Hi Ken,
I was pointing at two things:
1. Being "fixed" is not relevant but being "valid" is relevant for a
methodology.
2. There already is a lot of previous work where research was done
through design. They do contain comparative studies of several methods. We
are not starting from scratch. And yes we always need more studies.
Best,
Cigdem
Alinti Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>
> Dear Cigdem,
>
> To develop a methodological program does not imply a fixed method.
> One of the problems of vocabulary today is the confusion between [1]
> method and [2] methodology. Method is how to do something. Research
> methods are the ways that we do research. Methodology is the study
> of method. Research methodology is the study of research methods. A
> methodological program is a systematic program that studies
> different research methods. Methodology and the concept of a
> methodological program do not mean a program of fixed methods, but a
> comparative study of many methods.
>
> Mautner (1996: 267) defines methodology as ?1. The discipline
> which investigates and evaluates methods of inquiry, of validation,
> of teaching, etc. 2. a theory within that discipline. Note that
> methodology is about method and not the same as method.?
>
> Bunge (1999: 178) distinguishes between method, as ?a regular and
> well-specified procedure for doing something: an ordered sequence of
> goal-directed operations? and methodology as ?the study of methods.
> The normative branch of epistemology; a knowledge technology. Often
> confused with method, as in ?the methodology used in the present
> research.?
>
> To speak of a methodological program as a ?fixed methodology?
> grows from this confusion. The repertoire of methods in any living
> field is always growing and developing.Since methodology studies
> method, there cannot be a ?fixed methodology.?
>
> The comparative study of method presumes that some methods exist,
> but methodology implies no choice among existing methods. The
> situation is quite the contrary. Methodological sophistication leads
> to appropriate choices among methods. It can also lead researchers
> to develop and apply new methods.
>
> A term that is rarely used in our field is ?methodics.? This is
> the ?collection of methods employed in a research field. Not to be
> confused with methodology.? (Bunge 1999: 179)
>
> Methodics is the comprehensive repertoire of research methods
> available to a field. Given the wide range of disciplinary and
> interdisciplinary possibilities of research in design, themethodics
> of this area is immense rather than fixed. Kari?s post addresses the
> comparative and systemic study of a range of methods within the
> methodics of design and design research.
>
> This fact establishes the precise reason behind the importance of
> methodology ? the comparative study of research methods. One must
> compare alternatives to choose among them. One must therefore
> distinguish between comparative study of methods and the specific
> study and training in any one method.
>
> None of us can master all the methods required in any field. The
> lack of general methodological knowledge is a serious problem in
> design research and in research training courses in design. Kari
> argues that the time has come for richer and more systematic studies
> of research methods.
>
> One advantage of terms such as ?constructive research? and
> ?generative research? is that they cover research methods that
> involve making and building things without the confusion that often
> conflates the terms ?practice-based research? or ?practice-led
> research? with ?practice-as-research.? Kari?s post suggests a system
> study of methods that will enable us to understanding and use the
> range of research methods open to us. This is a methodological
> program, a systematic, comparative research program on research
> methods.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> Professor Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University
> Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology |
> Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask] | Phone +61 3 9214
> 6102 | http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design
>
> --
>
> References
>
> Bunge, Mario. 1999. The Dictionary of Philosophy. Amherst, New
> York: Prometheus Books.
>
> Mautner, Thomas. 1996. A dictionary of philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.
>
> --
>
> Cigdem Kaya wrote:
>
> --snip--
>
> Why do we need a fixed methodology for doing research through
> design activity?
>
> --snip--
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design-----------------------------------------------------------------
Y.Doç.Dr. Çi?dem Kaya
?stanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Endüstri Ürünleri Tasar?m? Bölümü
Ta?k??la, ?stanbul 34437
t. 0212 2931300 x 2824
f. 0212 2514895
w. www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr[1]
Ms. Cigdem Kaya
Assistant Professor, MFA, PhD
Istanbul Technical University
Department of Industrial Product Design
Taskisla, Istanbul 34437, Turkey
t. 0212 2931300 x 2824
f. 0212 2514895
w. www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr[1]
Bağlantılar:
------------
[1] http://www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|