Tim, Keith, Terry, Don and colleagues
Tim has brought to the front important issues regarding the assessment of design theories. Terry has contributed an argument that illuminates what Tim has presented
First Terry: "The test of a theory, classically in the areas in which I work, is that its
reasoning provides necessary and sufficient causal explanation of its
claims, does not contain fallacies and there is no contradictory evidence."
I would add that "The practical application of a theory of design should be demonstrated"
I have not yet read Tim's papers but am basing my comments on his posts, particularly:
"My question is what should we be trying to do here: devise and
execute studies and/or experiments that look for confirming
evidence of a theory, or should we devise and execute studies
and/or experiments that seek to disconfirm (disprove) the
theory, a la Popper? The two, as I see it, are not the same
kind of work. The first--studies and experiments that look
for confirming evidence--can result in disconfirming evidence,
but if we only seek disconfirming evidence, how do we ever
have much reason to have any confidence in the theory? A test
designed to look for disconfirming evidence that fails does
not provide confirming evidence, not in tests of design
theories, at least."
My point of view, after 50 years of testing the utility of "A Theory of Design Thinking" to confirm if it held up under different evidence and circumstances of use, is that a design theory must be developed in an atmosphere of inquiry,
adaptive development, and practical testing, searching for both confirmation and disconfirmation. My own work progressed from 1) trying to code all information communicated in a design project 2) looking at how others categorized comprehensive disclosures 3) applying theoretical distinctions to a classification system for the building industry 4) developing a role oriented approach to problem solving to demonstrate the open ended application, understandability, and utility of the theory 5) testing this model in many contexts, including K-12 education, university coursework, design studios, workshops, and professional consultations 5) demonstrating how the theory could structure communication, product development, and human factors assessment in a computer based support system for an interdisciplinary team 6) and how it could be applied to on-line lessons for children. None of these disconfirmed the theory. That does not mean that it is proven, that it could not be improved, or that it is universally accepted. Cognitive evidence for the theory and a chronicle of the major influences on it over the years will soon be posted on academia.edu. Rationales and rhetoric doubtless enter the picture. See "Theoretical Issues for Design Thinking"on academia.edu. The testing of theory in design is not hard science it is critical demonstration.
Or so I believe,
Chuck
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|