the shared
framework on which they are built. Design thinking has a persistent structure at the
cognitive process level which often has little visibility in instructional environments. In this
study, it was only through the combination of aligning cognitive science studies with
design instruction that larger patterns of application became apparent. None of the tactics
addressed above were actually presented to the students with the clarity of structure and
use that emerged through post-analysis. This lack of visibility created tension, confusion
and frustration in the student as well as limiting the success or even use of possible
reapplication of the learnt processes.
Acknowledgements: The author would like to thank Srdjan Jovanovic Weiss
for his discussions and openness to discuss his process and ideology in
relationship to research in methods. Scott Shall and Anirban Adhya also
continue to provide support..
413
PHILIP PLOWRIGHT
References
Adhya, A. & Plowright, P. (2015). Sustainable Architecture as Ecology: Defining shared
systemic priorities of public health and social ethics in places. Ahmed Z. Khan and Karen
Allacker (eds.). Architecture and Sustainability: Critical Perspectives for Integrated
Design. Leuven (Belgium) / Den Haag (Netherlands): ACCO.
Adhya, A. & Plowright, P. (2012). Setting Priorities: Sustainability, Environmental Health,
and Embedded Value Judgments for the Urban Design Process. Proceedings of the
EAAE/ARCC International Conference on Architectural Research, Politecnico di Milano,
Italy. 118-21.
Adhya, A., Plowright, P. & Stevens, J. (2010).’Defining Sustainable Urbanism: towards a
responsive urban design’ Proceedings of the Conference on Sustainability and the Built
Environment. King Saud University, Saudi Arabia. 17-38.
Evans, Robin. (1997). Translations from Drawing to Building. In Translations from Drawing
to Building and Other Essays, 153-193. London: Architectural Association Publications.
Foucault, Michel. (1971/1981)The Order of Discourse (Inaugural Lecture at the College de
France, given 2 December 1970). In Untying the Text, edited by Young, Robert, 52-64.
Boston, Mass.: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. 59.
Gropius, W. (1965). The New Architecture and the Bauhaus. Uniform Title: Neue
Architektur Und Das Bauhaus. English. The M.I.T. Paperback Series,; MIT21. Cambridge,
Mass.: M.I.T. Press.
Gropius, W. (1974). Scope of Total Architecture. New York: Collier Books.
Jones, J. Christopher. (1973) Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures. London: WileyInterscience.
Jovanovic Weiss, S. (2014a). TripBusStop. Studio brief. Southfield: Lawrence Technological
University.
Jovanovic Weiss, S. (2014b). Retreat Cloud. Studio brief. Southfield: Lawrence
Technological University.
Jovanovic Weiss, S. (2014c). Social Garage. Studio brief. Southfield: Lawrence Technological
University.
Kruft, H. (1994). A history of architectural theory: From Vitruvius to the present. London;
New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
Plowright, P. (2015) Methods and the Absence of Modernism. Proceedings of the 2015
ARCC Architectural Research Conference: Future of Architectural Research. Perkins &
Will: Chicago, Illinois. 458-465.
Plowright, P. (2014). Revealing Architectural Design: Methods, Frameworks & Tools. Oxon;
New York: Routledge.
Rowe, P. (1987) Design Thinking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Rudolph, P. (2008). Writings on Architecture. New Haven and London: Yale School of
Architecture.
Schumacher, P. (2014) STOP political correctness in architecture. But also: STOP confusing
architecture and art. Facebook. Retrieved January 16, 2015 from
https://www.facebook.com/patrik.schumacher.10/posts/10202631928712343
SHoP/Sharples Holden Pasquarelli (Eds) (2003) Versioning: Evolutionary Techniques in
Architecture. London: Architectural Design.
414
Structuring the Irrational
Tehrani, N. &Ponce de Leon, M. (2003) Versioning: Connubial Reciprocities of Surface and
Space in SHoP/Sharples Holden Pasquarelli (Eds) Versioning: Evolutionary Techniques in
Architecture. London: Architectural Design.
Winston, A. (2014) 'Architecture is not Art' says Patrik Schumacher in Venice Architecture
Biennale rant. Dezeen. Retrieved 13 Jan, 2015 from
http://www.dezeen.com/2014/03/18/architecture-not-art-patrik-schumacher-venicearchitecturebiennale-rant/
415
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in
Work-Based Design Management Education
Caroline NORMAN
Birmingham City University
caroline.norman@bcu.ac.uk
Abstract: Building on previous research into the value of master’s level workbased learning in design management, this case study evaluates an online
learning pilot designed to enhance the student experience and extend the reach
of work-based learning. While there is a strong case for designers to acquire
business and management skills, design education and early design careers focus
on the practical aspects of design and offer limited opportunities for professional
development. Work-based learning is well suited to the learning styles of
designers. When combined with recent developments in online learning
technology, work-based learning provides universities with an opportunity to
support designers’ professional development. Staff and students offer
contrasting experiences of technology-enhanced learning, webcast classes and
online discussion groups conducted alongside campus-based learning. Insights
into their technological, educational and social learning experiences highlight
the potential of technology-enhanced learning for design management,
particularly within the work-based mode of study. While conflicting views around
the role of online learning are valid, universities need to reconcile institutional
conservatism with their ability to innovate. The opportunity to capitalize on
technology-enhanced learning lies in the student experience, educational value
and the development of well-supported, online learning frameworks.
Keywords: Technology-enhanced learning; work-based learning; design
management; design careers.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Introduction
This paper reports on a technology-enhanced learning (TEL) pilot conducted within a
design management master’s programme that offers work-based learning (WBL) alongside
the more traditional full-time mode of study.
The purpose of the pilot was to test new online learning technologies, their potential to
enhance the student learning experience and extend the geographic reach of WBL for
design managers.
The paper evaluates both staff and student experiences of TEL whilst also considering
the institutional and technological challenges.
Before exploring the opportunity for online learning within higher education the paper
introduces the research context: the demand for design management skills, the nature of
design education and careers, the challenges designers face in acquiring management skills
and the value of WBL in designers’ professional development.
Demand for design management skills
A strong case for the development of designers’ management skills has been made for
some time. Creative & Cultural Skills (2011) identified an urgent need in the creative
industries for management and leadership, marketing, customer service and
communication skills. Prior to this the Design Skills Advisory Panel (2007, p27) highlighted
the shortfall in designers’ business skills, stating that ‘designers need skills to enable them
to better understand business drivers and markets and to work with senior management
across a range of industries and disciplines’. More recently, the European Design
Leadership Board (EDLB) expressed concern over the shortage of design management skills
and the need for design graduates to develop strategic thinking skills for business,
(Thomson & Koskinen, 2012). The EDLB also emphasised the importance of continuous
professional development in helping designers improve their ability to communicate
effectively with senior management and multi-disciplinary teams.
The challenge for those working in design is how these important skills can be acquired.
Design education and careers
The design industry has a high entry threshold, usually a bachelor’s degree, so by the
time a designer enters practice they are likely to have invested three or four years in
higher education. Once in employment designers’ early careers tend to focus on the
development of the practical aspects of design with limited opportunities to acquire
business or management skills.
The creative industries are characterized by micro businesses, freelance and selfemployment, for instance, in the UK most (96%) of design businesses employ fewer than
ten people (Creative & Cultural Skills, 2011). The small scale of these businesses means
that they are unlikely to engage in professional development planning, only investing in
training when needs arise and finances allow. As a result, practicing designers often find
themselves taking on business and management responsibilities for which they are illequipped. The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) recognises that the majority of skills
development within creative businesses is likely to be informal, but it also takes the view
that more could be done to overcome the barriers involved in ‘engaging with the external
skills system’, (CBI, 2011, p. 8).
417
CAROLINE NORMAN
So what role can universities play in the development of graduates’ design
management skills?
The value of work-based learning
WBL is an established mode of study that enables practitioners to develop their skills
and embed lifelong learning behaviour whilst remaining in full-time practice.
The growth in WBL has its critics who question its quality and where it sits in relation to
training. What distinguishes university based WBL from training is the assessment of
learning and the award of credit, both of which are subject to academic regulation and
quality assurance processes (Hammersley, Tallantyre & Le Cornu, 2013.).
WBL supports lifelong learning by bringing together the learner, academia and the
workplace, it provides learners and their organisations with accredited programmes of
study. These enable the development of individual learning plans that meet learners’
personal and work related needs (Boud & Solomon, 2001). Most importantly, WBL
facilitates meaningful learning by merging theory and practice, knowledge and experience
(Raelin, 2008).
WBL is well suited to design careers and designers’ experiential learning preferences
where learning involves practice, observation, conceptualisation and experimentation
(Kolb, 1984). Practicing designers who have studied design management via WBL have
reported significant changes in their approach, being more business oriented and better
placed to understand the business context (Norman & Jerrard, 2012).
Whilst WBL has been available for some time, recent advancements in online learning
technology have created the opportunity to enhance the student experience and make
WBL more accessible geographically.
The pilot setting
The online learning pilot was conducted at the Master’s in Design Management at
Birmingham City University and builds on previous research into the postgraduate
education in design management, which linked WBL with the acquisition of strategic
business skills and knowledge (Norman and Jerrard, 2012).
The course has delivered both full-time and WBL for over ten years with both cohorts
studying alongside each other. Attendance in person is expected of all students so WBL
students are required to negotiate a proportion of time away from work, which limits
prospective students’ access to the course.
Prior to the pilot the course had already established online support for learning and
teaching via the University’s virtual learning environment (VLE) called Moodle. The pilot
focused on the introduction of web conferencing software and video chat platforms
suitable for use on computers, tablets and mobile phones.
The research was action based with UK based teaching staff and students located in
Europe, North America and Africa collaborating in the implementation and evaluation of
the pilot. The paper discusses the opportunities and challenges provided by technological
change in higher education before reporting on the staff and students’ experiences of the
pilot.
418
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Online learning and the changing higher education
context
Growth in online learning
By the end of 2014 almost 3 billion people, 40% of the world’s population were
estimated to be using the Internet (International Telecommunications Union, 2014).
Increasing internet access and new technologies are leading to a profound re-thinking of
education at all levels with the scale of change being likened to that experienced in music,
retail and journalism (Weller & Anderson, 2013). The US is witnessing a potential
revolution in schools, with applications being developed that allow students to learn at
their own level and pace, and the role of the classroom teacher moving away from the
delivery of content to one of mentor. Bushnell’s (2014) aim for school education to be as
addictive as video games may not sit comfortably with higher education. A more
appropriate vision of the future might be Wasserman’s (2014) imagined view from 2050:
Today, learning takes place everywhere – out in the community and at cultural
institutions, at fab labs, tech shops, tinker spots, arts studios, innovation hubs, and at
learning incubators and accelerators. It takes place online, on-demands, and just-intime. It is flipped, blended and open. (Wasserman, 2014, p2)
Universities responding to change
The higher education landscape is rapidly changing with universities responding in
different ways to technological opportunities and more recently the global economic
downturn.
According to the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), there has been
an overall drop in postgraduate numbers since 2011, particularly in postgraduate taught
programmes (HEFCE, 2013). A fall in full-time enrolments is indicative of economic
downturn and business schools are adapting their offer to enable students to continue
working as well as studying. Warnes (2012) cites research conducted by the Association of
MBAs which identified this fall in full-time enrolments whilst also identifying growth in part
time and flexible learning enrolments. This reflects HEFCE’s (2013) view that flexible
delivery is becoming increasingly important.
At the same time as dealing with economic change, higher education is seeing a range
of institutional responses to technological change. Hammersley, Tallantyre & Le Cornu
(2013) describe responses ranging from small scale individual course led initiatives to large
scale university re-structuring. Whilst there are contrasting views about the value and
future of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), their rapid growth and popularity have
heightened awareness of online learning and opportunities for higher education.
As Dua (2013, www) points out, universities are well placed to deliver new modes of
study, they have the ‘intellectual property, the brands, and the tradition of public service
needed to integrate these interests sustainably’.
However, the responses from universities and teaching staff to the technological
opportunity have been mixed. For example, after Harvard invested over $30m in MOOCs,
58 professors were so concerned about the cost and consequences of online learning they
chose to express their views publicly (‘Letter from 58,’ 2013). Thomas (2014) reflects on
this paradox, universities’ ability to innovate and their resistance to change:
419
CAROLINE NORMAN
Universities are places that initiate profound change, they bring new knowledge, they
bring new insights, they bring new technologies, and yet they can be intrinsically
incredibly conservative. (Thomas, 2014, www)
This conservatism would seem to be based on concern about cost saving agendas and
the impact on teaching staff, academic quality and the need for technological knowledge
and infrastructure.
As universities face increasing financial pressure, potential resistance is re-inforced by
fears that technology is being used as a means of cost saving. As evidenced by Prof
Duneier, Professor of Sociology at Princeton who withdrew from making MOOCs after
being asked to license his course for use in other US colleges (Parry, 2013).
Where finance and the threat to staff are issues to be addressed at institutional level,
the issues facing teaching staff directly are academic quality and technological challenge.
Academic quality
There is clearly scope for a wide range of perspectives and these are likely to reflect
individual approaches to pedagogy. Newton (2013) advocates online learning, describing
rigorous academic standards and quality controls, with highly engaged students in
employment who are ‘quick to grasp theory and see how it can be put into practice’,
(Newton, 2013, www). However, Professor Michael Sandel, of Harvard expresses concern
about the limitations of online learning in isolation:
I think it would be a terrible mistake for San Jose or any other University to think that
just asking students to watch my lectures can substitute for the learning that goes on in
a classroom with the sense of community of learners, teachers and students together.
(Sandel, 2014, www)
Relevant to these differences in attitudes is a survey of 2,251 professors conducted by
Inside Higher Ed which reports that appreciation of online learning quality grows with
experience. The research found that 47% of professors with experience of teaching online
believe the learning outcomes can be equivalent to campus based classes. Whereas only
17% of professors without online teaching experience believe this. (Lederman & Jaschick,
2013, www)
Social opportunities are an important factor for most learners, UK Government
research into MOOCs highlights the value of social working for networking, group
formation and a feeling of inclusion amongst distance learners (Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills 2013). Coursera, a major provider of online learning, has recognised
social value through the development of bricks and mortar learning hubs (Coughlan, 2014).
This value is reinforced by Professor Mitch Duneier of Princeton who describes the value of
live discussion, enabling both staff and students to learn from each other (Duneier, 2014,
www).
Where there are clear differences in opinion between academics, differences are also
reflected in staff and students’ experiences of online learning. Gosper, Green, McNeil,
Phillips, Preston & Woo (2008) report on a large scale study of the impact of web-based
lecture technologies (WBLT) in Australia, where geography has driven the development of
online learning. The research explored staff and students’ experiences of WBLT and
420
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
identified distinct differences in perceptions, with a much higher proportion of students
(76%) reporting positive experiences than staff (54%).
Online learning would seem to be straightforward from a student perspective with
usefulness and ease of use a priority. Gosper, et al. (2008) identify three criteria that
students apply when deciding about lecture attendance: educational value, convenience
and flexibility, and social opportunities to meet other students and exchange ideas.
Students appreciate the convenience and flexibility of access provided by WBLT as they
don’t always have to attend classes in person. However, the availability of online learning
does not always exclude lecture attendance as students describe contact with their
lecturers and peers as valuable. In the case of lecture recordings intended for remote
students, the technology is reported to blur the boundaries between remote and campus
based students who also make use of WBLT for revision.
Gosper, et al. (2008) report a range of staff approaches to WBLT with some lecturers
making little change to their practice, some adapting their lectures, and some exploiting
the technology by designing lectures to engage both campus based and remote students.
Where some staff view the educational value of WBLT positively others report concerns
that technology has a negative impact on learning. Staff also express concern about
intellectual property, the potential re-use of lectures, reduced student attendance and the
technological challenges.
Technological skills and infrastructure
Negative attitudes to online learning are not only concerned with educational value,
they are also attributed to individuals’ lack of technological knowledge and the absence of
a supporting infrastructure (Sidawi, 2013). University staff lacking in technological knowhow are reluctant to be exposed to students who are seen as sophisticated users of
technology with expectations of ‘up-to-date and relevant information and communication’
(Păunescu, 2013, p. 28).
To ensure the successful adoption of online learning and avoid the disengagement of
academics, universities need to acknowledge that staff and students are not always
technically savvy and provide appropriate resources and support. This in turn poses
challenges for IT departments in terms of staying abreast of technological change and
resourcing support. Universities also need to be prepared to deal with a wide range of
practical issues that impact on the adoption of online learning:
Global time zones, student commitments and the practicality of synchronous delivery
Selection of appropriate online technology
Potential incompatibility between hardware, operating systems and applications
Provision of cameras, microphones, lighting and other hardware
24/7 provision requires 24/7 technical support
Quality assessment of electronic resources.
(Sidawi, 2013) and (Strachan, Liyanage, Casselden, & Penlington, 2011).
Whilst online learning is changing the ways universities operate and students learn, it is
important to recognise different technologies’ strengths and weaknesses and the scale of
infrastructure required to support the adoption of these technologies.
421
CAROLINE NORMAN
Research methodology
The aim of the pilot was to test the potential of new online technology as a means of
enhancing learning quality and extending the geographic reach of WBL for designers.
The research set out to evaluate the staff and student experience, exploring
institutional and technological challenges (Sidawi, 2013), convenience and flexibility,
educational and social value (Gosper, et al 2008).
Where case study based research does not intend findings to be generalised, there is
however scope for indicative findings and valuable insights if a rigorous approach is taken
and unwarranted claims are avoided (Denscombe, 2003). This case study employed the
principles of action based research, a practical, problem-solving approach well suited to
education where ‘research is directed towards greater understanding and improvement of
practice over a period of time’ (Bell, 2003, p.10). Action research enables practitioners to
introduce changes to their practice, evaluate these and implement findings through an
ongoing, cyclical process.
Staff and students collaborated in the evaluation of the online learning, both formally
and informally throughout the pilot, with findings being implemented as appropriate. The
two staff participants were part-time lecturers familiar with the University’s VLE Moodle
but inexperienced in other WBLT. The student participants were eight full-time campus
based students and eight WBL design practitioners located in the UK, Europe, North
America and Africa.
The pilot was conducted over one year and prior to this involved staff in the research of
online learning technology over a period of six months. Online learning was then
introduced at the beginning of the academic year with campus based lectures, seminars
and workshops made accessible online.
Classes were run by teaching staff and sometimes involved guest speakers, with
students attending both in person and online. The timetabling of classes was optimised to
accommodate different time zones and where possible classes were recorded and made
available online after the event. Shortly after the introduction of online classes, online
discussion groups and group tutorials were also introduced for WBL students.
Qualitative and quantitative data were collected throughout the pilot with
triangulation achieved by gathering data through a range of methods and sources. These
included documentation generated by the staff, informal discussions with both staff and
students, and semi-structured interviews with ten of the participating students (five fulltime and five WBL) after six months of online learning. The interviews were recorded and
subsequently transcribed for analysis.
The research was conducted with the informed consent of the staff and students within
the ethical guidelines of research at Birmingham City University. The ethical approach was
designed to ensure the anonymity of individual participants and included the
dissemination of findings.
Research findings
Preparation for online learning
Staff explained that the motivation for the pilot arose from the advent of MOOCs, the
recognition that more accessible technology was becoming available and online learning’s
422
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
potential to provide for a ‘better alignment with employer needs’ (Dua, 2013, www). Prior
to the pilot, one member of staff had experimented with lecture streaming over the
internet but this had been unsuccessful as the IT department was unable to support web
casting. Staff had become frustrated with the University’s slowness to innovate (Thomas,
2014) and were concerned that an opportunity was being missed.
The pilot was a small scale, course led initiative with the specific aim (Hammersley, et
al. 2013) of improving the student experience and extending WBL’s geographic reach. Led
and implemented by the staff, there was no institutional or cost saving agenda so
resistance on these grounds was not evident. However, staff were aware of intellectual
property issues and potential sensitivities around the recording of lectures (Gosper et al
2008).
Staff described the challenge faced in the absence of an online learning framework and
their own lack of specialist IT knowledge and experience. While they had found
considerable literature concerned with online learning, they were unable to identify
sources of guidance on specialist software and learned through online searches, discussion
groups, commercial web sites, participation in training offered by software providers and
experimentation with interested colleagues within the University. Two types of specialist
online software were identified. The first was web-based lecture technology (WBLT) such
as Panopto, designed to live stream, digitally record and store lectures for distribution via
the web as a one-way medium delivering audio, video, presentation material such as
PowerPoint and other visual content captured on camera. The second was web
conferencing or ‘webinar’ software such as GoToTraining, WebEx Training, Adobe Connect
and the open source Big Blue Button, designed to share and record real-time events,
offering two-way communication. Web conferencing software shares voice, video,
presentation material and text based chat, creating virtual classrooms where participants
can raise hands, answer polls, work in breakout groups and take over as presenters.
As two-way communication and the creation of a virtual classroom were seen as
essential to the learning experience the staff chose to focus on web conferencing software.
In deciding on an appropriate software provider cost proved a key factor. The costs
associated with implementing web conferencing software were found to vary and
depended on a number of scale related factors. Over and above cost the staff encountered
an array of IT and user related factors for consideration including:
Responsibility for hosting
Compatibility with university systems
The requirement for IT involvement and resources
Functionality across operating systems, desktop and mobile devices
The number of participants supported
Ease of operation
Quality and availability of training
Reliability
24/7 support
Synchronous and asynchronous learning features
Support for different file types
Ease of editing recordings.
423
CAROLINE NORMAN
During the research into online web conferencing software, the course staff found that
the University’s VLE Moodle could provide web conferencing via Big Blue Button. However,
testing at the time identified functional issues which led to the pilot progressing with
commercial web conferencing software provided by Adobe Connect.
Implementation of online learning
The staff accounts of the pilot and the interviews of the students revealed two very
distinct experiences as highlighted by Gosper, et al (2008). Where staff inexperience led to
a challenging and sometimes stressful introduction to online learning technology, the
students described an overwhelmingly positive experience.
Early staff accounts of the pilot focused on the technological challenges, the stress
caused when classes didn’t go to plan and ‘technology got in the way’. However there was
also a strong appreciation of the educational experience from both staff and students, with
staff becoming increasingly positive in response to student feedback.
Staff explained how research, design and delivery of classes was complicated by the
need to operate the web conferencing software. One member of staff likened the early
experience to trying to fly a plane whilst presenting.
When you stand up in front of a group of students you need to concentrate on the
content, you don't want the technology to get in the way.
Despite careful preparation and rehearsal staff encountered hardware and software
problems, such as the absence of audio, the creation of sound loops or the loss of
presentation files’ appearance and functionality.
Maybe there's been something as simple as a software upgrade, or someone’s changed
the settings on the computer, then you're stuck, the clock is running and you feel
you're letting your students down.
I don't mind crashing and burning occasionally, the students are very supportive, but
you don't want to be doing that too often.
Visiting speakers posed an additional challenge, being unfamiliar with the technology
and variable in their ability to adapt and relate to the online students.
Whilst becoming familiar with the web conferencing software and its many features,
the staff would de-brief after a class and adapt for the next time.
In the early days this often involved being less ambitious in classes and accepting that
our time was limited, so the quality and editing of recordings might not be as good as
we wanted, we reined it back a bit.
Relatively early in the pilot, staff and students found that although Adobe Connect
worked well for classes it was less suited to discussion groups and group tutorials, a
simpler format was needed. Staff and students considered various synchronous and
asynchronous platforms including email, Moodle’s text chat, video chat platforms Skype
and Google Hangout. Google Hangout was chosen as it provided free, real-time, multi user
video and text chat with the only pre-requisite being a Gmail email account. Staff and
students also negotiated the timing of Hangouts to accommodate students’ work
commitments and different time zones.
424
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
As Google Hangout was a relatively new consumer platform, introduced in May 2013,
most of the staff and students had no experience but found it relatively easy to operate.
Google Hangout proved valuable for study group discussions, group tutorials and as a
means of maintaining engagement during periods of independent study.
Educational and social learning value
Staff were impressed by the levels of student engagement and interaction online. They
also described the challenge of designing meaningful learning experiences, particularly
where classes were seminar and workshop based.
Some of our classes worked better than others for the online students. Our starting
point when planning a class was still campus based. Some of the web conferenced
classes took some organization to make them work well and time was an issue.
With experience, staff found they were able to run straightforward classes with
confidence, but they felt that if they had more time they could be more imaginative and
create better classes. Reflecting on the pilot to-date staff believed they had reached a
point where they could develop several different 'models' or formats for classes that
would help make the planning of online and campus based learning easier. Staff also
observed some unexpected and worthwhile outcomes.
We noticed in some cases that online students would be running their own text based
discussion in parallel with the class, these added value as we were able to draw upon
them.
If there was only one of us running the class, keeping track of the online students was
difficult, so we started to ask the students in the room to keep track of the online text
chat, which made our life easier and made the students feel more connected.
As the pilot progressed and staff enjoyed positive feedback from the students they
reported increasing confidence in operating the web conferencing software. Staff
recognized their lack of technological skills required them to be comfortable with a degree
of risk and learning by doing (Kolb, 1984), but they still found some experiences quite
stressful. However, they reported that the collaborative nature of the pilot and students’
involvement had created a positive environment which:
Allowed us to learn together and gave us permission to get it [the technology] wrong
provided the content was still good.
Staff sometimes experienced stress over technological challenges and were concerned
about the impact on the student experience. Students were far less concerned and
surprisingly relaxed, they took the view that technology problems are to be expected and
are part of everyday life. Where staff worried about the quality of sound and video
recordings, students were generally satisfied with recording quality and were more
interested in seeing all their classes recorded and made available online.
All of the WBL students described a positive experience of the online classes. Their
views mirrored Gosper, et al (2008), identifying flexibility, convenience and the scope to
achieve a work, study, life balance as a priority. One student took the view that attendance
online was of equal value to attendance in person.
425
CAROLINE NORMAN
I don’t feel any difference between being there in person or online.
Students also adopted their own flexible approaches to online learning, for-instance if
work commitments meant it was not viable to actively participate in a class they would still
connect online and simply listen in.
When asked about their overall experience of online classes, both full-time campus
based and WBL students were very positive. Campus based students felt they added value
to the course and the shared learning experience with one international student
observing:
Love it! Very good, I could have taken the course this way.
All of the campus based students interviewed felt they benefitted from increased
exposure to the more experienced WBL students and the discussion they generated during
online classes. Campus based students also found the online recordings valuable, despite
the relatively low quality and lack of editing, using them to revisit and gain greater
understanding.
As a means of evaluating how students viewed the relative value of learning from
attendance in person, online and via Moodle, students were asked to weight the three
components of their learning by apportioning 100 per cent across the three. Responses
varied by individuals and their circumstances, overall WBL students attributed 25% of their
learning value to online learning with campus based students attributing 14%. All students
placed high value on attendance in person. Moodle was valued particularly highly by WBL
students. Whilst the student sample was very small, the findings begin to demonstrate the
blurring of boundaries between the full-time campus based and WBL students, as
described by Gosper, et al (2008).
Table 1 Students’ views on relative value: learning in person, online and via Moodle.
Full-time students
Work-based learning students
All students
In person
64%
41%
52.5%
Online
14%
24%
19%
Moodle
22%
35%
28.5%
Students took a flexible approach to their learning. Where internet access was not an
issue for most, two of the more remote WBL students occasionally suffered from
unreliable internet connections, which was a cause of frustration. In these cases they
relied more heavily upon access to recordings of classes and the accompanying narrative
provided on Moodle. In contrast, one WBL student who lived within commuting distance
preferred to attend in person, but also appreciated being linked to the other WBL students
online.
Seeing the others online is amazing, it’s [the online technology] opening up the world.
All the WBL students valued the sense of involvement and connection the online
learning provided. Google Hangouts were seen as a valuable way of staying in touch,
particularly during periods of independent study where they might otherwise feel isolated.
Staff also appreciated the social engagement arising from the introduction of video chat,
426
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
contrasting previous years’ experiences of limited contact with WBL students with the
opportunity for regular connection between staff and students across the globe.
Before we settle down to work we’ll chat about the weather and plans for the weekend
with one student sitting in shirt sleeves whilst another has a snow scape as a backdrop.
Where one-way WBLT might not support the important social opportunities identified
by Sandel (2014), the two-way technologies Adobe Connect and Google Hangout were
consistently described as valuable to the development of the learning community.
As the pilot ended the staff expressed the view that their experiences had exposed
them to the advantages of online learning, that these had far outweighed the
disadvantages and that they intended to continue support the course using the
technology.
Conclusions
If the impact of technological change on higher education is to be similar to that in
music, retail and journalism then it may not be a case of whether universities adopt online
learning but when and how.
Building on previous research that identified the value of WBL for design management,
this pilot set out to test TEL as a means of making professional development more
accessible to those in design practice.
Whilst case study research doesn’t aim to generalize findings, the pilot highlights the
potential of new developments in online learning. More specifically for the professional
development of designers, the pilot draws attention to the opportunity for higher
education to contribute to design practitioners’ lifelong learning.
The pilot was ambitious and at times the introduction of online learning was
overwhelming for staff. This was due to time limitations, lack of technological know-how
and the absence of online learning infrastructure. Despite this, both WBL and full-time,
campus based students reported positive experiences, they valued the flexibility provided
by online learning, the educational and social learning value.
The pilot highlights the investment involved in implementing new approaches to
learning. The pilot also draws attention to the collaborative approach and the supportive
environment this created for the staff, enabling them to explore the technology and take
risks.
For institutions approaching online learning, the creation of a supportive institutional
environment would seem a priority, with provision of infrastructure, expertise, time for
staff learning and a safe environment in which to experiment.
Online learning strategies that focus on educational value may be more likely to
overcome universities’ inherent conservatism. The greater conviction of those already
experienced in TEL would suggest there is value in facilitating early adopters, both staff
and students, and enabling these to become the champions for online learning.
References
Bell, J. (2003). Doing Your Research Project – A guide for first-time researchers in
education and social science (3rd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
427
CAROLINE NORMAN
Boud, D., & Solomon, N. (Eds.). (2001). Work-based Learning – A New Higher Education?
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Bushnell, N. (Interview). (2014, February 24, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: My Teacher
Is an App: The Classroom of the Future. UK: BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03w02sj
CBI. (2011). Skills for the creative industries - Investing in the talents of our people.
Retrieved from http://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2011/09/urgentaction-needed-to-meet-creative-industries-skills-demand-cbi/
Coughlan, S. (2014, May 7, 2014). Online students can’t help being sociable. BBC. Retrieved
May 7, 2014, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26925463
Creative and Cultural Skills, (2011). The Qualifications Blueprint: A Qualifications Strategy
for the Creative and Cultural Industries. Retrieved from http://creativeblueprint.co.uk/library/item/the-qualifications-blueprint-a-qualifications-strategy-forthe-creative-and
Duneier, M. (Interview). (2014, March 3, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: The University of
the Future. UK: BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03wpf59
Denscombe, M. (2003). The Good Research Guide for small-scale social research projects
(2nd ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. (2013). Maturing of the MOOC. Retrieved
December 12, 2013 from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/2401
93/13-1173-maturing-of-the-mooc.pdf
Design Skills Advisory Panel. (2007). High-level skills for higher value. Retrieved February
26, 2014, from http://www.innovationunit.org/sites/default/files/Highlevel%20skills%20for%20higher%20value.pdf
Dua, A. (2013). College for All. McKinsey. Retrieved March 27, 2014, from
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/social_sector/college_for_all
Gosper, M., Green, D., McNeil, M., Phillips, R., Preston, G., & Woo, K. (2008). The impact of
web-based lecture technologies on current and future practices in learning and
teaching. Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved May 13, 2014 from
https://www.mq.edu.au/ltc/altc/wblt/research/report.html
Hammersley, A., Tallantyre, F., & Le Cornu, A. (2013). Flexible Learning: a practical guide
for academic staff. York: The higher Education Academy. Retrieved from
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/flexible-learning/fl_guides/staff_guide
HEFCE. (2013). Postgraduate education in England and Northern Ireland: Overview report
2013. Retrieved from http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2013/201314/
International Telecommunications Union. (2014). The World in 2014: ICT Facts and Figures.
Retrieved December 12, 2014 from
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lederman, D., & Jaschick, S. (2013, August 27). Survey of Faculty Attitudes on Technology.
Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved March 16, 2014 from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/survey-faculty-attitudestechnology#sthash.kF7Wnlca.dpbs
428
The Potential of Technology-Enhanced Learning in Work-Based Design Management Education
Letter from 58 Professors to Smith Addressing edX. (2013, May 23). Retrieved December
14, 2013 from http://www.thecrimson.com/flash-graphic/2013/5/23/edx-faculty-lettersmith/
Newton, D. (2013, May 9). Online students and teachers are no different from the rest of
academia. The Guardian. Retrieved December 11, 2013 from
http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2013/may/08/onlineteachers-learning-higher-education
Norman, C., & Jerrard, R.N. (2012). Design management education and work-based
learning. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 11/2, 155-166. doi:
10.1386/adch.11.2.155_1
Parry, M. (2013, September 3). A Star MOOC Professor Defects—at Least for Now. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved April 9, 2014 from
https://chronicle.com/article/A-MOOC-Star-Defects-at-Least/141331/
Păunescu, M. (2013). Students’ Attitudes towards technology-Enabled Learning: A Change
in Learning Patterns? European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16 /1, 27-35.
Raelin, J. A. (2008). Work-based Learning: bridging knowledge and action in the workplace.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Sandel, M. (Interview). (2014, March 3, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: The University of the
Future. UK: BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03wpf59
Strachan, R., Liyanage, L., Casselden, B., & Penlington, R. (2011). Effectiveness of
technology to support work based learning: the stakeholders’ perspective. Association
for Learning Technology. Retrieved from
http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2171/7/RLT_A_007800_O.html
Sidawi, B. (2013). The Tutors’ Views on the Utilization of E-Learning System in Architectural
Education. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16 /2, 1-12.
Thomas, E. (Interview). (2014, February 24, 20.00). [Radio series episode]. In: My Teacher
Is an App: The Classroom of the Future. BBC Radio 4. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03w02sj
Thomson, M., and Koskinen, T. (2012). Design for Growth & Prosperity. Helsinki, Finland:
The European Design Leadership Board.
Warnes, S. (2012, July 3). Flexible MBA programmes are on the up in the UK. The
Independent. Retrieved December 12, 2013 from
http://www.independent.co.uk/student/postgraduate/mbas-guide/flexible-mbaprogrammes-are-on-the-up-in-the-uk-7906290.html
Wasserman, A. (2014, www). Learn! 2050 – How we transformed America’s learning
system. Retrieved April 16, 2014 from
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7dCg1fKL5EaOFg2VkxKWEJvUjg/edit?usp=sharing&pl
i=1
Weller, M. and Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in higher education. European
Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16/1, 53-66.
429
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty
Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
Monica WALCH TRACEY* and Alisa HUTCHINSON
Wayne State University
*monicatracey@wayne.edu,
Abstract: The design space is defined by uncertainty, and designers must be
prepared to manage the instability and unpredictability inherent in their work in
order to achieve meaningful design outcomes. As such, design education
programs should provide students with opportunities to explore their own
perspectives on and experiences with uncertainty. As part of a larger research
agenda exploring professional identity development in design education, this
analysis addresses changing perspectives on uncertainty in graduate design
students across the course of one semester. Students engaged in reflective
writing on uncertainty at two points in the semester and responses were coded
for uncertainty orientation. Results indicate that 58% of students shifted their
uncertainty orientation at the second reflection point, with momentum stronger
toward positive and weaker toward negative at the second prompt. Implications
for research on uncertainty in design, design education, and professional identity
development are discussed.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
Introduction
Design is characterized by the uncertainty inherent in the ill-structured and often
mutable problems that it seeks to solve. When designers are positioned as the drivers and
arbiters of the design space, their own attitudes and strategies for managing this
uncertainty may likely hold the power to influence design actions and outcomes in a
meaningful way – for better or for worse. Research findings from psychology indicate that
information processing, decision-making, and creativity may all be influenced by the way
individuals respond to situational uncertainty (Dugas et al, 2005; Luhmann, Ishida, &
Hajcak, 2011; Rosen, Ivanova, and Knäuper, 2014). Although these results were typically
generated in experimental contexts, they suggest important implications for professional
design work that draws on cognitive and creative skills for idea generation and problem
solving. Yet, despite their potential to shape the design process, relatively little is known
about how designers’ attitudes and behaviors related to uncertainty develop or unfold in
professional contexts.
One avenue for exploring attitudes toward uncertainty in design is to consider them
within a framework of professional identity, or one’s sense of self-as-designer. Professional
identity can be generally understood as dynamic yet connected narratives about
professional beliefs, experiences, values, abilities, and responsibilities that are socially
constructed and ever-evolving in response to new experiences (Luehmann, 2007). Design
education programs are a logical venue to introduce emerging designers to concepts and
experiences that will be foundational for building and maintaining their identity as
designers. However, our understanding of effective methods for integrating identity
development work into design curricula is currently constrained by a lack of research.
While professional identity and its development have been studied and incorporated into
the curriculum of many other professional fields (Luehmann 2007), the design and design
education literatures have not adequately considered these issues to date.
This paper seeks to address this need by exploring how students consider and then
reconsider their experiences and attitudes about uncertainty in everyday and professional
contexts within the setting of a graduate course in instructional design. This line of inquiry
is part of a larger research project investigating identity development in design education;
the results to date have supported the use of reflective writing as an instructional strategy
for identity work while also providing important formative feedback that has been used to
revise the class content and activities (Tracey & Hutchinson, in review; Tracey, Hutchinson,
& Grzebyk, 2014). Our prior work has focused on the aspects of reflection that students
incorporate in their work; however, for this particular project, we were interested in
understanding how narratives taken from student reflection journals may reveal patterns
of attitude change or consolidation when addressing uncertainty topics at different points
in the semester.
A brief overview of the psychology of uncertainty
Within the psychological research literature (as well as common parlance), uncertainty
is defined as of a state of instability and unpredictability due to a lack of knowledge, either
about events that might occur or have already occurred (Bar-Anan, Wilson, & Gilbert,
2009; Rosen, Ivanova, & Knäuper, 2014). Certainty is akin to assurance and security, while
431
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
uncertainty arouses doubt and instability; it is typically characterized as a psychologicallyaversive state that people actively seek to minimize or eradicate (Bar-Anan, Wilson, &
Gilbert, 2009). Particularly within the design thinking tradition, uncertainty is also seen as a
defining aspect of the design space, inseparable from the knotty and untidy human
problems that design seeks to solve (Cross, 2011). Thus, being a designer means operating
in uncertainty, a space that is inherently uncomfortable in a psychological sense.
While uncertainty may be experienced as afflictive, research from social psychology
indicates that some people are motivated to engage with uncertain situations while others
seek to avoid them; this has been termed uncertainty orientation or UO (Sorrentino &
Short, 1986; Sorrentino, Smithson, Hodson, Roney, & Walker, 2003). Although the
uncertain state is aversive in either case, those who actively engage with it do so because
they find the new knowledge gained to be suitably rewarding, while those who are
motivated to avoid uncertainty find a greater benefit in preserving their existing
knowledge. There are other approaches to understanding individual relationships to
uncertainty (and ambiguity, a related concept that is often included as a component of
uncertainty) but they are generally concerned with how tolerance of uncertainty may
contribute to psychopathology with the cognitive or motivational aspects of the construct
seen as secondary or not considered (Rosen, Ivanova, & Knäuper, 2014).
The difference between tolerance of and orientation toward uncertainty is subtle but
important. Tolerance refers to the ability to endure uncertainty with minimal impact on
cognition, mood, or behavior while simultaneously seeking to move into certainty (Rosen,
Ivanova, & Knäuper, 2014). Uncertainty orientation as it is defined by Sorrentino and
Short (1986) is more concerned with willingness to either engage with or avoid uncertain
situations and seems to provide the best fit for understanding why some people actively
seek ‘the frustration and the joy that designers get from their activity’ (Cross, 2011, p. 21).
Within this perspective, the rewards of solving the wicked problems (Buchanan, 1992) of
design are sufficiently sweet to prompt the individual designer to engage with the oftenharsh realities of uncertainty. This is not to dismiss the importance of understanding of
how uncertainty tolerance comes into play once the designer has engaged with the
uncertain design space, but rather to point out how uncertainty orientation may explain
why some people are drawn to design in the first place.
At this juncture, little is known about the relationship between uncertainty attitudes
and/or orientation and design outcomes, although differences have been found in
information seeking, information processing, decision-making, and achievement
motivation between those who tolerate or seek uncertainty and those who do not (Rosen,
Ivanova, and Knäuper, 2014; Sorrentino et al, 2003). Cognitive differences include a
tendency toward black-and-white interpretations of information as well as a bias for
recalling uncertainty-marked information, impulsive decision-making, and avoidance of
novel situations (Dugas et al, 2005; Luhmann, Ishida, & Hajcak, 2011; Rosen, Ivanova, and
Knäuper, 2014). Some research has specifically investigated the relationship between
creativity and uncertainty tolerance, with findings indicating that greater tolerance for
uncertainty is associated with higher levels of creativity (Kornilova & Kornilov, 2010; Erez &
Nouri, 2010). Situational uncertainty in and of itself may have a stifling influence the
evaluation of creative ideas, regardless of the uncertainty tolerance of the individuals
involved, leading to the rejection of creative ideas even in situations specifically designed
to elicit them (Mueller, Melwani, & Goncalo, 2011). As a caveat, however, many of these
432
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
findings arise from experimental research and it is not clear to what extent these results
can be generalized to professional design activities and designers.
Professional identity as a frame for uncertainty
orientation
Although limited, these research findings suggest that personal attitudes toward
uncertainty may hold the potential to exert a powerful influence on actions and outcomes
in the design space. This underscores the importance of understanding how individual
attributes interact with design responsibilities, an understanding that is the core of one’s
professional identity. The concept of professional identity provides a useful frame for
addressing this topic as it incorporates the individual’s evolving understanding of beliefs,
values, experiences, abilities, and responsibilities as they relate to their professional
practice (Luehmann, 2007; Tracey & Hutchinson, 2013; Tracey, Hutchinson, & Gryzbek,
2014). Identity might also be thought of as a schema that integrates a definition of what it
means to be a designer with the expression of individual traits within that characterization
to construct a durable yet evolving sense of self-as-designer. It is important to recognize
that identity is simultaneously enduring and malleable; core components are typically slow
to develop and relatively stable, but are subject to ongoing re-evaluation and reinterpretation in response to new experiences (Luehmann, 2007). Such reinterpretations
may represent refinement or confirmation of existing beliefs or values, or they may
represent a significant transformation of an existing identity component, depending on the
nature of the triggering experience. Following this, designers would benefit not only from
understanding the role of uncertainty in design, but also from exploring and continually
refining an awareness of their own attitudes and orientation toward uncertainty in the
design space.
As mentioned previously, professional identity development is an established
curriculum component in fields such as education, medicine, psychology, and other human
services, and reflective writing is commonly used as a pedagogical tool to support student
identity work including belief exploration and change via narration of personal experiences
with professional contexts and duties (Luehmann, 2007; Tillema, 2000; Tracey &
Hutchinson, 2013; Tracey & Hutchinson, in review; Tracey, Hutchinson, and Grzebyk,
2014). Reflection-on-action as outlined by Schön (1983) is widely accepted as a framework
for examining experiences and beliefs within the professional sphere although reflectionfor-action, a related concept from Schön’s work, may be equally useful for design students
who are concerned with preparing for future professional activities.
Methodology
Instructional context
Data used in this study were drawn from four consecutive semesters of an introductory
instructional design (ID) class held by a large public university in the Great Lakes region of
the United States. All graduate students (master’s and doctoral) in ID were required to
take this course during their first semester; it was also open to graduate students from
other departments as part of a certificate program in online teaching. Because the
433
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
master’s program in ID was offered entirely online, this course was also held online. In
order to model experimental approaches to course design, Google Docs was used to
construct as ad-hoc class site rather than using the institutional learning management
system (Blackboard).
ID has traditionally taken a process- or model-driven approach to design, but there has
been a shift by some in the field in recent years to incorporate design-thinking approaches
in ID education (Tracey & Boling, 2013). The course involved in this study uses a designthinking framework, spending the first seven weeks on general design principles before
integrating content specific to instructional design during the remainder of the semester.
Class activities were developed from a general constructivist perspective and included case
studies, peer groups, reflective writing, and a term project that synthesized several design
components in response to a loosely structured ID problem. In keeping with the designthinking perspective (which privileges the role of the designer in the design space), there
was a significant emphasis on exploring personal experiences and beliefs relating to design
and instruction via written reflection. This represented a marked change in the course,
which had previously emphasized the importance of learning classic ID models with little to
no attention given to individual involvement in the design process.
Participants
A total of 69 graduate students consented to participate in this study. They varied in
terms of age and ethnic background (including several international students), but more
importantly, they brought a wide range of backgrounds and experiences to the course.
Some were not far removed from their undergraduate degree, while others had significant
professional experience in ID or other fields and were interested in advancing or changing
their careers. As mentioned previously, some students were pursuing a certificate in online
teaching and came from departments across the campus, including audiology, library and
information sciences, educational psychology, and bilingual education.
An important difference between our subject population and students in other design
fields is that these subjects did not necessarily enter their graduate program either
identifying themselves as designers or aspiring to acquire that identity. Many held a
traditional conception of ID as a field that is driven by process models and came to the
class with a preconceived notion that the course would be grounded in these models.
Students from outside the field typically had very little knowledge or awareness of ID or
design and identified with their own professional discipline rather than that of a designer
(either general or instructional), at least upon entry to the course.
Data sources and collection
Data was drawn from student reflection journals that were kept in response to
assigned prompts at regular intervals, with a total of 27 prompts over the fifteen weeks of
the semester. Journals were housed online in Google docs, with permission granted to the
instructor to provide comments and assessment. During the first and fifth week of the
course, students were asked to engage in reflective writing in response to prompts
regarding uncertainty, and their responses were used as the data for this study. The texts
of the prompts follow:
Prompt 1.3 (first week, third prompt of the week): ‘Describe a time when you felt
totally uncertain. Try to remember how that felt and the greatest challenges you faced
434
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
because of the uncertainty. What did you do to handle it? Knowing that part of being a
designer is always dealing with uncertainty, how do you feel about being a designer?’
Prompt 5.5 (fifth week, fifth prompt of the week): ‘What are your thoughts about the
last slide in the PPT presentation this week? Please share where you are today.’ (The slide
referred to in the prompt emphasized the role of uncertainty in design).
The pedagogical rationale for sequencing the prompts in this manner was to allow
students to begin exploring uncertainty from a general (and presumably less threatening)
vantage point, and then tackle the more challenging issue of locating themselves in
relation to design-based uncertainty. In the interim weeks, students were exposed to
concepts and issues intended to deepen their understanding of design-thinking and the
role of the designer. Through exposure to this material, it was presumed that student
reactions to and understanding of uncertainty would become more complicated, which
was an intentional instructional strategy design to support development and growth. In
terms of the wording of the prompts, there was also an intentional movement from a very
specific and rich prompt to one that was more general, allowing freedom for a wider range
of responses but also challenging students to take ownership of the form and content of
their writing. The prompts in this case served as instructional scaffolding that supported
students who were engaging with unfamiliar material, and were gradually faded in order
to continually challenge them as they gained more experience with the content and
confidence in their writing.
After final grades were submitted at the close of each semester, students were asked
to give their consent to participate in the study; the instructor then removed any
identifying information from the journals of participating students and sent them to the
research team. An additional review was performed by the second author to verify that
journals were anonymous, then relevant journal responses were organized into separate
files by prompt and semester. Response sets were forwarded to the assigned data coders,
drawn from our coding team of eight instructional technology graduate students and one
educational psychology graduate student, all of whom made coding decisions
independently. As mentioned, a total of 69 students gave consent to include their journals
in the study. Of this group, 67 subjects provided a response to Prompt 1.3, 68 provided a
response to Prompt 5.5, and a total of 66 students responded to both prompts.
Data Assessment
All responses (N=135) were coded for orientation toward uncertainty using the
following categories: positive (overall positive attitude signaling an embracing of
uncertainty); negative (overall negative attitude signaling avoidance of uncertainty); mixed
(attitude incorporating positive and negative aspects); and not indicated (response either
did not discuss the subject’s personal uncertainty orientation or was unclear in some other
way). Our approach to this coding scheme was based on the UO orientation described
previously, although the binary approach of that construct was not adequate for our data,
as many subjects had a mixed perspective on uncertainty or did not indicate a clear
personal orientation.
Two data coders initially categorized each response using the uncertainty orientation
criteria. If these two coders agreed, the categorization decision was accepted as final. In
the event that they disagreed, a third reviewer independently coded the response and if
that decision matched one from the first coding round, the coding for that response was
435
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
considered final. When all three coders disagreed, the principal researchers collaborated
to deliberate and adjudicate the coding decision.
Results
Table 1 displays the counts for each uncertainty orientation category by prompt and
semester. Figure 1 displays the results as percentages, allowing for an easier comparison
across semesters. An increase in positive orientation from 44% to 54% can be seen from
Prompt 1.3 to Prompt 5.5. There was no meaningful difference in mixed orientation (24%
to 25%); while negative orientation decreased from 9% to 3% and not indicated/unclear
orientation decreased from 24% to 18% (see Figure 1).
Uncertainty
Orientation
N
Semester
Prompt 1.3
17 20 11
S1 S2 S3
20
S4
68
All
Prompt 5.5
17 21 10
S1 S2 S3
19
S4
67
All
135
TOTAL
P
N
M
NI/U
3
4
5
5
12
1
4
3
30
6
16
16
8
0
4
5
11
0
5
3
36
2
17
12
66
8
33
28
11
0
5
5
4
1
3
3
12
2
4
3
5
0
4
1
Table 1: Uncertainty orientation by prompt and semester. Adapted from Tracey & Hutchinson (in
revision). Uncertainty, reflection, and designer identity development.
In total, 38 subjects, or 58%, shifted their uncertainty orientation in response to
Prompt 5.5 when compared to their response to Prompt 1.3. The changes between
prompts can be better understood by considering patterns of movement from one
category to another, illustrated by Figure 2.
Of subjects who originally displayed a positive orientation for the first prompt, 36%
shifted to another orientation category in their second response. For mixed orientation,
this rate was 71%, while negative orientation was at 100% (meaning all subjects who were
initially negative toward uncertainty shifted their perspective) and not indicated was at
67%. Looking at this from the opposite direction, of the subjects who were in the positive
category for Prompt 5.5, 49% moved there from a different category. For mixed
orientation at Prompt 5.5, 71% of responses were originally in another category, while this
rate for negative orientation was 100% and not indicated was 58%.
A final consideration is an analysis of which categories the subjects who shifted
perspective most commonly vacated and entered. First, 26% of the 38 subjects who shifted
moved out of positive, 32% moved out of mixed, 16% moved out of negative, and 26%
moved out of not indicated. Conversely, 45% of the 38 total shifters moved into positive,
32% moved into mixed, 5% moved into negative, and 18% moved into not indicated.
436
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Prompt 1.3
Prompt 5.5
NI/U
24%
18%
N
9%
3%
M
24%
25%
P
44%
54%
Figure 1: Uncertainty orientation by prompt (displayed as percentages). From Tracey & Hutchinson (in
revision). Uncertainty, reflection, and designer identity development.
Figure 2: Movement in uncertainty orientation between prompts
437
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
Discussion
As mentioned previously, professional identity is recursive in nature, emerging from
narrative interpretations of experiences as filtered through existing precedents and beliefs.
While central features of identity tend to remain stable over time, as individuals build
initial schemas of their sense of professional self, flux and revision is to be expected. The
goal of this study was to examine patterns of change in subjective perceptions in a group
of student designers as they moved from considering uncertainty as a general topic to
reconsidering it as a component of their professional life. The patterns that emerge from
this particular pool of subjects is not intended to be representative of the experiences of
all design students, but rather illustrative of possible developmental trajectories that may
inform future research on identity development and design education.
First, it is important to note that well over half of all subjects shifted their position on
uncertainty; this may be attributable to the change in focus of the prompts (from a general
to a professional context) as well as exposure to content related to design and uncertainty
in the learning experience that unfolded between prompts. It is also worth noting that the
second prompt fell during the fifth week of the class, and students were anticipating the
start of an ID project during the upcoming weeks that would represent a significant portion
of their final grade (up to 60% in some semesters) and thus were staring design
uncertainty in the face. However, even with this atmosphere of uncertainty and the
complications that come from going deeper into the content, the strongest momentum
was in the direction of the positive category, as almost half of those who switched
positions moved into positive. Likewise, the positive category had the lowest rate of
departure, losing only 36% of its original subjects (the lowest outbound percentage of the
four categories). While these findings may seem to indicate that subjects were more
willing to embrace uncertainty at the time of Prompt 5.5, it is important to remember that
the results speak only to subjects’ self-perceptions, not the objective reality of their
actions. It is possible that responses were influenced by the desire to adopt attitudes that
were presented as characteristic of the profession rather than representing a genuine
change in mindset regarding uncertainty. Part of professional identity development
involves trying out new schemas about the self-as-designer in order to assess whether they
fit the individual (both in terms of their own qualities, perceptions of self, and feedback
from others in their community of practice). Thus, it is not surprising to see the most
movement in student responses toward a positive orientation for uncertainty, as the
course content emphasized the need for designers to be able to live with and in
uncertainty in their professional life.
In line with this finding, the negative category generated the least inbound momentum
within this group; its six original members all shifted to either the mixed category (four
subjects) or the positive category (two subjects), while only two students moved into the
negative category at the second prompt (both shifting from a previously mixed
orientation). Not surprisingly, one of the two indicated doubts about committing to a
design-focused profession while the other remained committed to design but still very
resistant to choosing a profession that rests in uncertainty (and even acknowledged that
they may not find as much joy in their work as others did). This suggests that uncertainty
orientation may be a useful filter for students whose temperament is not well suited to
design. It should be noted that resistance to uncertainty does not necessarily preclude a
438
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
career in design, but a designer who feels this way may need to develop different coping
strategies to successfully negotiate the design space than one who embraces it. This
speaks to the importance of providing students with the opportunity to reflect on their
personal qualities as they relate to design in order to give them an opportunity to provide
them with an adequate foundation to meet professional challenges. Likewise, given the
amount of belief change exhibited by these subjects, it may be beneficial to give students
multiple opportunities to reconsider uncertainty in light of new experiences, as students
who initially exhibit enthusiasm may find that uncertainty becomes tedious while others
who initially resisted uncertainty may become more comfortable with it over time, if they
are otherwise highly motivated and equipped to become a designer.
The mixed category generated the second-highest level of outbound momentum (with
71% shifting from an initial mixed orientation to another category, predominantly positive)
as well as the second-highest level of inbound change (with 32% of shifters moving into
mixed, and 71% of final mixed responses moving there from another category). Only five
subjects retained a mixed orientation for both prompts; since this category represents an
orientation that allows for both positive and negative aspects of uncertainty to be
acknowledged and externalized, it is possible that it serves primarily as a way station
(rather than a stable position) when this aspect of identity is in flux.
Similar to the mixed category, the not indicated category may act as a transitional state
as two-thirds of its original inhabitants shifted into another category for Prompt 5.5, and
58% of its final members moved into this category from another. Not indicating
orientation can be considered an act of avoidance and suggests that subjects in this
category were not prepared to externalize their stance toward uncertainty. There are
several possible motivations for this: perhaps the topic was too novel or too threatening,
or perhaps internal turbulence surrounding the development (or rejection) of new schema
was an obstacle to articulating a position. Again, it is important to note that this is a valid
position from an identity-development standpoint, as it is to be expected that the
narratives generated in this process are dynamic in nature and thus may be difficult to
articulate while in a state of incubation or transition.
The value that comes from examining these reflection patterns is that they illustrate
some (but by no means all) paths that professional identity development can take, any of
which may be valid in a given situation for a given individual. Some students may need to
step away from taking a position while taking in a new experience that challenges their
current understanding of self-as-designer, while others may have a more durable and
stable orientation that weathers a variety of external conditions. As long as students are
genuinely engaging with identity issues, the outcome of that engagement at any one point
in time may not be overly important since identity development is a dynamic process with
a natural ebb and flow.
From the perspective of design education, the goal is not to push students toward a
professional identity that mimics some Platonic ideal of a ‘Designer’ but rather to afford
them the space and the stimuli necessary to understand and master their own traits,
attitudes, habits, and history as they relate to the design space in order to understand who
they are – and who they might become – as designers. It is important to recognize and
reinforce genuine engagement with the material, even (or perhaps especially) when that
engagement reflects ambivalence or malleability. This may be especially important for
identity development work, which naturally involves reinterpretation and revision of
439
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
existing narratives as new ideas and experiences are layered on top of them. Students
may need multiple opportunities to revisit core issues such as uncertainty in order to
develop and maintain a stable sense of how they feel about it as well as an ongoing
awareness of their own development.
Empirical research into uncertainty in design and professional identity development for
designers are in its infancy, but we believe this study is makes an important contribution to
existing discourse on these topics. First, it is important to point out that there are many
possible research paths for exploring uncertainty in relation to design and designers. As an
example, the authors have recently initiated a study intended to develop a preliminary
typology of uncertainty in design; in other words, we are seeking to understand just what
it is that designers are uncertain about. The work of Lane & Maxfield (2005) is providing a
tentative framework for categorizing uncertainty in terms of truth (our confidence level in
the truth of a belief or idea); semantics (our confidence level that meanings are shared by
relevant parties), and ontology (what we do not know about relevant parties, their actions,
and the changes that result from those actions) based on large set of design meeting
transcripts. We believe this will be a fruitful starting point for developing a more nuanced
understanding of uncertainty in design, but there is ample room for other models and
ways of exploring this construct. As one example, Barr, Onarheim, & Christensen (2010)
considered epistemological uncertainty, or subjects’ awareness of what it is they don’t
know, in relation to design requirements and solution strategies and found that
perceptions of uncertainty mediated designer movement between depth-first and
breadth-first approaches to strategy selection.
A foundational typology of uncertainty in the design space will allow for meaningful
research into how individual designers respond to and interact with different types of
uncertainty. While we know from the psychological literature that uncertainty influences
mood, cognition, and behavior, we do not know how these influences operate in
professional design contexts and in professional designers (whether emerging or
established). For instance, an exploration of transactional relationships between designer
expertise, intuition, and personal attitudes toward uncertainty in the design space may
generate significant insight into how individual designers manage uncertainty to keep the
design process moving forward – not to mention, whether and how these relationships
evolve as a function of professional experience.
More work is also needed to understand identity development in designers (both as a
component of design education and as an ongoing process in design practice) and to
identify useful pedagogical strategies for incorporating meaningful identity work in design
curricula. The findings from this study suggest that subjective perceptions of uncertainty
attitudes are pliable, at least during the formational stage if not beyond. This means that
design educators have the responsibility to support students as they explore, transform,
and consolidate their understanding of themselves in relation to uncertainty and other
relevant professional characteristics and beliefs. While we have focused on reflective
writing as one viable instructional strategy, it will be important to explore other
approaches that afford students with opportunities to develop their sense of self-asdesigner. In some cases, the nature of the design field may dictate other approaches; as
one example, visual representations and explorations may resonant strongly for graphic
design students. Instructional designers do a tremendous amount of writing in their
design work and outputs, so reflection journals were a conscious choice as they allow for
440
Getting to Know the Unknown: Shifts in Uncertainty Orientation in a Graduate Design Course
the development of a crucial professional skill in tandem with identity exploration. We
would encourage design educators in other fields to consider reflective writing but also
investigate other modalities of expression that align with the skills specific to their
disciplines. We also believe that it will be important to understand how experienced
designers develop, maintain, and refine their professional identities, as these insights will
likely be quite valuable to design educators in terms of facilitating meaningful learning
experiences for their students. The work of Adams, Daly, Mann, & Dall'Alba, (2011)
provides one approach, an interesting phenomenological exploration of how designers
define their professional responsibilities, but more work is needed to better appreciate
how designers integrate their individual traits into their understanding of the profession
and its cognitive, behavioral, and emotional territories.
Closing remarks
This research is preliminary in nature and is limited by its scope and subject pool, but
we believe it is a meaningful addition to the emerging bodies of work concerning both
uncertainty in design and professional identity development in design education. The
findings demonstrate that students may need multiple opportunities to reflect on
uncertainty in order to move toward a stable position, and that views on general
uncertainty versus professional uncertainty may not always be consistent. While the
willingness to engage with uncertainty is absolutely crucial for designers, it must be
acknowledged that this willingness is subject to change over time. Students who resist
uncertainty initially but still show an interest in design should be given the experiences and
space necessary to engage deeply with uncertainty and with themselves to see if workable
integration can be achieved. It is our hope that these initial results will spur further inquiry
into the role of uncertainty in design and the incorporation of identity building work in
design education.
References
Adams, R. S., Daly, S. R., Mann, L. M., & Dall'Alba, G. (2011). Being a professional: Three
lenses into design thinking, acting, and being. Design Studies, 32(6), 588-607.
Ball, L. J., Onarheim, B., & Christensen, B. T. (2010). Design requirements, epistemic
uncertainty and solution development strategies in software design. Design Studies,
31(6), 567-589.
Bar-Anan, Y., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2009). The feeling of uncertainty intensifies
affective reactions. Emotion, 9(1), 123-127.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5-21.
Dugas, M. J., Hedayati, M., Karavidas, A., Buhr, K., Francis, K., & Phillips, N. A. (2005).
Intolerance of uncertainty and information processing: Evidence of biased recall and
interpretations. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 29(1), 57-70.
Erez, M., & Nouri, R. (2010). Creativity: The influence of cultural, social, and work contexts.
Management and Organization Review, 6(3), 351-370.
Kornilova, T. V., & Kornilov, S. A. (2010). Intelligence and tolerance/intolerance for
uncertainty as predictors of creativity. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 3, 240-256.
441
MONICA WALCH TRACEY & ALISA HUTCHINSON
Lane, D. A., & Maxfield, R. R. (2005). Ontological uncertainty and innovation. Journal of
Evolutionary Economics, 15(1), 3-50.
Luehmann, A.L. (2007). Identity development as a lens to science teacher preparation.
Science Education, 91, 822-839. doi: 10.1002/sce20209
Luhmann, C. C., Ishida, K., & Hajcak, G. (2011). Intolerance of uncertainty and decisions
about delayed, probabilistic rewards. Behavior Therapy, 42(3), 378-386.
Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people
desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23(1), 13-17.
Rosen, N. O., Ivanova, E., & Knäuper, B. (2014). Differentiating intolerance of uncertainty
from three related but distinct constructs. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 27(1), 55-73.
Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York:
Basic Books Inc.
Sorrentino, R. M., & Short, J. C. (1986). Uncertainty orientation, motivation, and cognition.
Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior, 1, 379-403.
Sorrentino, R. M., Smithson, M., Hodson, G., Roney, C. J., & Marie Walker, A. (2003). The
theory of uncertainty orientation: A mathematical reformulation. Journal of
Mathematical Psychology, 47(2), 132-149.
Tillema, H. H. (2000). Belief change towards self-directed learning in student teachers:
immersion in practice or reflection on action. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 575591. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00016-0
Tracey, M.W., & Boling, E. (2013). Preparing instructional designers and educational
technologists: Traditional and emerging perspectives. In M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen, &
M.J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and
Technology (4th ed.). (pp.653-660). New York: Springer.
Tracey, M.W., & Hutchinson, A. (2013). Developing designer identity through reflection.
Educational Technology, 53(3), 28-32.
Tracey, M.W., & Hutchinson, A. (in revision). Uncertainty, reflection, and designer identity
development.
Tracey, M.W., & Hutchinson, A. (in review). Reflection, professional identity, and
instructional design education.
Tracey, M.W., Hutchinson, A., & Grzebyk, T. (2014). Instructional designers as reflective
practitioners: Developing professional identity through reflection. Educational
Technology Research & Development
442
Once Upon a Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
Andrew J. HUNSUCKER and Martin A. SIEGEL
Indiana University School of Informatics and Computing
*ahunsuck@iu.edu
Abstract: As designers we tell stories as we engage in the design process. But
how does one story differ from another? Are there storytelling types used during
different parts of the process? What form and function do these stories take? In
this paper we explore the nature of storytelling in the context of design and how
it plays different roles throughout the process: (1) during research to explain user
stories; (2) during ideation to expand the design space and explore problems; (3)
as a prototyping tool; and so on. We also will describe inappropriate uses of
storytelling in the design process; for example, telling pristine and unreal stories
rather than keeping the story ‘roughly right.’ Examples of each of these
classifications will be presented in the paper, illustrating good techniques
throughout. Finally, implications for design pedagogy will be discussed.
Keywords: storytelling, design process, prototyping, design pedagogy
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
Introduction
Stories are how humans describe their behaviors, actions, emotions and
thoughts. Storytellers build a world, and create a window for the listeners, viewers or
readers to experience that world. As designers, we work in much the same way (Gruen,
Redpath, & Ruettinger, 2002). While the window a storyteller creates could exist as a
video, the pages of a book, or a proscenium, the designer can create a window that exists
as a phone screen, browser window, or even a physical space.
While a storyteller creates characters, a designer creates personas. Where a storyteller
creates settings and mood, a designer creates interfaces and experiences. When a designer
creates a story behind a design, they are imagining a real user working with their design.
This creates a reality behind the design that reminds the designer of the real people that
will touch and interact with their design.
The designer does this by understanding the user story at every step of the design
process. ‘Good stories are memorable. They provide context (conditions). They
communicate culture as well as skill. They communicate tacit knowledge (that which is
difficult to describe in other ways).’ (Siegel, 2004, p. 7) In this paper, we will discuss what
forms these stories take at different phases of the design process: Research, Ideation,
Prototyping and Presentation. We also will examine example stories for each of these four
phases and examine them in detail, understanding how they are built, and how designers
can shape stories for different parts of the process.
Finally, we will examine the phenomenon of the ‘perfect story’ and see how designers
can avoid this common pitfall.
While this paper focuses on storytelling, it is important to understand that we do not
intend to state that a design can or should be completed with only storytelling. Rather, we
suggest that storytelling is a powerful tool (Erickson, 1996) for a designer to develop in
addition to other methods.
Although these stories may make their way into the final product’s marketing
materials, we are not describing stories here for these purposes. Our use of stories is
entirely internal for the purposes of improved product conceptualization and development
by the team—designers, programmers, stakeholders, and management.
The stories told in this paper were written by the authors, based on their experiences
with student design projects.
Stories during the design process
Research
Designers can use research to gather stories from their users, and better understand
the space and pain points that their users are encountering. They can craft the information
they gather into stories that can combine many users’ experiences into a single
story(Quesenbery & Brooks, 2010). Let’s look at an example story.
Terri arrives at work every day to sit at her desk in a windowless corner of the office. As
she works, she takes frequent breaks to stand up and walk around. When the weather
is agreeable, she walks around the corporate campus outside. If the weather is cold or
rainy, she sits down near the large windows in the lobby and looks out at the campus of
444
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
her office building. She feels this energizes her and gives her a boost to take her through
the next part of her work day. But her boss sometimes walks by her desk, or sends an
email that she expects to be answered right away.
On this particular day, when she returns to her desk, she finds that she has several
urgent emails from her boss. A system that she is responsible for is down, and she was
away from her desk. She sits down to fix the problem, embarrassed that the system has
been down for an unacceptable amount of time. She feels guilty that her co-workers
were unable to do their jobs while she was out for a walk.
The story above is not based on research, but if it were, it would give designers a good
overview of some of the problems faced by their users and allow them to start thinking
about design directions.
For example, in the story above, what is the real problem that needs to be solved? Is
the problem that Terri’s office environment isn’t sufficiently engaging? Moving Terri’s desk
near a window, or creating a program at the office to help engage employees’ minds might
be a solution. Or is the problem that the notification systems in place aren’t reaching Terri
at the right time? Email might not be sufficient for the issues that Terri has to manage. A
mobile alert or other kind of emergency notification could help. Or perhaps Terri’s
computing devices aren’t mobile enough. A more flexible office space where Terri could
choose a different workspace near a window could improve her situation.
Ideation
Once designers understand the space in which they are working, stories are an
excellent way to begin to understand what problems exist. Designers can recreate stories
from their user research, or simply use this research as a starting point to develop a
broader story. What is important is that the story is grounded in real understanding of the
users. These stories could even be shared with the user to ensure that their world is
accurately depicted. Where does the story match with your experience or expectations?
Where does it not?
Initially, these stories should be used to broaden the space, rather than to narrow it.
Think about how a user in this space goes about their tasks. What tasks are essential?
What tasks are inefficient? What can we as designers understand about their workspace?
What parts of the story are still mysterious? We can think of this type of storytelling as a
structured brainstorming. Building a story gives the designers a more complete picture of
the world that their users inhabit. Once these stories are complete, designers can use
other ideation methods like affinity diagramming to proceed with concrete ideas.
Let’s look at a different story example about self-driving cars:
Jon has been concerned about his aging parents. They are getting older and less
independent. The week before, his mother damaged their car by turning too widely and
hitting a mailbox. No one was hurt, but Jon recognizes that his parents driving
themselves everywhere will not be a valid option for long.
Jon has been examining self-driving cars, which have just started to become affordable
and available, but he was concerned with how easy the technology would be to
navigate for his elderly parents.
445
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
After taking a test drive alone, he decided he might be able to set up the system for
them by inputting common destinations and making it as simple as possible.
He gathered as much information as he could and sat down with his parents to present
his idea. His father liked the idea of being more mobile and was willing to try the selfdriving vehicle as long as Jon helped him. But he did lament the loss of being able to
drive, which he has always enjoyed.
However, his mother refused to consider the idea. She simply didn’t trust a car that she
or her husband couldn’t control themselves. The idea of a computer being totally in
charge of her car made her uncomfortable. Jon offered to take them on a test ride, but
his mother still refused.
Jon would have to find another way to make his parents safer.
In the story above, no solutions are presented, only problems. Blythe, et al. explain that
‘there is some evidence that the most effective storytelling is suggestive, rather than
exhaustive’ (Blythe, Wright, & Petrelli, 2011, p. 396). Here we ensure that the reader can
project their own values and ideas onto the story by keeping the story open.
Two possible user groups are listed: the elderly, and the children of elderly parents. In
addition, an early core is defined: keeping elderly people independent and safe.
Many stories like this could be created based on various user groups in response to a
prompt, and new cores could be found. This process could help the team decide which
user group to pursue if it has not already been defined for them by the client. Designers
shouldn’t rely on a single story to explore their(Gruen et al., 2002).
In this story, designers could choose among several problems to attempt to solve.
There is the problem of how to make a self-driving car easy enough for the elderly to use.
Designers could also attempt to solve the problem for the child of an elderly parent and try
to create a system that Jon could set up to make it easy for his parents to use. Designers
could also explore how to build trust between the elderly parent and the self-driving car.
Solving any of these problems could pay dividends for other user groups.
This example is based on a self-driving car, but if the prompt were simply ‘make life
easier for the elderly,’ we would be able to explore many more issues related to the lives
of elderly people living on their own.
The importance of the story in the ideation stage is to open up the space, generating
multiple possibilities to explore. The danger of a story in this phase is that a well-told story
can make a mediocre idea sound much better than it is. Designers must be careful not to
present specific solutions in this phase. Keeping the story open is essential.
Prototyping
Storytelling can be thought of as a type of prototyping(Spaulding & Faste, 2013). Once
designers begin to understand the space through the ideation process, they can begin to
describe solutions. As they sketch these solutions, they can build a story in which their user
or persona is a main character. This story can be an extension of the stories told in the
ideation process, or a completely new scenario. In this new or extended story, instead of
being a direct recounting of the research, the character or persona can now attempt to use
the solution through the course of the story. A secondary story might also be told; these
446
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
stories might be about others affected by the new product—how it changes their lives, not
just the life of the product user. These effects can be positive or negative.
Using a story in this way can give the designers a better understanding of how the
design will be used in the real world. ‘…It can provide inspiration and motivation for design
by exploring possible design requirements within a fictional scenario before attempting
physical prototyping’(Tanenbaum, 2014, p. 22). Many design problems can be discovered
and fixed before building an expensive prototype.
Visual storytelling like storyboarding and video also can be valuable at this stage in the
process. Designers might need to hire a filmmaker or videographer to create this material,
and can use this opportunity to test the design story with a non-designer. If a director can’t
understand how to depict a character using a design solution on film, it is very likely there
is a problem with the design.
Let’s look at another example story based on the self-driving car scenario.
Jon has been exploring self-driving cars to help his elderly parents keep their
independence. He has run into a problem though: his parents don’t really trust the
technology. They want to be in control of their driving. The idea of a computer
conveying them in a car is completely alien to them.
Jon finds a car that he thinks might help them trust the technology. This car is selfdriving, but also includes a brake pedal like the user would find on a normal car. The
user doesn’t have control of the steering, but with the brake pedal, they can slow the
car down at will. As they use the brake pedal, the car learns their preferred speed and
desired separation distance from other cars; the system adjusts these variables over
time.
Jon is able to convince the dealer to loan him one for a day, and brings it to his parent’s
house. He visits with them for a while, and then asks if they’d like to go to the store.
They agree and he takes them outside and introduces them to the car.
His father is impressed with the technology, but his mother is still wary. At first, she
refuses to get into the car at all, so Jon offers to take them on a ride around the block to
prove it’s safe. His mother refuses, but his father agrees.
Jon and his father get into the car and Jon pauses, trying to figure out how to get the
car to just go around the block. After working with the map a bit, he decides to direct
the car to a nearby school. The car sets off while his mother watches warily from the
driveway.
Jon’s father asks lots of questions about the car while they take the trip. Jon shows him
that he is in control by pressing the brake. His father uses the GPS-style touchscreen
controls to examine the options. Jon is concerned that his father might change the
directions he has programmed into the computer, but his father doesn’t manage to
make any changes.
Once they get to the school Jon offers to let his father sit in the driver’s side seat on the
way back. His father agrees, and they switch sides. He shows his father how to find the
controls to get the car moving on the touch screen, and his father finds his own address
that Jon has previously saved.
447
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
He presses the ‘Go’ button and the car begins to move. Jon’s father immediately holds
down the brake pedal. The car obediently pulls over and displays a message on the
control screen asking if he’d like to cancel the current destination or continue. His father
lets go of the brake pedal, but the car simply waits for additional user input.
Jon’s father hits the ‘Continue’ button and the car slowly pulls out of the parking lot and
onto the road. As the car pulls up to a stop sign, Jon’s father presses the brake out of
habit, and the car slows down short of the sign. As Jon’s father releases the pedal
slowly, the car continues moving forward, and eventually makes it to the sign, coming
to a complete stop. He lets go of the pedal completely, while the car waits at the stop
sign. After a moment, it continues towards home.
When they arrive home Jon’s mother is still waiting outside. Jon recognizes the worried
expression on her face. The car comes to stop outside the home. Jon’s father gets out
without turning off the engine, but Jon does it for him.
Jon’s father mentions that he still prefers driving his own car, but he supposes there
might be some use for the technology.
This story has clearly chosen a design direction. It focuses on how a brake pedal might
be implemented into the controls of a self-driving car. It also explains the reasoning behind
this design. The design is outlined briefly in the second paragraph of the story. Giving the
viewer this type of overview lets them in on some of the details of the design, so they can
evaluate the user actions and detail more easily.
There are several points to note in this story. First, we reiterate the previous story that
led to this one. We don’t need to retell the entire story, but we must keep in mind ‘stories
in user experience are usually created for a specific audience and for a specific reason’
(Quesenbery & Brooks, 2010) and people who see this version might not have been privy
to the previous version.
Next, we establish the characters in the story. In the previous story, Jon’s goal is to help
his parent’s become more independent; his father is willing to try, but feels he will miss
driving his own car, and his mother is completely unconvinced. Once we have established
these traits, it is essential to maintain the reality of those points throughout the story. If
we abandon any of these character traits, the audience will quickly lose the ability to
believe in our story. Later in the paper, we will explore a storytelling framework to help us
understand how to do this.
The way we maintain the reality of the characters in this story is to show that the
mother is still unconvinced of the technology, and refuses to participate. It would be easy
to tell a story where the mother immediately consents and then slowly learns to love this
design. But that is a job for marketing, not design. The job of a story in design is to explain
how a real user would react to the design and to explore possible solutions that address
the user’s realities. If we find at this point that following the reality of the story and
characters makes the design unbelievable, then we likely have a problem with our design
that needs to be addressed.
Once we begin to tell the part of the story where Jon takes his father on a ride, details
are important. But it is even more important to include the right details. Attempting to
design every aspect of this system in detail at this point would limit the design too much at
this stage(Gruen et al., 2002).
448
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
This story is crafted to show how the self-driving car design builds trust in the user. This
story includes sufficient detail about how users will use and react to the brake pedal, and
what the car will do in each of these states. Again, it would be incredibly easy to discuss
each screen in detail during this story, but that isn’t the point. When we eventually try to
tell a story where we explain how users will react to the control system, then it may be
important to explain in detail each screen they see.
The design team likely would have created sketches during their process. These
sketches could be worked into storyboards to accompany the prototype, helping to explain
things more clearly for their audience.
In addition, a story can illustrate a range of use. After the story is told, the designer can
show exactly the use through bullet points—to make more explicit what the story
illustrates. Then the designer can define precisely the extent of the range by creating
constraining points. For this story, we would be able to explain clearly what happens when
the user completes a specific action, and how the device will only perform that action
under specific circumstances.
Table 1 – A range of use in storytelling.
Original story
Jon’s father holds down
the brake pedal while the
car is moving because he is
uncomfortable with the
idea of the car being in
total control.
Bulleted list of actions
When holding the
brake pedal down
completely, the car
safely pulls over
and waits for
further user
interaction.
Explanation of actions
This is an active, deliberate interaction
with the device; it’s not passive or
automatic. When the user holds down
the brake pedal for a certain amount of
time, the vehicle stops completely and
will not move again until the user
performs an additional action on the
touchscreen.
A table like this could be presented along with the storyboards while telling the story,
or as a handout to give the viewers while learning about the design.
Presentation
Storytelling during a presentation is an excellent way to sell your design idea to
stakeholders. Those outside the design process might not have the background in design
terminology and design thinking. They will be more interested in results. Seeing a
character in a story using a design can be a powerful tool for understanding. Storyboarding
and video again are valuable tools at this point in the process.
A good presentation story will have very similar characteristics to a story for
prototyping. But when presenting to stakeholders, the designer might be tempted to
polish the story a bit too much. When that happens, they could create the perfect story.
B EWARE OF THE PERFECT STORY
A trend seen often in design storytelling, especially among novices, is the perfect story.
In a perfect story, the characters use the design exactly as intended with no issues or
questions, and their lives are much improved just from being in the presence of the design.
449
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
While the phrase ‘perfect story’ might sound like something to strive for, in this
context, we are talking about how the characters interact in the story.
The danger of the perfect story in design is twofold. First, it is unconvincing to the
stakeholders. While the designers might be tempted to make their design look as good as
possible in a presentation, the perfect story will be open to critique from the viewers
because it is not satisfying(Boorstin, 1990). Stories include characters that face problems
that must be overcome, or challenges that must be faced. Characters in a perfect story
always achieve their goals and excel while doing it. In fan fiction literature, this
phenomenon is sometimes referred to as a ‘Mary Sue’(Chandler & Sunder, 2007).
The second issue with the perfect story is that it reveals a lack of design thinking.
Novice designers (usually students) are taught that storytelling can be an effective tool, but
don’t yet understand how to build a convincing narrative through design thinking.
Let’s continue our example with Terri and examine a perfect story:
Terri walks away from her desk for a break, and sits down in the lobby. As she relaxes
for a moment, a critical system goes down, sending the office into a panic. She
immediately receives a text on her phone alerting her to the problem.
Terri calmly opens the text message and responds with ‘R’ for reboot. The system
reboots, service is restored, and the office can get back to work. Terri resumes her
break, musing about how pleased her boss will be that the new system works so well.
The problems with this story are vast. First, the story assumes the worst case scenario
for Terri as she takes her break. Any number of work related tasks could need attention
while she is away from her desk. Unless the core of the design is to make it easy to
respond to critical failures, it will be better to lower the stakes in a story like this.
In addition, the story hides the massive amount of complexity behind a system like this.
Very few systems that are simple for the user are simple for the development team. The
designers need to sell their design not only to the people paying for the system, but the
people that will need to build it(Kolko, 2010). An acknowledgement of the complexity of a
system like this could go a long way to building a bridge to the development team and
make the story more believable. This design seems like it wouldn’t work at all, or be so
complex that it would be impossible to build effectively. While a full spec sheet of all of the
features and technical information is not necessary or even welcome in a story like this,
the designer must show an awareness of the details of their system. The design showed in
this story hints at a deep misunderstanding of what the user needs and how complex
systems work.
Finally, the last note where Terri muses about her boss being pleased is too implausible
for any story in design. Any mention of the inner thoughts of a character in the story
should be focused on aspects that will bring clarity to the design. A note like the one above
feels more like the designer is patting themselves on the back for creating such a clever
design.
While the dangers of an unbelievable story have been examined in design
literature(Spaulding & Faste, 2013), we can look directly at storytelling resources to help
craft better design stories. Jon Boorstin describes a useful framework in his book The
Hollywood Eye - What Makes Movies Work. In this framework, he describes how audiences
450
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
consume film from three different viewpoints: the voyeuristic eye, the vicarious eye, and
the visceral eye.
The voyeuristic eye is concerned with the reality of the world of the film. The vicarious
eye is examining the emotion of the film; it is concerned with creating empathy for the
characters of the film. The visceral eye is only concerned with what thrills and new
experiences the film might offer.
The fundamental criticism in the voyeur’s world is ‘that couldn’t happen,’ in the
vicarious world ‘he wouldn’t do that,’ but in the visceral world it is ‘it doesn’t get me.’
(Boorstin, 1990, p. 114)
This framework has been compared to Dewey’s aesthetic experience(Dewey, 1934;
McCarthy & Wright, 2007), but from a storytelling perspective, we can use it to better
understand how to keep our audiences engaged with our stories.
First, we must understand how film stories are different from design stories. The
language of film combines human emotion, carefully crafted visuals, music and sound
design. All of these elements are carefully controlled by a not-so-small group of talented
individuals that collaborate to craft an experience. Iterations occur during every phase of
the filmmaking process. A script progresses through many drafts, possibly even many
writers before moving to filming, where each scene can be given many takes before the
cast and crew are satisfied. And once the filming is completed, the film will be edited,
viewed, and then iterated on many times before it is considered complete.
While filmmakers generally create a story as a final product, the designer uses a story
as a method to understand how to build the final product.
Designers don’t need to worry about music and sound design, and their visuals, rather
than careful camera work, are displayed as wireframes and storyboards.
From our framework above, designers are generally not concerned with the visceral
eye. The visceral eye is useful in a film because spectacle and excitement are expected.
The stories designers create must be more practical because they must lead to concrete
results(Grimaldi, Fokkinga, & Ocnarescu, 2013; Quesenbery & Brooks, 2010). Designers
create stories to work towards a goal. Adding suspense or excitement to a design
presentation should be done with great caution. Remember in our example above, the
entire office went into a panic when the system went down. While it’s possible the office
might panic, it’s an unnecessary detail to understand the design which sacrifices the reality
of the story (the voyeuristic eye) for a weak attempt at suspense (the visceral eye). Even
so, design in and of itself is about creating a new experience. We could say that the visceral
eye is inherent within the context of the design. If the viewers feel they have seen the
exact design presented before, they will lose interest quickly.
So as designers, we can examine the voyeuristic eye and the vicarious eye. Of these,
the voyeuristic eye is paramount. Designers must maintain the reality of their story. Any
time the viewer questions the reality of the story, the design is damaged. Boorstin notes:
In movies, people don’t waste their time looking for parking places or making change,
and the audience knows it. If an actor can’t find a parking space, the audience expects
his bumbling to affect the story; if it doesn’t, the filmmakers have slowed the pace for
nothing and loosened their grip on the viewer. (Boorstin, 1990, p. 48)
451
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
In the self-driving car story, Jon’s father tries out the brake pedal several times. By
Boorstin’s reckoning, moments like that should directly affect the story. If they don’t, they
should be cut. In our case, Jon’s father testing out the brake pedal is in fact the point of the
story. We are slowing down the story by slowing down the car, but furthering our goals of
explaining the design.
Designers can look to the vicarious eye to build their personas and characters. The
vicarious eye is about the emotional truth of the story(Boorstin, 1990). The viewers must
believe that the characters are engaging in the story legitimately. Designers should have a
leg up on this, because they should be building empathy for their users throughout the
process(Wright & McCarthy, 2008). For example, the vicarious eye allows us to create a
character like Jon’s mother, who remains skeptical of the technology no matter what he
tries. With the vicarious eye, the audience must be able to put themselves in the position
of the character and understand what they are doing, or even better, imagine themselves
doing the same thing in that situation.
The emotions of others create a matching urge on our part—to comfort them, to
protect ourselves, to respond to their smile with a smile of our own. We are wired that
way. (Boorstin, 1990, p. 66)
In the perfect story, the reality and emotions are lost. The perfect story might result
from the designer being too attached to an early concept. A concept or space that hasn’t
been fully explored comes with obvious flaws. A novice designer might attempt to hide the
flaws by crafting a story where the user can use their design with none of the problems
that a real user would encounter. Instead, they should examine how the reality of the story
will lead them to a better design.
The perfect story might also result from the designer not understanding their user
group. The design might work for a different user, but as presented in the reality of the
world, it falls flat. Again, the designer can examine the story from the perspective of the
user to build a better understanding of the design.
Recognizing a perfect story requires self-awareness on the part of the designer, and a
willingness to seek constant feedback. It can be very difficult for a designer to recognize
that they have built an unrealistic story. By examining Boorstin’s three perspectives, we
can build our stories in a way that our audiences will find acceptable and satisfying.
Implications for design pedagogy
It might be argued that design instructors should spend less time on storytelling
techniques and more emphasis on design methodologies per se (e.g., field studies,
sketching, concept generation, user-testing, and so on). We certainly do not wish to
diminish the importance of these skills, but we believe that storytelling is a meta-method.
That is, it is the story that is told during the ideation phase of design that helps us more
skillfully generate possible concepts; the same is true for prototyping and every other
phase of the design process. As such, storytelling becomes an important method that
shapes the designer’s proficiencies in other methods and therefore must be included in
the design thinking curriculum.
For example, requiring student-designers to employ the technique of contrasting
stories defines the design’s limits. Contrasting stories are two stories, where both stories
452
Once Upon A Time: Storytelling in the Design Process
share all details except those features that distinguish the design. Another pedagogical
example, requiring student-designers to develop a story illustrating abstract statements
such as the design’s core, leads to further clarification of the design’s context. These
techniques remind us that the story is the experience. A well-crafted story (or contrasting
stories) adds substance, clarity, range, and context to the design.
Conclusion
In this paper we examined several ways of using storytelling at different phases of the
design process. As designers, we must make use of every tool available in our toolkit.
Storytelling allows us to explore the spaces our users inhabit, and how they might use our
solutions in those spaces. Moreover, storytelling is an essential tool for convincing
stakeholders that our solutions are viable.
By teaching storytelling skills to designers directly, we can enhance their design skills by
giving them the ability to craft realistic characters. These realistic characters can be placed
in any imaginary design scenario, and designers can explore their reactions, keeping the
voyeuristic and vicarious eyes in mind, while seeking constant feedback to check their
assumptions.
However, we must be cautious to keep our stories realistic and grounded in our
research. Designers that create perfect stories are simply writing fan fiction about their
users and designs. A designer’s first duty is to the users. We must keep them at the
forefront of our stories the way we keep them at the forefront of our designs.
Acknowledgements: This work is supported in part by the National Science
Foundation (NSF) Grant Award no. 1115532. Opinions expressed are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the entire research
team or the NSF. The authors would also like to thank Gabe Persons and ShuChuan Chiu for their help in editing this paper.
References
Blythe, M., Wright, P., & Petrelli, D. (2011). History and experience: storytelling and
interaction design. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 25th BCS conference on
Human-Computer Interaction, Swinton, UK.
Boorstin, J. (1990). The Hollywood Eye: What Makes Movies Work. New York, NY:
HarperCollins Publishers.
Chandler, A., & Sunder, M. (2007, April). Everyone's a Superhero: A Cultural Theory of
‘Mary Sue’ Fan Fiction as Fair Use. California Law Review, 597-626.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art As Experience. New York, NY: Perigree.
Erickson, T. (1996, July). Design as storytelling. interactions, 30-35.
Grimaldi, S., Fokkinga, S., & Ocnarescu, I. (2013). Narratives in design: a study of the types,
applications and functions of narratives in design practice. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and
Interafaces, New York, NY.
Gruen, D., Redpath, S., & Ruettinger, S. (2002). The Use of Stories in User Experience
Design. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 503-534.
453
ANDREW J HUNSUCKER & MARTIN SIEGEL
Kolko, J. (2010). Thoughts on interaction Design: Morgan Kaufman.
McCarthy, J., & Wright, P. (2007). Technology as Experience. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
Quesenbery, W., & Brooks, K. (2010). Storytelling for User Experience: Crafting Stories for
Better Design. Brooklyn, NY: Rosenfeld Media.
Siegel, M. (2004). Accelerating Insight Through Scenarios (pp. 7). Bloomington, IN: Wisdom
Tools.
Spaulding, E., & Faste, H. (2013). Design-Driven narrative: using stories to prototype and
build immersive design worlds. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), New York, NY.
Tanenbaum, J. (2014, October). Design Fictional Interactions: Why HCI Should Care About
Stories. Interactions, 22.
Wright, J., & McCarthy, P. (2008). Empathy and Experience in HCI. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New
York.
454
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Nina BJØRNSTADa* and Monika HESTADb
a Oslo
School of Architecture and Design b Central Saint Martins, University of Arts London / Oslo
School of Architecture and Design
*nina.bjornstad@aho.no
Abstract: Industrial design is in transition and there is a pressure to deal with
even more intangible concepts. This leads to the introduction of new skill bases
into the education. However, with inclusion of new skill bases the question is
what needs to go? Using an action research framework we investigated how a
university industrial design module changed when introducing more input on
research and service design. We analysed the projects from two different years
and asked whether the students had managed to integrate the input and if this
led to more informed processes or a better result. The projects from one year
had less novel solutions and less complexity than the previous year. While the
students appreciated new skills that were learned, they found that their process
was rushed. Lack of time to iterate and reflect affected the final outcome.
Exploration develops industrial designers’ sensibility and ability to facilitate
experiences, but an emphasis on formalised research led to less time to explore.
In our eagerness to ‘professionalise’ the industrial design education, are we
about to leave out our core skills?
Keywords: Industrial design, Design education, Exploration, Analysis, Design
thinking.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Introduction
Across the globe designers experience a profession in transition (Yee et al., 2010) with
the inclusion of a greater need to negotiate with external partners and become
professionalised researchers (Press et al., 2003), developing business models (Abbing
2010; Yee et al., 2013), innovation cultures (Kochargaonkar and Boult, 2014) and similar,
and with this the inclusion of more intangible concepts and questions with which to
engage.
As a result of widening the scope of what is considered part of the designers’ core
knowledge base, design education is changing. Skills associated with artisan practices of
design are no longer the only knowledge bases that designers need to acquire (Yee et al.,
2013). However, with the constant inclusion of new knowledge bases, methods and
approaches, there will naturally be pressure to leave something out. The tension explored
in this paper is, when bringing in a more rigid analytical approach from business as well as
from science, what happens to the time to explore and experiment, and how does this
change the designers’ core capabilities?
In this paper we will offer a critical examination of a module that is part of a degree
course that has experienced these transformations towards more conceptual and
intangible output. This module is the first introduction the students have to branding and
management. It is project-led, with the students developing a product concept at the same
time as they develop a brand concept. This means the students have two complex
syntheses of knowledge to make, one that includes their insights about a new product
concept and one that includes insights about the brand concept. The complexity in the task
is to make these two syntheses relate to each other as well as making the justifications of
why they do. A more detailed presentation of the syntheses will be addressed later in the
paper.
In the autumn 2014 module, the theoretical input on the course increased to meet
demands to professionalise the research that the students are building their concepts
upon, as well as to include more service design thinking. The inclusion of more knowledge
did not somehow lead to better concepts. On the contrary, it seems to have led to less
interesting concepts and created pressure on the students that was beyond what they had
the capacity to absorb. The general feeling we were left with was that, in the autumn 2014
module, the balance between time to explore and develop the project and time to obtain
the input was not right. Therefore, as part of evaluation of the course we arranged a
meeting with our students from this module. The student representatives expressed that
they were satisfied with what they learned overall this year, but that they were not
satisfied with their final solutions. They expressed less confidence in what they delivered
this year than we have experienced from previous years.
This paper offers a critical evaluation of the module before the change in 2014 and
after the change. The aim of the study is to more systematically develop the learning
environment (Light et al., 2011). The challenges identified will therefore be taken into
consideration when developing the learning module in 2015. As the research is
contextually rich it also opens up for multiple facets and dimensions; in this paper the
focus will be on the students’ ability to make the complex synthesis. In the core of making
these complex syntheses is the balance between building their insights and knowledge on
analytical processes, and on the more subjective nature that comes in a more free flowing
456
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
exploration. The balance between rigid analysis and free form exploration in developing
complex synthesis will be the key consideration undertaken in this paper.
The dynamic interplay between analysis and exploration
Design has been described as a hybrid activity that could include multiple knowledge
bodies from art, from science and from mathematics (Jones, 2009). In designing, the
navigation of these fields and identification of which of them are needed in the context
they are working on is part of the complexity. In addition the designers will have to work
with vague challenges, then to transfer insights gained about the challenge into concrete
propositions (Tovey, 2009). In order to understand and build on multiple knowledge bodies
the designer will have to engage with various experts in their processes, and will by this
need to know about different related fields but will not become the expert. Their own
expertise will be needed to navigate in this complexity, and later to transfer this into a new
concept. This navigation will include both analysis of the context as well as making creative
decisions that only in the retrospect can be explained. An important part of the designers’
expertise is form and ‘formgiving’ (Akner-Koler, 2007).
The propositions that the designer makes are often presented as visual material; it
could be sketches as well as prototypes. By making the propositions concrete, they will be
accessible for others than just the designer to engage with, to critique and to question.
How the designers are creating these propositions is not always so easy to explain and
designers are not always themselves the best to explain the designed object. An important
part of this explanation is the ‘reflection in action’ as introduced by Donald Schön (1991).
In exploration with physical prototypes the thought patterns become clearer and more
explicit. Visual communication is an intuitive way to explore ideas and proposals
(Minichiello and Anelli, 2012), but it takes skills and practice to make this a medium to
communicate a complex proposition.
The designer has an ability to make proposition and to concretise synthesis from vague
problems (Tovey, 2012), which creates new opportunity in other fields as there is
something in the way designers are thinking that proves promising to tackle other
problems outside the traditional design work. However, in the discourse around design
thinking the part of the approach that includes subjective reasoning is more challenging to
explain. According to Roger Martin, design thinking is ‘analytical mastery and intuitive
originality in a dynamic interplay’ (2009, p. 6). Design thinking, he says, brings together
both the ‘analytical’ school which is about creating rigidity behind decision making, with
the ‘intuitive’ which builds on the school of thought that is ‘the art of knowing without
reasoning’. From our experience as teachers, this ‘intuitive reasoning’ does not seem to
come of itself. The ‘intuition’ for which insights to combine, and how to combine them into
concrete proposition, comes by practice. Further, the designer also needs the skills to be
able to work with the material and create these concretisations, through exploration in
sketches (Minichiello and Anelli, 2012) or other flexible materials that can become a
medium to quickly develop their thought processes and capture their thinking. The job of
the designer becomes to understand the challenge, identify right sources for information,
gain the insights and then transform it into artefacts. This is not a straightforward job –
and it is not always easy to find the right balance between the hard facts and rigidity
needed to develop informed decisions and to allow the time needed to develop skills in
explorations.
457
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Engaging with changed social context
In the module that is evaluated in this paper, a key learning objective has been to
prepare the students to navigate complexity in the market as well as in society. The
students are encouraged to engage with major drivers of changes in society and to use
these changes as a source of inspiration as well as a tool to make relevant the concepts
that the students are developing. The module builds on theories in branding that see the
brand as a dynamic process with multiple stakeholders being part of developing what the
brand is about (Holt, 2002, 2004). The consideration in the branding literature has been
from a design perspective, where the aim is to create meaningful propositions that could
become brands.
In the academic development of teaching a similar change as the one in branding can
be observed. Building on Schön’s ‘reflective practitioner’ theory (Schön, 1991 [1983]), Light
et al. (2011) argue for a new role relevant in teaching: ‘reflective professionals’. The call for
professionalism: ‘…requires a model of practice that must account not only for the events
and situations that arise in practice but also for the changing social context of practice’
(Light et al., 2011, p.14). This has a parallel with our aim in the examined module to
develop students that move beyond reflective practitioner in dialogue with an object, to
become ‘reflective professionals’ where the object represents the synthesis of an on-going
process in dialogue with various actors as well as larger changes in society.
However, there are multiple challenges that arise in this. For example, the same insight
could give multiple interpretations, or the insight that is built upon is flawed. There could
also be practical hindrances such as that the medium chosen to communicate the insights
were not flexible enough, or that the designer did not have the skills needed to
communicate their insights. The transfer process from insights to medium can be
described as semantic transformation, and in this semantic transformation distortion may
happen (Karjalainen, 2004).
From an educational point of view there is a complexity in finding the right balance.
How can we create learning activities that both introduces the necessary analytical
frameworks they will need to create robust insights to build their propositions from, and at
the same time allow them time to learn by exploration and which is such a crucial part of
developing their intuitive reasoning? Before going deeper into this challenge, we will first
look at the Institute to give context to the challenge presented.
Constant negotiation of tensions
Oslo School of Architecture and Design offers a five-year master’s course in design. The
previous design education was an industrial design degree. In the last decade it has
changed to now offer a two years’ specialisation in interaction design and service design,
industrial design or system-oriented design on top of the three-year undergraduate years
of the course.
Changes and negotiation between different methods, knowledge basis and approaches
to design is part of the history of the institute. It can be traced back to the establishment
of the Norwegian Association of Applied Art in 1918 (Romsaas, 2009), whilst a permanent
course in industrial design was only established as late as 1983. In developing the first
syllabus, organisations from industry and politics, and representatives from the profession,
worked together. This included the Norwegian Federation of Sales and Advertisement.
458
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
The tension between the exploratory and the analytic rigidity is a part of the history.
From the very beginning the course found itself in an on-going discussion between the
Head of Industrial Design, Torbjørn Rygh, and the course’s parent institution, the National
College of Art and Design (NCAD), on whether the pedagogy was built on an aesthetical or
a technological ground. NCAD, where the course was first located, was the country’s
leading arts school. At the same time there was an academically ambitious attitude at the
Institute of Industrial Design, which suggested that the Institute should leave the arts
school (Romsaas, 2009). In 1996 the institute joined Oslo School of Architecture and
Design. The latter institution is categorised as a scientific school (specialised university)
rather than an arts school, and therefore closer to the technology ambitions that the
leadership of the Institute held.
The previous tension between aesthetics and technology are today history, as
aesthetics is one of the focus areas and technology is still part of the curricula. The
Institute has recently agreed on a ‘designerly’ approach, referring to three pillars defined
as methods, aesthetics and communication (Troye, 2014). However, the recent pressure
on including new frameworks, methods and skills as a result of including interaction design
and service design as possible specialisations seems to once again have created internal
tensions. With the current range of specialisation offered, how should the first three years
prepare the students to make educated decisions of which specialisation to apply for? This
in reality means moving away from the industrial design foundation that the course is built
upon, to allow the new disciplines such as interaction design and service design take a
greater part of the curriculum.
The module examined
The scope of the study in this paper is a four-month module named Identity in
products, services and interactions. The aim of the module is for the students to explore
how the branded context can set the agenda for the products or services and vice versa
(Abbing, 2010; Karjalainen, 2004; Hestad, 2013). The students are encouraged to create
visions that are relevant for society as well as bringing something new to the market. New
in this context could be either original products or services, but it could also be new brand
concepts.
The students get introduced to marketing and branding. In addition to the
experimentation and formgiving, the students are supposed to take the cultural,
ecological, economic, ergonomic and user-centred aspects into account. They should know
their users and they also have to interact with them. Further, the students also have to
reflect upon their solution from an ethical perspective (Keitch and Bjørnstad, 2010). The
module is project driven and the students are creating a branded context of how they
would like to propose their solutions to their imagined users.
The complexity that lies in both creating a new product or service parallel with creating
a brand context, makes the third year a good time to introduce this module. Before this
module the students should have a basic understanding of design and formgiving as well as
research, with a focus on user-centred research. Exploration in various materials as well as
digital exploration is part of their curriculum before this course. They should therefore be
able to explore and experiment in the process. Vision based design proposals demand
459
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
some experience, and the students have gained enough experience in the third year to
experiment on self-generated ideas.
In the autumn module of 2014 we introduced more formalised research classes than in
previous years and at the same time service design classes. In the design research classes
the students were introduced to creating a research plan, of various methods for
investigating the user. They were introduced to the academic theories behind these as well
as being asked to deliver a research plan and conduct their study according to that plan.
The theory and methods in the design research course were introduced at the same time
as the theory and methods on branding. These two parts took up an equal amount of time
and which meant that the students had a heavily theoretical introduction to the course.
The service design course was planned as a short introduction and was task based. The
students were introduced to new tools such as the customer blueprint and the user
journey. The service design classes did not take up that much more time of the schedule.
Also the branding and service design courses have overlapping theories and methods. In
branding it is important to express the brand through various touch points, to involve
multiple stakeholders and to understand how the brand is experienced through time
(Wheeler, 2014). These are also important considerations when developing a service.
A method to investigate the change
To investigate the change the authors planned the study as a critical evaluation of the
course and decided to do a comparative study between the projects in 2013 and the
projects in 2014. The study was planned as a combination of a case study research and
action research. Case study research is a method that can be used when the challenges to
explore are highly context dependent (Flyvjberg, 2004). Action research is a method for
when the aim is to implement changes to improve the learning environment (Koshy, 2010).
The action research is planned in cycles; observe, reflect, plan, act (Leary quoted in Koshy,
2010). A challenge is observed and reflected upon, and then a plan on how to act upon this
is formed and implemented. From this new observations are made. However, in this paper
the reflection of the change is based on a reconstruction of the already conducted module
and not as part of an ongoing module. This will therefore not be a complete action
research project. It could though form a very good starting point for an action research
project in the future.
There are several limitations of the study that needs to be addressed. We are not
independent as this is our own course that is being examined. This means that there will
be biases as to what is important to emphasise in the course as well as on how the projects
are interpreted. This is met by constantly questioning our own propositions and by being
transparent about what these are. Another challenge with contextual dependent cases is
that the material is very rich, while the write-up will have to focus on one aspect of the
case. In this article we choose to focus on the development of the complex synthesis and
the balance between analysis and explorative approaches. The reason for this is that we
see this as the most important challenge at this time.
Another issue is that this year the topic introduced to the students that was the
starting point of their project was a challenge in itself. In the autumn 2013 module the
topic of the course was to reinvent an old story. The students had to identify a story from
history that may have been lost and use this story as a starting point in their processes. In
460
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
2014 the topic of the course was far more political as the students worked with gender
stigmatization. Some of the students found this to be a personally challenging topic.
Data and analysis
Each of the years were treated as their own case, and which were then compared with
each other. In setting up the comparison of the module before and after the changes, we
chose multiple sources of information to be able to triangulate our findings. The teaching
in the module consists of a wide range of different teaching approaches (Light, et al.,
2011), from the students’ development of their own project, workshop and seminars, oneto-one supervision as well as regular discussions and lectures. The assessment is through
presentations, models or other visual representations and a report. The sources were: the
module descriptions and literature list, students’ final presentations, student reports, the
final evaluation and marks of the module (with an external examiner). Having taught in
both of these modules we knew the process the students had been through, but we also
used the student reports to verify whether our understanding was right. In addition we
issued invitations to an evaluation meeting where we discussed the modules with three
student representatives and with two of the co-teachers of the modules.
In each of the cohorts there were about 20 students. We decided to make a selection
of ten from each cohort. In this selection we went for those that were well documented so
it was possible to get an understanding of how they worked in the project, as well as those
that gave us the best indication of use of theory and practice and how this had informed
their process.
There will always be a significant number of variables to choose from in order to make
an analysis of the projects and for this paper we simplified the process. We therefore
experimented with different ways of analysing these and at the end we developed a
simplified structure that looked at the output and the input. These were visualised in order
to compare the different projects. The projects were analysed from various dimensions.
This was done to gain a better understanding of the nature of the project and provided an
indication of the students’ understanding of how to put theory into practice. From these
experimentations we found that two of these dimensions shed light on the questions that
we explored.
1. C OMPLEXITY OF THE SYNTHESES AND THE COHERENCE BETWEEN THEM
To investigate whether the students had managed to navigate the complexity in their
proposals the projects were structured into three different categories: product-driven
brand stories (e.g. stories about functionality, ergonomics, attributes, production); actordriven brand stories (e.g. stories about the heritage or origin of the company or the
creator/designer, the user, about creating together); and myth-driven brand stories. The
brand story is not directly related to the product. The product gets a symbolic role in this
story (e.g. stories about sub-cultures or society, a myth, a relation). This gave a way to see
which level of abstractions the students worked on, as well as to quickly identify the
coherence between the brand story and the product story.
2. E XPLORATION VERSUS NOVELTY
In the next analysis the processes were examined. Did the student demonstrate a high
level of either material exploration or exploration through sketches in the design process?
461
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
This analysis was of key importance as this gave the opportunity to have a critical look at
the students’ processes and how their projects had developed. In this analysis novelty was
also included. Novelty in this context refers to whether there is an established category in
the market that was already recognised (like craft beer, shoes or similar) or not, as well as
the novelty in the brand story, and novelty in expression. When the student suggested and
was able to document that this was a potentially new category (or a new direction with an
existing category), it was perceived as a high level of novelty, even if the aesthetic
expression was perceived as less novel.
Less complex synthesis?
In 2014 the majority of the students’ brand stories could be understood as productdriven (figure 1). This is not a problem in itself, however the novelty in the solutions did
not suggest a product-driven brand story would suffice. There would be many competitors
in the market and the solution they offered were not perceived as novel. The level of
innovation as well as whether the solution is market-driven or is driving-market, would
affect how the brand is perceived (Beverland et al., 2010). Further, several of the brand
stories communicated an actor-driven story in part of the product or the imagery while
other touch points, particularly in the text, communicated a product-driven story.
Figure 1: Coherence and level of abstraction in the story (autumn, 2013).
462
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Figure 2: Coherence and level of abstraction in the story (autumn, 2014).
In both of the years (2013 and 2014) we identified projects that belonged to all three
categories. However, in 2013 (figure 2) many of the projects belonged in the myth-driven
brand story. The students had managed to create products that had a symbolic role in the
brand story, and a coherence was created by the students being concerned with how the
values were informing the development of the products/services as well as all of the other
touch points that build the experience of the brand.
In 2013 there were only two stories that were product-driven. Both of these had a high
degree of novelty in the solution, which justify a product-driven brand story. These two
students were confident in how they presented the brand story and the products became
strong statements.
Another interesting finding is that the theme in 2014 was far more abstract and related
to a larger debate in society than the theme in 2013. Initially we thought this would lead to
a higher degree of ‘big questions’ that would be explored, however, the opposite
happened. The majority of the projects found niches in the market, rather than taking on
bigger questions to tackle compared with the year before.
Organising the projects on an axis between experimental and novelty (see figures 3 and
4) we found that the 2013 cohort overall had a higher degree of novelty in their solutions.
This supports our first finding that the synthesis seems to be less complex in 2014 than in
2013. It also gives an indication that there is not automatically a correspondence between
having a larger rigidity in the data collection, ultimately leading to stronger synthesis. On
the contrary, this may indicate that there seems to be a correspondence between the
novelty and choosing an experimental approach. While, in 2014, there were fewer projects
that had managed both. The most novel concept had a strong analytical approach in the
finding, however, it was less exploratory. In 2014 there were few that had both an
exploratory approach and a novel concept.
463
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Figure 3: The student projects sorted in level of Experimental Design and Novelty (autumn, 2013).
Figure 4: The student projects sorted in level of Experimental and Novelty (autumn, 2014).
464
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
Overall, there seems to be less complexity in the synthesis in 2014, than in the 2013
projects. The 2013 cohort managed to design stronger statements and these were skilfully
communicated through all of the touch points to build a strong brand concept.
Time to make a synthesis
Seeing that the 2013 cohort overall demonstrated a more advanced synthesis with
multiple projects that work on a high level of abstraction and complexity, and which
appear more experimental and novel in the solutions, tells a story that the changed
teaching changed the final results. Although there could be other factors that led to this
that have not been examined in this paper. The theme the students in 2013 explored may
be a richer and easier starting point and have rich stories to be inspired from. While in
2014, the theme chosen was in general perceived as more challenging and many of the
students also chose questions that were demanding for them as individuals to relate to as
starting points.
The students’ own feedback in 2014 pointed towards a lack of time to iterate. The
module in this year appeared too full of different topics and the students felt the structure
forced them to take rushed decisions without the time necessary to reflect and iterate.
This correlates with our own observations of this year. By not having the necessary time to
work with the material, in making their own investigations, failure and successes, the
students did not have the opportunity to iterate in the process, and the results became
weaker.
In 2014 they were forced into a sequence of events, and which affected the processes
and the results. The processes overall were less experimental and the results less original.
The students were forced to make quick decisions when they worked with concept and
form development. It is not a straightforward process to concretise insights into a brand
and product concept. This is a time consuming activity that involves several iterations. The
students in this module have to learn how to capture and analyse this, and materialise the
findings in the objects. It means experimentation with materials as well as aesthetic
exploration, as they learn more about what they are making and how this responds to the
changes in society. In parallel with any creative exercise, whether it is about writing an
essay or developing a form to a product, it is a process where while working on the
solution and making adjustments, the thought processes become clearer and more
refined.
Market, society and cultural engagement at this level are new topics for the students in
this module. To come to the level of sophistication that is required to develop strong brand
stories and products that are part of telling this story, they will need to have time to
develop the story as well as the understanding of the underlying drivers. In addition the
students already have a mind-set that is about production technology when they start to
study the user. Their technology knowledge will at this stage be combined with the
knowledge of the user. The information they gather has to be processed and made into
concepts, and with the mind-set from technology it also needs to be possible to produce.
In addition we also ask them to take a strategic stand, to consider the validity of what they
offer from a commercial perspective and make ethical considerations on top of this. This
means that the task is complex and, while the students develop skills in navigating this
complexity, we also have to acknowledge the time they need to make errors and failures
465
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
before concluding, and delivering their thoughts both in written statements as well as
materialised in all the touch points as a coherent whole.
What are we about to leave out?
The students are, as Donald Schön (1991) suggests, engaging with reflective
conversations in action, which can be seen as the process between the student and the
object that is in the making. However, as the field of design develops, the process of
making must also be seen as a process of learning and engaging with insights from the
outer world. There is a complexity in navigating through a constant change in society, in
the market context and technology as well as in human behaviour. In this module it is the
first time the students iterate a synthesis of this complexity, and the learning aim of this
module has been to prepare the students to make this complex synthesis in the everchanging context they will experience in their professional life. We have learnt that in
developing our students’ ability to become the ‘reflective professionals’ (Light et al., 2011)
that can engage with the complexity in navigating change, they will have to have the time
to iterate, fail and experiment in their processes. This will be one of the most important
changes in the module. We will need to go back to the overall learning objective of this
course. Important decisions will need to be made in identifying what will be the key
objective and then planning the activities accordingly. This could help to better align the
learning objective with activities and outcomes (Biggs, 2007).
With the continuous demand we experience for including new skill sets in the module,
such as developing the student as a design researcher and similar, we seem to have lost
sight of the complexity in this module to start with. In the development of the module, as
well as the degree course it is part of, an important discussion will be whether the
emphasis on new skills is starting to reduce the time our students have to develop their
core skills. Another important consideration for us to have will be on the indication the
findings gave us that the introduction of more formalised research, while lacking time to
experiment and explore how the insights could be made into statements, leads to less
novel as well as less complex synthesis. This could be because the students are still
learners and will need time to absorb how they engage with the user insights. It could also
be that there is a lack of a critical engagement with the research conducted to gain the
insights. The students, therefore, fall into the trap of replicating what users says and using
this to verify their concepts, rather than to engage with the insights critically and translate
them into design concepts.
What we learned in our study is that aesthetic exploration in materials in the workshop
or through digital exploration that is not defined is about more than acquiring basic skills.
It is a highly necessary part of the design education for designers to develop their core
skills, their thinking and their understanding of society, and becomes the medium to
present their complex synthesis that can bring us forward. In light of this study, we will
also emphasise the importance of allowing the students time to explore. In including new
frameworks and theories from multiple disciplines we have less time for what used to be
designers’ strengths to visualise, experiment and to make the abstract concepts tangible.
An important exercise for the Institute of design will be to critically examine all of the
modules taught in the course. If the majority include more theories and frameworks that
466
Time to Explore and Make Sense of Complexity?
help the students to become more analytical and make rational decisions, it is important to
identify where the students could experiment to develop their intuitive reasoning.
The design discipline has opened up to other fields and ‘designerly ways of knowing’
(Cross, 2006) becomes increasingly important in a management context as well as in
society in general. An important part of the interest in design is that designers have had a
way to navigate in complexity and to make patterns and concepts that are innovative
(Martin, 2009). The interest is based on designers’ work. However, as designers develop
into becoming facilitators, researchers or business managers, new tensions arise and new
skill sets are in demand (Yee et al., 2013). In examining our own teaching practice we have
observed that there are less students doing explorative work, and a general trend that
design school workshops are downplayed. We will ask for a pause to reflect upon industrial
design as a field, and the role of making things in developing the students’ core skills. In
design education, when preparing and developing our students to engage with bigger
questions, is it not important to understand what made us relevant in the first place? Is
there a value in exploring and experimenting as designers used to do, besides what we
already do now? The question we will need to answer is, with the inclusion of all of these
new skill sets, what is it we leave out? In relation to this, we also need to consider how
important is that which we leave out compared with that which we include.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Oslo School of Architecture and
Design’s Institute of Design, all of the GK5 students in the autumn 2013 and
2014 semesters and our lovely co-teachers. In addition we would like to thank
Dr Jamie Brassett (Central Saint Martins), Dr Håkan Edeholt (AHO) and Anders
Groenli (Brand Valley AS) for useful suggestions on how to improve the paper.
References
Abbing, E.R. (2010). Brand-Driven Innovation. London: Ava Publishing.
Akner-Koler, C. (2007). Form & Formlessness. Gothenburg: Chalmers University of
Tecnhology, Axl Books.
Beverland, M., Napoli, J. & Farrelly, F. (2010). Can All Brands Innovate in the Same Way? A
Typology of Brands, Position and Innovation Effort. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 27, 33–48.
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. 3rd ed. Berkshire:
Open University Press.
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing. London: Springer-Verlag.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research. In Seal, C., Gobo,
G., Gubrium, J. & Silverman, D. Quality Research Practise (pp. 390-403). London: Sage.
Hestad, M. (2013). Branding and Product Design: An Integrated Perspective. UK: Gower
Applied Research.
Holt, D. (2002). Why Do Brands Cause Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of Consumer Culture
and Branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29 (June 2002), 70–90.
Jones, C. J. (2009). What is designing? Design Philosophies and Theories. Design studies: A
reader. Edited by Hazel Clark & David Brody, 77–80.
467
NINA BJØRNSTAD & MONIKA HESTAD
Karjalainen, T. M. (2004) Semantic transformation in design: communicating strategic
brand identity through product design references. Publication series of the University of
Art and Design: Helsinki.
Keitsch, M.M & Bjørnstad, N. (2010) Ethics in product design curriculum: An example from
The Oslo School of Architecture and Design. In When Design Education and Design
Research meet. The Design Society, 120–125.
Kochargaonkar, A. & Boult, J. (2014). Designing an Innovation Culture within and
Entrepreneurial Environment. Design Management and Innovation DMI:review: Design
and Entrepreneurship: Thinkers, Makers & Doers, 25:3, 10-16.
Koshy, V. (2010). Action Research for Improving Educational Practice: A step-by-step guide.
2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Light, G., Cox, R. & Calkins, S. (2011). Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: The
Reflective Professional. 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications.
Lockwood, T. (2010). Design thinking: Integrating Innovation, Customer Experiences, and
Brand Value. New York: Allworth Press.
Martin, R. (2009). The Design of Business: Why Design Thinking is the Next Competive
Advantage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Minichiello, M. & Anelli, L. (2012) Why do designers draw? Design and Designing: a critical
introduction. Edited by S. Garner & Chris Evans. 82–96. London: Berg Publisher.
Neumeier, M. (2009). The Designful Company: How to Build a Culture of Nonstop
Innovation. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.
Press, M. & Cooper, R. (2003). The Design Experience. The Role of Design and Designers in
the Twenty-First Century. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.
Romsaas, J. (2009). The Birth of an Institute. Industrial Design. Shaping Futures. Oslo: Oslo
School of Architecture and Design.
Schön, D. (1991). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Surrey:
Ashgate.
Simon, H. (1994, [1969, 1981]). The Science of the Artifical. 2nd ed. USA: MIT Press.
Tovey, M. (2009) The Passport to Practice. Design and Designing: a critical introduction.
Edited by S. Garner & Chris Evans. 82–96. London: Berg Publisher.
Troye, R. (2014). [Institution] -Works Studies 2013-2014. Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture
and Design.
Yee, J., Jefferies E. & Tan, L. (2013). Design Transitions: Inspiring Stories, Global Viewpoints,
How Design is Changing. Amsterdam, Netherlands: BIS Publishers.
Vogel, C. M. (2010). Notes on the Evolution of Design Thinking: A Work in Progress. In
Lockwood, T. In Design Thinking: Integrating Innovation, Customer Experience and
Brand Value. 3–14.
Wheeler, A. (2006). Designing Brand Identity. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
468
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking
MOOCs
Mana TAHERI* and Christoph MEINEL
Hasso Plattner Institute
*mana.taheri@hpi.de
Abstract: Design Thinking and Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) have
enjoyed a widespread attention and uptake by both institutes of higher
education and media. These two increasingly popular phenomena have joined
forces in the recent years with several reputable universities offering MOOCs on
Design Thinking. However the MOOC model of learning and Design Thinking
education seem very contradictory at the first glance: Design Thinking is taught
in a learning-by-doing fashion in small teams and through various hands-on
activities. In contrast, MOOCs are most often completed individually. Hence the
seemingly unfitting characteristics of MOOCs and Design Thinking are worth
further investigation. This paper presents the initial stage of a research project
that explores the potential of teaching Design Thinking at scale. It offers a
pedagogical evaluation of the existing Design Thinking MOOCs using the
Taxonomy Table and the Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate
Education. The results shed light on how Design Thinking is being taught today in
a MOOC environment and the learning objectives that the course providers are
expecting.
Keywords: Design Thinking; Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs); Seven
Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education; Taxonomy Table.
Copyright © 2015. Copyright of each paper in this conference proceedings is the property of the author(s).
Permission is granted to reproduce copies of these works for purposes relevant to the above conference,
provided that the author(s), source and copyright notice are included on each copy. For other uses, including
extended quotation, please contact the author(s).
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
Introduction
The advent of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) sparked a heated debate over their
potential and role for the prospect of higher education in the recent years (Yuan and
Powell, 2013). The increasing popularity of MOOCs challenged the traditional model of
education, leaving residential universities concerned about their role and of becoming
outdated (Holford, Jarvis, Milana, Waller and Webb, 2014). However, most of the MOOCs
that are popularized today are not far from the big lecture hall model of traditional
universities themselves and not as revolutionary as some have claimed (Eisenberg and
Fisher, 2014; Bali, 2014).
The surge in media attention on MOOCs and their so-called revolutionary prospect for
education has declined but still continues. Now that the dust has settled, it is time to take
a closer and more realistic look at MOOCs and their potentials. Taking into account that
MOOCs are only the latest chapter in the long history of distant and open education
(Liyanagunawardena, Adams and Williams, 2013) there is a long path ahead for
researchers to investigate their impact and role for complementing current education and
lifelong learning.
One of the distinctive characteristics of MOOCs, which is superior to the traditional lecture
model, is their degree of flexibility (Nkuyubwatsi, 2013). MOOC is a powerful medium to
reach a wide range of audience independent from time and location; individuals can watch
the course videos according to the setting and time that is best suited to their own
learning needs. However, some critics argue that the MOOC model of teaching and
learning might not be compatible with all types of courses and disciplines. In other words,
while MOOCs seem to be a good fit for those courses that are already taught in big lecture
halls, they may not be appropriate for those requiring specific physical settings such as labs
and studios (Eisenberg and Fisher, 2014). In this light, design education is among the latter
group.
The application of creativity and design has stepped beyond creative industries and into a
wider range of business and real life challenges, largely due to the fact that solving today’s
complex problems demands different ways of thinking and designing (Lloyd, 2013).
Increasing numbers of universities and educational institutions are joining this trend by
incorporating the teaching and learning of Design Thinking, as a human-centered approach
to innovative problem solving (Withell and Haigh, 2013; Dunne and Martin, 2006). The
popularity of the method has proceeded into the world of online learning to the point
where some prestigious universities are now offering MOOCs on Design Thinking (e.g.
Design Thinking Action Lab by Stanford University).
This current trend raises the question of how compatible such courses are with a real life
Design Thinking learning experience. Design Thinking is taught and learned in a rather
unconventional and learning-by-doing fashion: interdisciplinary teamwork, hands-on
activities, rapid prototyping, various iterations, warm-ups and team building exercises are
inevitable parts of a Design Thinking learning experience. Thus Design Thinking and the
current model of MOOCs are seemingly incompatible in their core nature. Given the
emergence of Design Thinking as a discipline (Withell and Haigh, 2013) and its gradual yet
increasing uptake by MOOC providers, there is a strong case for this research project,
which investigates the main research questions of:
How can Design Thinking be best taught in an online environment?
470
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
To what degree can students gain Design Thinking expertise through the MOOC
model of learning?
How can we assess the outcomes and the students’ learnings?
This conceptual paper is the first step in investigating the MOOC potential of Design
Thinking and its impact on individuals’ learning. It offers a pedagogical evaluation of the
current Design Thinking MOOCs, shedding light on how Design Thinking is being taught
today in a MOOC environment and the learning objectives that the course providers are
expecting.
As Bali (2014) argues, since the popularized MOOC model of education is similar to college
courses, for evaluating MOOCs it is more suitable to apply those frameworks and
approaches used for higher education than those for distance education. Thus, for the
purpose of this work, we apply the Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002) and the Seven
Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education developed by Chickering and
Gamson (1987). Given the limited research on learning and teaching Design Thinking in a
MOOC environment, this research will make a significant contribution to the field of Design
Thinking education.
Design (Thinking) Education over Distance
Teaching and learning design-related disciplines is traditionally associated with a physical
setting or a design studio. The role of studio learning for design education has been
emphasized by many scholars (e.g. Lynas, Budge and Beale, 2013). Brown (2005) discusses
the importance of the studio context from various aspects: as students develop their
design, they are constantly exposed to their peers’ works as well as their respective
thinking processes. In addition they benefit from listening to feedback given by experts
and instructors to their peers’ as well as to their own work. This continuous exposure and
interaction between students offers a great learning opportunity.
Despite the above mentioned emphasis on the role of the design studio, design education
has been taught and learned in a distant model for many years in the absence of a
conventional physical studios. The Open University in the UK, for instance offered its first
course on Design, called Man-Made Future: Design and Technology in 1975 (Lloyd, 2013).
Furthermore, the technological developments in recent years have offered new ways of
educational delivery and thus the opportunity to redefine teaching and learning in some
design disciplines (Walpole, 2012).
Lloyd (2013) identifies three main developments which play an important role in enabling
teaching and learning design over distance: firstly, the advent of creative social networks
that allow for individuals to expose their work and design to a broader audience and
consequently receive feedback. Secondly the recent development of the design discipline
itself: design is no longer limited to creating aesthetic artifacts, but has expanded into
different areas e.g. into communication. Finally, with the help of technological
development, design education itself has moved from the studio-based learning model
towards a more digital environment in which students work at home and communicate the
results online for feedback.
Similar to the classic design education, Design Thinking is traditionally taught in a studiobased learning environment. During a conventional Design Thinking workshop, students
471
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
collaborate in interdisciplinary teams, in an open and creative environment, and
participate in hands-on activities to develop innovative solutions (Plattner, Meinel and
Leifer, 2011). As interdisciplinary teamwork is an inevitable part of Design Thinking
problem solving, it poses an additional challenge in replicating the real life experience in an
online environment.
Despite the seemingly incompatible nature of learning experiences of MOOCs and Design
Thinking education, there is a significant value of teaching Design Thinking at scale; in
today’s world, the impact of design goes beyond creative industries and can be applied to
a range of areas (Lloyd, 2013). Managers are becoming more interested in approaching
problems afflicting businesses using design methods (Dunne and Martin, 2006). Moreover
many day-to-day problems that people face around the globe are design challenges in
their nature (Lloyd, 2013).
As Lloyd (2013) pointed out, there is a potential advantage of teaching Design (Thinking) in
a MOOC environment. While many academic design schools have a rather homogenous
selection of students, the MOOC model can tap into the potential of diversity among its
audience. He further argues that the design knowledge transfer in any given design school
is a mix of one-to-one (between mentor and student and therefore more formal) and
many-to-many (among students in an informal manner). In an online environment a manyto-many knowledge transmission should be in the center of the course design and
supported by learning activities. This will allow for participants from different backgrounds
and expertise to be involved in the problem solving process.
Finally, Design Thinking is a human-centered approach to problem solving with the focus
on the needs of the people for whom the solutions are designed for, thus it can be applied
in different cultural contexts. Considering the ever increasing need to apply the Design
Thinking methodology and lessons to address today’s complex challenges (Owen, 2007),
and the fact that there are still limited opportunities internationally to learn and apply
Design Thinking compared to other disciplines, teaching this methodology at scale has the
potential to make a significant contribution in empowering individuals.
As the first step towards identifying how Design Thinking can be best taught in a MOOC
environment, it is necessary to explore the existing MOOCs on Design Thinking and review
the pedagogies across these courses.
Research Approach
In this section we first clarify the steps in which the Design Thinking MOOCs were
identified and present our selection criteria. Then we discuss the role of learning objectives
and their importance for the MOOC research, followed by the placement of the retrieved
objectives of the selected MOOCs into the Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002). Applying
the model of Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education (Chickering
and Gamson, 1987) will allow for assessing to which extent the expected learning
objectives were supported by the pedagogies of the courses. For this purpose we
examined each MOOC individually rather than a genre (Bali, 2014) and took the
perspective of participant observers (Nkuyubwatsi, 2013).
472
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
Selection of MOOCs on Design Thinking
Considering the constant change in the MOOC environment, using a source that provides
an overview of the related courses was crucial to this work. Four MOOC aggregators were
used, namely: Class Central, Course Talk, Open Education Europa and MOOCSE. As a first
step, we searched for the terms Design Thinking and Human Centered Design as these
terms are used interchangeably (e.g. IDEO.com uses human-centered design). This
approach resulted in identification of courses that contained these two keywords in their
titles.
Secondly, to ensure consistency in our study, the following boundaries were defined:
Courses offered in languages other than English were not considered for this review.
However, only one non-English course, taught in French was dismissed as a result. In order
to apply our pedagogical assessment across all courses, we focused on university-level
MOOCs, thus dismissing those offered by individuals on skill sharing platforms (here only
the course Design Thinking: Innovation in Style on Udemy was dismissed). Finally, only
those courses that were free of charge were included (here the course Design Thinking for
Innovative Problem Solving was dismissed).
Table 1
List of existing Design Thinking MOOCs (offered in English)
Provider
Duration
Course Code
Platform
Macromedia University
4 Weeks
DTOC
Iversity
Innovation and Design
Thinking
University of Cincinnati
7 Weeks
IDT
UC MOOCs
Design Thinking Action Lab
Stanford University
5 Weeks
DTAL
Design Thinking for Business
Innovation
Design Kit: The Course for
Human-Centered Design
University of Virginia
4 Weeks
DTBI
Stanford
Online
Coursera
+Acumen
7 Weeks
DK
NovoEd
Course Name
Design Thinking Online
Course
University of
Cincinnati
All these courses are offered on an introductory level requiring no prior knowledge on
Design Thinking from participants. At the time of this study, the following courses were
terminated and no upcoming iterations were offered: Design Thinking Action Lab (Stanford
University), and Innovation and Design Thinking (University of Cincinnati). Therefore the
research sample for our investigation consists of the three courses that were accessible,
namely: Design Thinking Online Course (DTOC), Design Thinking for Business Innovation
(DTBI) and the Design Kit: The Course for Human-Centered Design (DK). The characteristics
of the selected courses will be discussed further in this paper.
Learning Objectives of the Selected MOOCs
Since the advent of MOOCs and consequently the access to large data sets on learners’
activities, researchers have been fascinated by the use of big data through learning
analytics. However, big data does not answer all the questions about learning and teaching
473
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
by the virtue of their size (Reich, 2015). Learning analytics are useful for helping students
to make fewer mistakes and allowing course providers to adapt the pace of the course to
patterns of students’ answers. The important question that arises is how primary these
goals are in the overall learning objectives of a given course and how much they contribute
to the improvement of students’ learning experience? (Eisenberg and Fisher, 2014). Thus,
it is valuable to focus on the improvement of those objectives and goals, which have a
higher and more direct impact on students’ learning. As a first step, curricular objectives of
a given course need to be defined clearly. Once these objectives are prioritized, MOOC
research can pose those types of questions that address the most primary objectives of an
online learning experience.
In addition, identifying clear and measurable learning objectives early on in the process of
course design, enables curriculum builders and course designers to define learning
activities and instructional design for achieving these goals (Krathwohl, 2002). In this light
and with the purpose of identifying those objectives that have significant impact on the
overall learning experience, we begin our investigation by reviewing the selected Design
Thinking MOOCs and their curricular objectives using the framework of the Taxonomy
Table (Krathwohl, 2002).
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives provides educators and course designers
with a structure for classifying statements of what they expect students to achieve and
learn as a result of participation in a given course (Krathwohl, 2002). The original
Taxonomy represented a cumulative hierarchy of six categories in the Cognitive Process
domain, starting from the lower order thinking (simpler category) towards more complex
thinking skills (e.g. evaluation). The Taxonomy has been used as a guidance for educators
to develop learning objectives aiming towards higher order thinking (Bali, 2014).
The revised version of the Taxonomy allows for the separation between the Knowledge
and the Cognitive Process spectrum. Development of the six hierarchical thinking skills on
the Cognitive Process (on the horizontal axis) is tackled on four categories of the
Knowledge dimension (on the vertical axis). Thus, suggesting a possibility to represent the
objectives in a two-dimensional table called the Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002).
In this study, we extracted the learning objectives of the selected courses from their
landing page. Commonly the first page of a MOOC contains general information about the
course, instructor(s), format, as well as what can be expected from the course. It might
contain a short introductory video about the course as well. The process of extracting the
learning objectives was not straightforward, as the objectives are not always mentioned
explicitly. In such cases, they were extracted from the general information about the
corresponding course on the first page.
In order to see how the placement of the extracted learning objectives into the Taxonomy
Table was accomplished, consider the following example extracted from the course DTOC.
One of the objectives mentioned is ‘You will learn how to apply teamwork and
communications skills’. Following Krathwohl (2002) for placement of objectives along the
Cognitive Process dimension we pay attention to the verb Apply, in the statement which is
associated with the category Apply. Consequently in order to place the objective along the
Knowledge axis, consideration of the noun phrase, teamwork and communications skills, is
required, which associates with the Procedural Knowledge category.
However, the placement of some of the statements required additional considerations and
differed from the process that Krathwohl (2002) demonstrated in his work. In other words,
474
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
classifying objectives solely by focusing on the verb and the noun phrase of a given
statement is limiting for our case; consider the following objective as an example:
‘students will create prototype of their solutions’. Following the recommendation of
Krathwohl (2002) if we only note the verb Create, we would place this objective under the
Create category and consequently in the highest order thinking skill. However, creating a
prototype is one of the steps of the Design Thinking process and therefore should be
classified in the cell corresponding with the intersection of Apply and Procedural
Knowledge.
Conceptual
Factual
Table 2
Taxonomy Table of the selected Design Thinking MOOCs
Remember
Understand
DTOC:
[…] fundamentals
like historical and
theoretical aspects
of design, design
models and design
systems
DTOC:
You will gain deeper
insights into the Design
Thinking methodology
and the human-centered
design approach
Apply
Analyse
DTBI:
[…] we will look at
several stories from
different organizations
[…]all using Design
Thinking tools and
approaches
Procedural
DTOC:
You will learn how to
apply teamwork and
communications skills
Metacognitive
Evaluate
DK:
[…] equip you with the
mind-sets and methods of
human-cantered design
[…] inspire you to
approach challenges
differently
[…] experience speaking
to, prototyping for, and
testing solutions with the
people you’re designing
for
DK:
[…] identify patterns and
opportunities for concept
development
475
DTOC:
[…] will teach
you how to
evaluate
ideas and
concepts […]
DK:
[…] experience
how humancantered design
can add new
perspectives to
your own work
[…]
Create
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
Seven Principles of Good Practice in Undergraduate Education
Based on research Chickering and Gamson (1987) defined seven principles on good
teaching in undergraduate education. These principles are still relevant and being used to
assure high quality teaching (Bali, 2014). According to Chickering and Gamson (1987), a
good practice in undergraduate education contains the following attributes:
Encouraging contact between the students and faculty
Encouraging cooperation among the students
Encouraging active learning
Providing prompt feedback
Emphasizing time on tasks
Communicating high expectations
Respecting and supporting diverse talents and ways of learning
Beyond their application in the context of traditional course design, these principles
translate well into the MOOC environment and can guide course designers to create good
instructional practices (Siemens and Tittenberger, 2009).
In discussing different attributes of MOOCs, it is important to define one’s point of view
(Bali, 2014). Since the authors are well experienced with applying, as well as teaching
Design Thinking, taking the perspective of a new learner was not possible. Thus, following
Nkuyubwatsi (2013), informed by our role as researchers and our experience with Design
Thinking, we enrolled and observed, without fully participating in the three accessible
courses, namely: DTOC, DK and DTBI. In each course, we tried different features and
functionalities of the platform and engaged in adequate amount of learning activities to
gain a thorough understanding of their pedagogies and instructional design. Although
these courses shared a common topic, they vary in terms of their content and approach in
teaching Design Thinking.
The course DK focuses on the application of Design Thinking in tackling challenges from the
social sector. Although it is possible to take the course individually, the course providers
highly recommend to form a team, either with colleagues and friends or joining the
already existing teams.
On the other hand, DTBI and DTOC do not require teamwork. The course DTBI emphasizes
the application of Design Thinking for innovation in business environment, as the selection
of examples presented in the course as well the recommended readings imply.
Finally, the DTOC has a theoretical and historical approach in introducing Design Thinking,
in that they allocate a significant part of the course to design theories and models.
In the following we will assess the extent to which each of the three courses has met the
above mentioned principles and consequently shedding light on some of the attributes of
these courses:
Regarding the first principle of encouraging student-faculty interaction, besides
unidirectional weekly emails and video lectures, in DTOC there was very little interaction
between students and instructors. Some answers to forum posts were occasionally signed
as Macromedia MOOC Team, by a contributor who was not mentioned in the teaching
team. Additionally, an email address for the course-related questions was provided, as well
as a Facebook page with a number of uncommented posts. However, students were not
476
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
actively encouraged to utilize them. An invitation to a webinar with the course instructor
on the topic of Design Management was announced in the last week of the course.
In DK the main content was provided through various readings and workshop guides, thus
there are no instructors talking to the camera. These are complemented by short videos
with practitioners sharing their experiences in using different tools and methods. The
course providers were actively supporting participants in the forums through two roles of
Course Catalysts (volunteers who are former participants) and the Teaching Assistants.
In DTBI apart from the weekly questions posed by the course providers to spark
discussions in the forums, in the midst of the course there was an opportunity of one hour
Google hangout, where the instructor answered several pre-compiled questions from the
tweets and forums.
The second principle of developing reciprocity and encouraging cooperation among the
students was hardly addressed in the DTOC. The discussion forum offered the space for
informal cooperation, but it was not actively utilized. Formally, no teamwork and
collaboration was required.
In DK there were various opportunities for interaction between students. The course highly
recommended students to form teams and try to have physical meetings to prepare the
assignments (team workshops) and tweet pictures of their team activities throughout the
course. In addition, participants were encouraged to explore other submissions to
contribute feedback and find inspirations for their own project. Moreover, there were a
number of opportunities for in-person meetups in some cities.
The interaction between students did not go beyond the discussion forums in DTBI. Apart
from course announcements, weekly additional emails provided updates on active
discussion threads and encouraged course participants to join.
The third principle is encouraging active learning. The DTOC relied mostly on quizzes along
some of the video lectures which required students to recall. In addition, some lessons
posed open questions, which were optional for the students to answer. In order to gain a
statement of participation, students were required to complete 80% of the course
materials (including videos and quizzes).
The DK course required participants to apply their learnings to a design challenge and
submit their results throughout the course. Weekly workshop guides provided teams with
instructions on different activities and tasks. There were no quizzes and the statement of
accomplishment was published upon completing course materials (readings and videos)
and submitting all four assignments.
There were no quizzes or weekly assignments in the course DTBI either. However in order
to gain a certificate of accomplishment, students were required to provide an example of
how they applied at least two of the tools they learned from the course.
The fourth principle emphasizes the importance of providing prompt feedback. Despite the
automatic feedback on the multiple-choice quizzes in DTOC, no hints were provided to
improve a wrong answer. This was especially confusing in the case of open questions.
In DK, besides the voluntary peer review and feedback on the assignments, there were
occasional comments from the course staff. However, not all submissions received
comments and reviews.
The only option for providing feedback in DTBI was the final submission (for those
interested in achieving a certificate), as there were no quizzes or assignments. The period
477
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
between the final submission deadline and the first news about the review status was
about a week.
The fifth principle, emphasizing time on task was missing in the DTOC. There is a fourweek course structure that participants are recommended to follow but it is not
mandatory. For multiple-choice quizzes and open questions there were no given time
constraints.
Similarly, the DK recommended soft deadlines to allow for those who joined late to catch
up and be able to submit the assignments before the course closed. Two extra weeks in
advance were allocated for the final submission. On the other hand the required time for
team workshops was estimated about two hours and the workshop guides contained
information about each task and the allocated time needed.
Finally, in the absence of quizzes and assignments in the DTBI, watching the weekly videos
and reading the optional readings were the only time consuming tasks.
Regarding the sixth principle of communicating high expectations, the expectations were
rather low in both DTOC and DTBI. In the case of DTOC, as most of the quizzes asked
students to recall, the requirements for passing the course were not challenging. In DTBI,
apart from the final optional assignment, there were no requirements or deadlines to be
fulfilled during the course.
On the other hand the expectations for completing the DK course were rather high.
Submitting four assignments required both time and team commitment. For each
assignment students needed to complete the course materials and allocate two hours for
the team workshop.
Finally, the last principle is respecting and supporting diverse talents and ways of learning.
Beyond offering a set of standard features such as quizzes, video lectures and
recommended readings, DTOC did not actively use multimedia to support diverse learning
styles.
In DTBI, the subtitle feature and the option of downloading the lecture slides was helpful
in supporting non-native speakers of the audience.
In DK a link to a Dropbox folder that included all the course materials in a single PDF
format was provided, for those groups of participants with limited Internet access.
Moreover regarding the course project, students had the freedom to choose from either
the three pre-crafted design challenges by IDEO.org, or a design challenge from their own
social context.
Conclusion
Comparing the retrieved learning objectives of the selected courses and the results of the
participant observation, allows for evaluating the extent to which the expected objectives
were supported by the practices used in these courses. It also demonstrates the existing
variations in pedagogies across these courses. It is important to point out that not all
courses need to incorporate all the principles by Chickering and Gamson. In other words
the application of good practices depends on how they can support the expected learning
objectives (Bali, 2014).
Despite the absence of assignments and peer interaction in the course DTBI, the
instructional practices of the course match its primary goal of introducing the Design
Thinking methodology and its application in real life, as the following statement extracted
478
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
from the course suggests: ‘In this course we will look at several stories from different
organizations […] all using Design Thinking tools and approaches to achieve better
outcomes.’
The pedagogies of the course DK allows for seeking its goal of enabling students to apply
their learnings to a real life design challenge. Thus, moving towards developing higher
order thinking (Apply).The final submissions of the teams that demonstrates how they
applied their learnings to their design project support this claim.
Finally, although the pedagogical approaches used in DTOC are suitable for introducing
‘…the fundamentals like historical and theoretical aspects of design, design models and
design systems’ (retrieved from the course website), they fall short in fulfilling some of the
expected objectives. For instance ‘learning how to apply teamwork and communications
skills’ in a course where cooperation between students is not encouraged, seem hard to
achieve.
As Table 2 demonstrates, there is an emphasis on objectives requiring the skill of applying
and carrying out a procedure. This implies that the focus is mostly on teaching the process
steps of the Design Thinking methodology. Thus assignments, tasks and activities need to
be incorporated that encourage students to apply their learnings. Moreover, learning a
new skill to a level of applying it requires time and commitment. Although loose schedules
and less demanding assignments might be appealing to busy adult learners, but
communicating low expectations might also hinder the potential learning that one could
get from the course (Bali, 2014).
The evaluation further highlights good practices that tap into some of the unique
potentials of MOOC model of education. The lack of student-faculty interaction for
instance, can be mitigated to some extent by engaging former students in the supporting
team, as seen in the course DK. Due to the large number of participants in each iteration,
course designers can form a strong support team in collaboration with many former
students.
Furthermore, the massive nature of the MOOCs offers a great opportunity for encouraging
cooperation among students (Stewart, 2013). Considering the fact that students
conventionally learn Design Thinking through interaction and collaboration in
interdisciplinary teams, having students from different countries and disciplines offers a
great opportunity to course designers to tap into the potential of diversity (Lloyd, 2013). A
course that puts student interaction in the center of the learning experience will allow for
participants from different backgrounds and expertise to be involved in the problem
solving process and collaborate on a design challenge.
Finally, reaching a global audience in an effective way, requires awareness of existing
challenges and limitations in different parts of the world. In another word, MOOC
designers need to think beyond their own context (e.g. video lectures with high resolution
pose a challenge to those with limited internet access). Furthermore using global examples
and incorporating stories beyond ‘Western World’ in a given course, will help to resonate
with a broader audience (Bali, 2014).
Discussion
This paper has provided a pedagogical assessment of the selected Design Thinking MOOCs
using both Taxonomy Table (Krathwohl, 2002) and the Seven Principles of Good Practice in
479
MANA TAHERI & CHRISTOPH MEINEL
Undergraduate Education (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). The following remarks emerged as
a result of this work:
Firstly, in classifying the learning objectives of a given Design Thinking course using the
Taxonomy Table, the terminologies of the process steps of Design Thinking should be
taken into close consideration. In other words, classification solely based on the verb and
noun phrase will be misleading in this case.
Secondly, as Brown (2005) and Lloyd (2013) point out, there is a division between learning
about and learning to be. However some objectives claimed by the above-mentioned
courses aim for outcomes towards learning to be a Design Thinker. Achieving such
objectives requires course designers to take a more project-based teaching approach and
communicate higher expectations with the participants.
Although we limited our review of MOOCs on Design Thinking to courses taught in English,
interestingly this resulted in dismissing only one course which was taught in French. This
indicates that teaching Design Thinking in a MOOC environment has been taken up mainly
by English courses and offers a huge potential for international educators to design
courses in other languages, and thus reaching a more diverse audience.
Moreover it is important to highlight that the results of the keyword search varied among
the four aggregators, which implies that they are not covering all courses.
As a first step of a broader research project, our review has several limitations. In our
attempt to extract learning objectives of the selected courses, our sole source of
information was the welcoming page of each course. The presented objectives were those
claimed by the course providers on their web page. In order to evaluate the impact of
these objectives on students’ learning experience and their development of Design
Thinking attributes, survey and in-depth interviews with participants are required as a next
step. Thus, there shall be further collaboration with the course providers in the future.
Moreover, the pedagogical evaluation using the above mentioned frameworks was
completed by two reviewers separately, followed by a discussion. To avoid the risk of a
subjective categorization it is recommended to involve more reviewers and to measure the
inter-rater reliability.
Despite the limited number of accessible MOOCs on Design Thinking found in this study,
the authors believe that this is a positive movement in demystifying and introducing the
potential of Design Thinking methodology to a broader audience.
Acknowledgements: I am profoundly thankful to Prof. Katharina Hölzle for
her supports and constructive feedback.
References
Bali, M. (2014). MOOC pedagogy: gleaning good practice from existing MOOCs. MERLOT.
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 44-56.
Brown, J. S. (2005). New learning environments for the 21st century. In Futures Forum.
Chickering, A. W. & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in
undergraduate education. AAHE bulletin, 3, 7.
Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design thinking and how it will change management
education: An interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning & Education,
5(4), 512-523.
480
Pedagogical Evaluation of the Design Thinking MOOCs
Eisenberg, M., & Fischer, G. (2014). MOOCs: a Perspective from the Learning Sciences. In
Learning and Becoming in Practice. Boulder, Colorado.
Holford, J., Jarvis, P., Milana, M., Waller, R., & Webb, S., (2014). The MOOC phenomenon:
toward lifelong education for all? International Journal of Lifelong Education, 33:5, 569572
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Liyanagunawardena, T. R., Adams, A. A., & Williams, S. A. (2013). MOOCs: A systematic
study of the published literature 2008-2012. The International Review of Research in Open
and Distributed Learning, 14(3), 202-227.
Lloyd, P. (2013). Embedded creativity: teaching design thinking via distance education.
International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 749–765.
Lynas, E., Budge, K., & Beale, C. (2013). Hands on: The importance of studio learning in
design education. Visual Inquiry, 2(2), 127-138.
Nkuyubwatsi, B. (2013). Evaluation of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) from the
learner’s perspective.
Owen, C. (2007). Design Thinking: Notes on its Nature and Use. Design Research Quarterly,
2(1), 16–27.
Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2011). Design Thinking: Understand – Improve – Apply
Heidelberg: Springer – Verlag.
Reich, J. (2015). Rebooting MOOC Research. Science Magazine, 347(6217), 34–35.
Siemens, G., & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook of emerging technologies for learning.
Manitoba, Canada: University of Manitoba.
Stewart, B. (2013). Massiveness + Openness = New Literacies of Participation? MERLOT.
Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 228-238.
Walpole, H. (2012). Preparing to Teach Architecture Online: The Hurdle of the Design
Studio. In ASCILITE-Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education
Annual Conference (Vol. 2012, No. 1).
Withell, A., & Haigh, N. (2013). Developing Design Thinking Expertise in Higher Education
(Vol. 2). Presented at the International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Oslo,
Norway.
Yuan, L., Powell, S., & CETIS, J. (2013). MOOCs and open education: Implications for higher
education. Cetis White Paper.
481
This page is intentionally left blank.
Author Index
ACKERMANN, L., 575
AFLATOONY, L., 563
AHMED, A., 548
AIA, 1034, 1099
AITCHISON, I., 1536
ANTOLINEZ-BENAVIDES, L., 366
ATMAN, C., 1498
BADKE-SCHAUB, P., 330
BAKIRLIOĞLU, Y., 1569
BALL, C. E., 1701
BARNEY, D., 142
BARTON, G., 347
BASNAK, M., 683
BENKER, A., 1319
BJØRNSTAD, N., 455
BOĞA-AKYOL, M., 970
BOLING, E., 1417
BÖREKÇİ, N., 264
BRAND, A., 1255
BRAUN, J., 1585
BROWN, P., 1432
BRUNMAIR, B., 1397
BSIESY, A., 1072
CALLAHAN, K., 735
CHEVRIER, J., 1072
CHILDS, P. R., 1255
CHORNYAK, B., 45
CHU, S., 1628
CORAZZO, J., 32
COŞKUN, A., 1569
CROTCH, J., 589
DALY, 308
DANKL, K., 535
DAY, J., 1057, 1518
DE LA SOTTA, P., 1481
DEE, M., 1349
DELVAUX, F., 954
DENARDI, F., 1585
DEWBERRY, E., 1536
DIGRANES, I., 800
DISKIN, S., 1255
ECHEVERRI, D., 870
EDEHOLT, H., 673
EL AHDAB, D., 715
EL-KHOURY, N., 1287
ELSEN, C., 954
EMANS, D., 604, 1301
ENGLISH, S., 623
EROGLU, I., 156
ESTEVAN, J. A., 638
FERNÁNDEZ, J., 1381
FERREIRA da SILVA, G., 1276
FONTAINE, L., 748
FRANKE, A., 366
FREIMANE, A., 187
FRIEDMEYER, W., 991
FRY, A., 655
FUJIKAWA, M., 1255
GAO, B., 882
GIBSON, M., 1016
GILLETT, D., 80
GONÇALVES, E., 1585
GONZALEZ, 308
GONZÁLEZ RAMOS, A., 1132
GONZÁLEZ, M., 1381
GRAHAM, M., 142
GRAY, 308
GRAY, C., 1417
GRAY, C. M., 1680
GRIEVE, F., 109
GRÖPPEL-WEGENER, A., 93
GROSS, K., 19
GUERSENZVAIG, A., 1669
GUO, Y., 214
HAMDY, B., 604
HAMUY, E., 1481
HE, R., 214
HEAPE, C., 1362
HESTAD, M., 382, 455
HLAVACS, H., 1397
HOLDEN, G., 1645
HOWARD, C. D., 1680
1715
Author Index
HU, Y., 214
HUNSUCKER, A., 443
HUTCHINSON, A., 430
HYNES, W., 1002
INAKAGE, M., 1255
INGALLS VANADA, D., 278
JACOBS, J., 200
JAMES, M., 485
JANCART, S., 954
JOINES, S., 847
JONES, D., 1599, 1645
KAISER, Z., 1616
KAPKIN, E., 847
KAYA, C., 156
KAYALI, F., 1397
KEANE, L., 1034, 1099
KEANE, M., 1034, 1099
KUCZWARA, J., 1397
LAWITSCHKA, A., 1397
LAWSON, C., 518
LEHNER, S., 1397
LINN, S., 3
LOBO, T., 907
LOFTHOUSE, V., 774
LOPEZ-LEON, R., 1465
LOTZ, N., 1536, 1645
LÖYTÖNEN, T., 168
LUIPPOLD, C., 330
LUNDBERG, S., 1255
LUPINACCI, A., 230
MADANI, L., 1072
MAINSAH, H., 1701
MÄKELÄ, M., 168
MALCOLM, J., 923
MANLEY, A., 774
MANNS GANTZ, P., 1132
MARTIN, P. S., 715
MARTINEK, D., 1397
MARTINSON, B. E., 1628
MATEUS-BERR, R., 1397
McDONNELL, J., 1498
MEEK, K., 109
MEINEL, C., 469
MILLS, D., 940
MONTORE, M., 230
MORRISON, A., 1701
MUELLER, R., 330
MUELLER-RUSSO, K., 1255
MURDOCH-KITT, K., 1301
NAPIER, P., 246
NASH, K., 1616
NAVARRO-SANINT, M., 366
NEBEL, M., 1397
NOEL, L., 1118
NORMAN, C., 416
O’REILLY, J., 382
ORTHEL, B., 1518
OVERBY, C., 655
ÖZGEN KOÇYILDIRIM, D., 1569
PEÑA, J., 1381
PENNINGTON, M., 1255
PERELLI, B., 1481
PERRONE, R., 819
PETERS, K., 1397
PLOWRIGHT, P., 397
POGGIO, N., 518
POLDMA, T., 1333
RAESIDE-ELLIOT, F., 1552
REITHOFER, A., 1397
REITSPERGER, P., 382
RINGVOLD, T., 800
ROJAS, C., 57
ROJAS, F., 623
ROJAS-CESPEDES, C., 366
SANCHEZ RUANO, D., 923
SCHAEFER, K., 790
SEIFERT, 308
SELIGER, M., 131
SHAYLER, M., 774
SHREEVE, A., 80
SIEGEL, M., 443, 1432
SILBERNAGL, M., 1397
SILVA, J., 834
SMITH, A., 1552
SMITH, K., 1417
SOARES, L., 698
SOSA-TZEC, O., 1432
SPENCER, N., 623
SPRUNG, M., 1397
STALS, A., 954
STELZER, B., 575
STEVENS, J. S., 1255
1716
Author Index
TAHERI, M., 469
TAKEYAMA, N., 500
TAUKE, B., 683
TEMPLE, S., 1454
THORING, K., 330
TİMUR-ÖĞÜT, S., 970
TRIMMEL, S., 897
VAUGHAN, L., 1701
WADA, T., 246
WAKKARY, R., 563
WALCH TRACEY, M., 430
WANG, F., 1267
WEIDEMANN, S., 683
WEINSTEIN, K., 1084
WHITCOMB, A., 1319
WILSON, J., 655
WÖLFLE, R., 1397
YACOUB, C., 1333
YILMAZ, 308
YOUNG, R., 623, 1552
YU, Y., 1267
1717
Chicago, IL USA / JUNE 28–30 2015
Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference
for Design Education Researchers
Editors
Robin VandeZande is a strong advocate for the teaching of design education at
the elementary and secondary levels. An associate professor of art education at
Kent State University, her research and publications include teaching sustainable
design, K-12 design education as it relates to social responsibility, the economy and
enhancement to life. She has recently completed a framework for the Principles,
Practices and Strategies of teaching design under a National Art Education
Foundation grant. Dr. VandeZande is a trustee of DESIGN-ED, Advisory Council
Robin VandeZande member of Fallingwater, Education member of the National Building Museum,
Washington, DC., past-chair of the NAEA Design Issues Group, and chair of the
Learnxdesign2015 Conference.
978- 952- 60- 0069- 5
Ingvild Digranes
Ingvild Digranes’ research interests include: curriculum studies and design education
for citizenship as well as professional challenges for design educators. Dr Digranes
chairs the course Educational Theory and Practice in Art and Design Education at
Oslo and Akershus University College in Norway, and also teaches and supervises
at master and PhD level. Ingvild has experience in policymaking through curriculum
development at local and national levels. Dr Digranes chairs the NGO Art and Design
in Education, and sits in the board for the Nordic Collaboration of Craft Teachers. She
is the guest editor for the FORMakademisk Special Issue from the conference.
ISBN 978-952-60-0069-5
Erik Bohemia
Erik Bohemia’s current research explores changes associated with globalisation and
the impact of these changes on design. Such research has been used to develop
various funded research projects, as well as an innovative international collaboration
through the Global Studio. Dr Bohemia is actively shaping the design education
agenda through co-chairing key international design education research conferences
and through editorial roles. Erik is currently leading programme development for the
Institute for Design Innovation at Loughborough University London. Dr Bohemia is an
elected member of DRS’ Executive Council, an international society for developing
and supporting the interests of the design research community.