Teena,

You wrote:
{snip}
points to the range of (research) activities in which PhD students engage, as individuals learning new
scholarly practices in the process of contributing knowledge to a field. I prefer to think of this as a
landscape of knowledge rather than a body, as the former suggests multiplicity, diversity and room
to move and look around.

Abbott's theory of the system of professions, and the notion of a body of knowledge are not without their own pitfalls. (The closet Foucauldian in me takes issue with the notion of a body of knowledge.) However, one of the benefits of using the language "body of knowledge" is that there are precedents in other design disciplines for investigating/interrogating a "body of knowledge" (c.f. ASLA, 2004; Guerin & Martin, 2001). For my research project, drawing upon previous research (and its literature) are critical to situating it (graphic design knowledge/graphic design's body of knowledge) within a larger corpus of research about disciplinary/work/professional knowledge. By doing this (to use Abbott as a framework) I trace the profession to cultural values (e.g. situate it within a larger body of scientific/scholarly knowledge). Indeed, Guerin and Martin (2001) reference Abbott in defining the rationale for their ongoing body of knowledge studies for interior design.

While a 'landscape of knowledge' is appealing in the ways you described, it doesn't fit with my research nor the theoretical framework the research engages.

You also state that
Rather than making a clear distinction between the range of institutional activities design academics
at all stages of their scholarly careers engage in, I suggest that we are both educating individuals as
well as ourselves while simultaneously contributing to the multiple landscapes of design knowledge
{snip}

My previous statements about professions/graphic design knowledge/graphic design's body of knowledge did not insinuate any particular ranking of types of knowledge. (Or if it did, then that was a mistake.) Indeed, Abbott's work (1988) is an interesting exploration of the types of disciplinary knowledge and work, the pitfalls of each type/location, and the role(s) these play in maintaining a discipline's jurisdiction. The strength and weakness of particular aspects of work/disciplinary knowledge can make a jurisdiction (control over work) either weak or strong, depending on a variety of factors. I won't go further into this here unless someone asks, as this is a much longer discussion.

Best,
Kate.


Abbott, A. (1988). The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor (1st ed.). University of Chicago Press.

ASLA. (2004). Landscape Architecture Body of Knowledge Study Report. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.asla.org/uploadedFiles/CMS/Education/Accreditation/LABOK_3_pages.pdf

Guerin, D., & Martin, C. (2001). The interior design profession’s body of knowledge: Its definition and documentation. Toronto: Association of Registered Interior Designers of Ontario.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Kate LaMere, PhD
Assistant Professor and Area Coordinator of Graphic Design
School of Art and Design
Mail Stop 502
East Carolina University
Greenville, NC 27858 USA

[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
(+1) 252.328.5180