Hi Teena
On 6 Oct 2011, at 22:14, Teena Clerke wrote:
-snip-
> like you, many of the design courses in which I have been involved in teaching at undergraduate
> level often continue to neglect or struggle to include basic qualitiative research skills and processes
> that, for example, generate researchable questions and research designs.
Agreed. Although some 'basic qualitative research' skills are also practiced unknowingly in art school environments. This is directly aligned with what a social scientist may refer to as visual methodology, but in art schools is better known as sketchbook development, or equivalent. I find it is not so much a struggle, more an issue for language use to connect what has traditionally been an 'implicit' rather than 'explicit' practice. In fact, just recently, in reviewing a first year PhD animation student, I tried to encourage how grappling with the language of research methodology may be the key to collaboration beyond art and design. In that particular case, it was about the need to articulate the process of animation to the non-animator, as a potential research method explaining how animation can support research in traditional scientific research. Perhaps I'm stating the obvious to say that regarding generating research questions, the process of good sketchbook inquiry represents a desire to find something out, but usually evidenced through 'images' more than words.
-snip-
> how I used visual communication design skills to analyse qualitative interview data for my PhD.
I became increasingly aware of this in my own recent PhD experience, whereby, the experience I had in graphic design practice sensitised me to critiquing artefacts in a way I cannot imagine being able to do had I not been so closely aligned to the data I collected. But, as I understand it, this sensitisation is a typical PhD experience in qualitative research.
-snip-
> I wonder, do other design academics on this list also have this experience?
> cheers, teena
|