My apologies, I have forgotten to introduce myself. I lecture in industrial
design at the University of South Australia teaching design methodology and
advanced methodology as well as industrial design studio. I am also a
consultant for collaborative innovation. Both of the methodology courses which
I designed, address collaboration and the complexity of systems design
problems. The surrounding issues of how to teach to these and what to teach
weigh strongly on my mind.
On Monday, 1 December 2003 8:33 PM Nicola Morelli, referring to messages from
Harold Nelson and David Sless said:
        " the teaching curricula taking into account systemic approach to
design are      still to be developed. Many design programs I've seen are not
considering     this approach at all, while others I've been dealing with are
using the term  system design, but are not solving the confusion        on
definition Harold       mentioned in his post. I've seen systemic approach
confused with   systematic."
I think it is important also to distinguish between the design problems,
designing and teaching students methodologies and methods for understanding and
addressing systems, applying systemic and systematic approaches to design that
can be evaluated, while still preserving opportunities for the kind of
innovation which is more likely in an unstructured free environment allowing
for the 'play instinct' (I hesitate to use this word) to emerge. Earlier in the
conference multidisciplinary design groups were mentioned. There are
methodologies and methods which foster collaboration and synergy and yet these
are often left out of the educational program for designers. For design
education this is often new territory requiring new knowledge however it is
possible to synthesize a blending of existing and new bodies of knowledge
(beyond the bounds of design) but I would suggest the search for the existing
bodies of knowledge needs to be broader in many ways, disciplinarily,
culturally, socially, etc.
        So one issue is what are the needed bodies of knowledge? A second issue
is how design knowledge and process can be used and where it might be applied
or in other words what, where and how? And a separate issue is what this
implies for education in terms of pedagogy. And a fourth issue which Nicole
brought up is how to represent a system.  "Therefore another topic I would
include in the debate about systemic design in the development of new curricula
would be how to represent, (through models, graphic or whatever technique) the
system,"  I would add a fifth  topic, a need to re-evaluate what kinds of
deliverables students are asked for, and how those add too, or diminish
learning taking place.
Jan
Jan Coker
C3-10 Underdale Campus
University of South Australia
+61 8 8302 6919
"There is no way to peace, peace is the way"
Gandhi