Dear Colleagues,
In reflecting on and trying to link a few of the questions that have
appeared here lately, I have been tracking threads on the list over the
past two or three weeks. The threads seem to circle around a series of
twelve issues. Some of these relate directly to each other. Others touch at
the edges. Some function as outliers.
A quick reading of the past few weeks of debate on PhD-Design reveals
several interesting themes that remain open threads. (There may well be
themes I have not identified, and others might state these themes in
different ways.)
These operate on different level of inquiry and analysis.
Listing the topics suggests some of the important and underdeveloped areas
of inquiry in our field, as well as a few topics of specific importance to
the list.
Examining the list of rubrics or questions without considering the content
of any specific topic offers an interesting overview of potential research
areas.
In rough chronological order, the topics of the past few weeks are:
1) Transformative learning: general thread with subsidiary questions.
2) Creativity research: general thread with subsidiary questions.
3) Can creativity research advance professional practice in design?
4) Is there a form of design research that is specifically suited to and
based upon the knowledge and experience of designers?
5) Should there be a form of design research that is specifically suited to
and based upon the knowledge and experience of designers or - possibly -
should design restricted be focused on or restricted to this form of
research?
6) Must all design research be applied or clinical, or are their
significant areas of basic research that are vital to design research even
though they do not directly advance the professional practice of design?
7) Would PhD-Design benefit from some form of improved process to encourage
more and wider participation, especially by those who feel uncomfortable
participating now?
8) Generative theory: general inquiry that may give rise to further
questions.
9) Is it possible to develop or work with theories that are not predictive?
10) Intelligibility of concepts, including notes on Stephen Toulmin's
approach of reason as contrasted with rationalism. Example given in the
Dilthey-Mead-Blumer tradition of social inquiry.
11) Does (or can) theory contribute to improved practice?
12) How does (or how can) theory contribute to improved practice?
13) What is the nature of interests in defining research issues and
programs?
14) What is the natuyre of design research?
15) Is design theory possible?
16) Theory and theory contruction. (One must understand theory and theory
construction to ask whether design theory is possible.)
17) Nominalization and communication
18) Grammatical and linguistic aspects of the terms "design" and
"designing."
It may take a while to bring some order out of my notes. In the meantime, I
want to share this rough outline of open themes and topics.
Best regards,
--
Ken Friedman, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
Department of Leadership and Organization
Norwegian School of Management
Visiting Professor
Advanced Research Institute
School of Art and Design
Staffordshire University
|