This short paper by my former colleague Carlos Sapochnik might be of
interest:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260421045_Why_argument_Reflections_
on_the_value_of_improving_the_quality_of_argument_in_Design
Stephen Boyd Davis
Professor of Design Research
School of Design
Royal College of Art
Kensington Gore, London
SW7 2EU
E [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
T (Inka Hella, School Administrator) +44 (0)20 7590 4274
T (personal) +44 (0)20 7590 4343
www.rca.ac.uk
twitter.com/RCADesRes
facebook.com/RCA.London
From: Juan Alfonso Dela Rosa Munar <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
related research in Design <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, 11 May 2015 18:45
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [PHD-DESIGN] How to teach argument ability to design students?
> Good morning, since this threads are enormously long I would like to
> participate with a small comment out of my experience on the classroom. The
> first consideration would be: if we are disappointed about the answers,
> have we consider if we are making the right question? Most of the times we
> propose exercises where we expect an already defined solution that we
> expect the students to realize, discouraging different unexpected answers;
> so the student is forced into a path were his/hers abilities to recognize
> the problems are no required or encouraged. Second, most of the design
> programs that I know give a big recognition to skills at the beginning, so
> students are driven to appreciate that over other cognitive abilities,
> besides the already strong social recognition of those skills, making them
> use their skills as a tool for better grades.
> I have some other considerations by I offer a brief comment so I will cut
> here, hoping the comment is of any help for the discussion.
>
> *Juan de la Rosa*
> Associate Professor
> School of Graphic Design
> Universidad Nacional de Colombia
>
> On Monday, May 11, 2015, katie jane hill <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hello, it's nice to read this thread as this is something that I think
>> about a lot. I have been teaching Critical Studies to undergraduate 3D /
>> product design students for several years.
>>
>> One common problem that I have is the understanding of words like
>> 'argument' and 'critical' - I tend to talk about critical thinking and
>> narrative rather than argument, but the common perception is that being
>> critical or presenting an argument has to be negative, or binary -
>> positives and negatives. I explain it by saying that it doesn't need to be
>> about saying something is right or wrong, it is more about showing that
>> they can look at a range of evidence, understand other peoples perspectives
>> and form their own indepedent opinion based on a range of different
>> perspectives. It's about understanding criticality as independence rather
>> than criticism. I also say that the strongest arguments show that they
>> understand the complexity of situations/phenomena rather than boiling it
>> down to good/bad, right/wrong.
>>
>> I've found that two strategies help -
>>
>> One is to frame their critical studies projects as a research project
>> rather than a writing project, as they seem to be more comfortable with
>> research as a process (possibly because it's an explicit part of
>> designing?) than with producing written work.
>>
>> The other is to closely link this to their studio design projects, to see
>> it as an opportunity to do research that strengthens their studio work by
>> providing a rationale for decision making, or a deeper understanding of a
>> process/context/user group.
>>
>> Taking part in the Writing PAD project many years ago was influential in my
>> thinking about this teaching and I would recommend looking at their
>> resources and journal - http://writing-pad.org/HomePage
>>
>> Also recently I saw the Rapid Response Collecting display at the V&A museum
>> in London, this is a small collection of objects that are collected because
>> they have a contemporary cultural and political story, and they are
>> symbolic of contemporary debates - for example they have the first 3d
>> printed gun that was fired, and they have the first lego set that was
>> designed by users which is a set of women scientists, they have a set of
>> flesh coloured shoes in multiple skin tones. These displays show how
>> designed objects sit within a complex combination of social and political
>> contextual arguments, and I thought were a neat way to communicate the idea
>> that critical and contextual arguments and stories can be built around
>> designed objects - and that it's not just a futile academic activity that
>> we make students do but that it is also an important cultural practice.
>>
>> Being able to explain why developing independent critical thinking skills
>> is important seems important in this, and it needs to be important beyond
>> being successful in education, so other ideas about that would be welcome!
>>
>> Katie
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Enbo.Hu12 <[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> > Dear Jed and Gunnar,
>>> >
>>> > (Jed)
>>> > The ability to clearly communicate and rationalize design decisions is
>>> > clearly an asset, but I feel your problem has more to do with your
>>> > students' fear of speaking publicly. Is it that they do not know now to
>>> > rationalize their ideas, or that they are too afraid to orally
>> communicate
>>> > them?
>>> >
>>> > Yes, it has something to do with the fear of speaking publicly. Shy
>>> > students give away speak chances willingly to active students. Therefore,
>>> > it is important to balance the conversation in class. Let shy students
>>> > speak more and active students to be patient. Every students should feel
>>> > that they are in the conversation rather than be forgot. Shy students do
>>> > have good ideas and need more orally communication practices. Active
>>> > students need to practice their appreciation to peer students’ ideas, be
>>> > open minded. How to let shy students talk more?
>>> >
>>> > My teacher Wibo Bakker uses memo as an assistant. He asks all students
>>> > (shy and active) to write down their comments to all student works. The
>>> > student works lay on the table and memos are around each of work.
>> Students
>>> > walk around the table. Moving makes people relax and not so formal.
>>> > Therefore, students feel more confident in conversation. It works. Every
>>> > students have some interesting ideas. As a starting stage, writing gives
>>> > some time to students. It helps students to generate comments gradually
>> in
>>> > orally communication without a memo section.
>>> >
>>> > The issue in teaching may not due to a lack of rationalizing ideas skill
>>> > but how students perceive their assignments. Students have more
>> enthusiasm
>>> > to what they good at, which is understandable. However, it is also
>>> > dangerous. Students may treat what they do not good at as a reluctant
>> task.
>>> > There are limited motivation in accomplishing a reluctant task. Students
>>> > never share about their ideas about assignments to friends if they treat
>>> > assignments as a reluctant task. The thing students considered are
>> quickest
>>> > and easiest solution that looks cool visually and targets on a higher
>> mark
>>> > without a deeper consideration on rationales.
>>> >
>>> > In addition, students will guess what is the teacher’s personal
>> preference
>>> > in order to get a higher mark. The personal preference is different from
>>> > assignment criteria. The personal preference refers to personal
>>> > interpretation of criteria. I could not say it is wrong. The attitude of
>>> > flattering is somehow not right since it causes students far away from
>>> > design itself. The design result may not be bad but this way the design
>>> > students to finish a task as they will do in the future career is less
>>> > helpful to generate great works. The client may not have a standard in
>>> > design that students can follow. Students need to understand the
>> situation
>>> > and establish the standard and interpretation according to requirements
>> by
>>> > themselves. In this case, students used to design according to a tangible
>>> > standard and interpretation will have difficult to generate a good
>> result.
>>> > Furthermore, students may not remember the standard from teacher. What
>> they
>>> > get after graduated? Not memory. It is the attitude and the ability. The
>>> > attitude of investigating design tasks that they may not good at (jump
>> out
>>> > of comfort zone). The ability of establishing own standard and
>>> > interpretation in order to generate great works.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > (Gunnar)
>>> > Also, don't underestimate the gulf between your thinking and knowledge
>> and
>>> > theirs.
>>> >
>>> > I think it is the same case as above. The issue is how students perceive
>>> > the conversation. As a student, I know what it feels like if teacher
>> tells
>>> > ‘you will never reach that level’. As Jed said, the enthusiasm to
>>> > participate depends on a variety of factors. A good environment is
>> crucial
>>> > for an interesting conversation. Even students can’t stand in the same
>>> > level of a case with teacher. It would be better that the teacher finish
>>> > the conversation appropriately. Therefore, the enthusiasm of students
>> isn’t
>>> > be killed. The next informative conversation is easy to start. Otherwise,
>>> > shy students will have opposite opinion in their mind compared to their
>>> > friendly face.
>>> >
>>> > BTW, I am a student so that the phrase ‘your students’ in emails is
>>> > somewhat a little strange to me.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Enbo Hu
>>> > Email [log in to unmask] <javascript:;><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 在 2015年5月11日,上午2:40,Jed Looker <[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>> 写道:
>>> >
>>> > Hi Enbo,
>>> >
>>> > Lubomir summed up it up nicely, although I feel the number of students
>> who
>>> > continue to study a Masters is significantly less, perhaps due to its
>>> > perceived value in industry.
>>> >
>>> > You have started a very interesting conversation. The ability to clearly
>>> > communicate and rationalize design decisions is clearly an asset, but I
>>> > feel your problem has more to do with your students' fear of speaking
>>> > publicly. Is it that they do not know now to rationalize their ideas, or
>>> > that they are too afraid to orally communicate them?
>>> >
>>> > From my experience teaching interaction design, a student’s enthusiasm to
>>> > participate in a discussion or critique is dependent on a variety of
>>> > factors including time of the week, time of day, project deadlines in
>> other
>>> > courses, hunger, the weather, the instructor’s approach and so on. Even
>> the
>>> > best curriculum and lesson plan can succumb to these external forces. If
>>> > teaching the same lesson to 3 or 4 different sections you can literally
>> go
>>> > from wrestling to keep the discussion on the rails in one, to
>> individually
>>> > motivating students to speak out in another.
>>> >
>>> > Three strategies have worked for me. The first is to shuffle the sections
>>> > between years. This has been successful in breaking up sections who as a
>>> > group have fallen into a non-talkative rut. The second is to tune my
>>> > approach based on the class dynamic of the day. I literally start my
>>> > lessons discussing current events and industry news, and based on that
>>> > conversation I'll have an idea on whether my approach is more as a
>>> > behind-the-scenes facilitator, or as energetic motivator (or what
>> sometimes
>>> > feels like court jester). The third is to choose an activity that
>> promotes
>>> > conversation. Last semester I tried a variation on the 3MT (Three Minute
>>> > Thesis) competition that was very popular with my students and gave them
>>> > experience defending their design decisions. Each student had 3 minutes
>> to
>>> > present their project, and their presentation had to have three sections:
>>> > 1. an introduction to the design problem, 2. an overview of the methods
>>> > used to ideate a solution to the design problem, and 3. a reveal of the
>>> > proposed solution. Students could use as many slides as they thought were
>>> > appropriate (a deviation from the 3MT format), and after they presented
>> the
>>> > class would provide them feedback on their artwork. At the end we voted
>> on
>>> > best in show, the grand prize a gourmet cupcake from a famous local
>> bakery.
>>> > If you were to ask me having the critique as a competition is what
>>> > generated the excitement, and the 3 minute time length kept the flow of
>> the
>>> > class quick and lively. This fun and informal atmosphere encouraged
>>> > students who would otherwise be reserved come out of their shell.
>>> >
>>> > Hope that helps!
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Jed Looker
>>> > MDes Candidate
>>> >
>>> > School of Industrial Design
>>> > Carleton University
>>> > 613 715 1025
>>> > id.carleton.ca<http://id.carleton.ca/><http://id.carleton.ca<
>>> > http://id.carleton.ca/>>
>>> >
>>> > On May 10, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Enbo.Hu12 <[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>
>>> > <mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Dear Lubomir,
>>> >
>>> > I appreciate your and other’s reply. As I understand, you mentioned
>> points:
>>> > 1.vocational attitude of students
>>> > 2.market doesn’t stimulate theoretical thoughts
>>> > 3.programm improvement limited by valued customers (students)
>>> >
>>> > In fact, my first email title was Does argument ability earn money for a
>>> > designer. People consider their career life early than before I guess.
>> The
>>> > school announces their career consultant service as an attractive point
>> to
>>> > current and potential students. The service somewhat release some
>> pressure
>>> > and satisfy needs from family and society. Chinese parents ask their ‘one
>>> > child policy’ child that what they are capable to do after graduated.
>>> > People talk to students how difficult to find a job referencing to news,
>>> > personal experience and stories heard from someone. I think students have
>>> > limited power to response appropriately to these pressure.
>>> > To illustrate, smart watch is not firstly announced by Apple. However,
>>> > Apple has power to introduce this idea to the mass audience compared to
>>> > other companies. This power could benefit the smart watch industry but
>> also
>>> > the industry shares the failure risk reluctantly with Apple. In other
>>> > words, the industry will be hurt if Apple Watch failed. Market plays the
>>> > role of powerful Apple and students have difficulty to response
>>> > appropriately. I asked myself that can I write down argument ability ( in
>>> > your aspect, design philosophy and theory) as a skill in my resume? Does
>> it
>>> > earn money for me? I think the ability is valuable after cooperation with
>>> > non design students.
>>> >
>>> > Currently, I have an entrepreneurship module cooperating with business
>>> > students in my university. At the beginning brain storm stage, one
>> business
>>> > student show 4 sketches without a clear approach behind, two students
>>> > search on Google. The search keyword is ‘1000 great product ideas’. I
>>> > suddenly know the value of a designer. Their direction is totally wrong.
>> I
>>> > have no idea that people will do things like this. Then, I suggest them
>> to
>>> > think about the target customers first. The tools (paint storming,
>>> > root-cause analysis) generates two ideas. Then business students want to
>>> > stick on one of them.
>>> > Let's say the tangible skills are tools. As Susan said, tools also enable
>>> > students to argue (invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery).
>> In
>>> > this case, the ability distinguishes a design student is the way we
>> observe
>>> > and response to the world, which is probably the design philosophy rather
>>> > than the tools.
>>> >
>>> > Appreciate for all replies again.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Enbo Hu
>>> > Email [log in to unmask] <javascript:;><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 在 2015年5月10日,下午8:20,Lubomir Savov Popov <[log in to unmask]
>>> <javascript:;>
>> <mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>>> ><mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>> 写道:
>>> >
>>> > Dear Enbo,
>>> >
>>> > I am glad you raise this question. I will slightly modify it and focus on
>>> > the content you brought rather than on the argument ability itself.
>>> >
>>> > The nature of design attitudes of the students has baffled me for years.
>> I
>>> > have done some research on this problem, although I never published it
>> for
>>> > political reasons. Students are valued customers and we don't want to
>>> > offend them. University administrators don't like raising issues that
>> will
>>> > offend the customers and turn them off.
>>> >
>>> > I will share some thoughts, although not in a systematic way. I will talk
>>> > regarding the state of this issue in architecture and interiors.
>>> >
>>> > The situations are different across different institutions and design
>>> > disciplines depending on the emphasis of the program of study, the
>>> > tradition, and the culture.
>>> >
>>> > I found that most of our students have vocational career plans, but they
>>> > feel social pressure to go to college and get a degree. Of course, a
>> degree
>>> > for them is the undergraduate degree. Most of design students rarely go
>> for
>>> > Masters. But the way, this is typical across all disciplines. Only about
>>> > 10%-15% of people with Bachelor's degrees continue their studies at
>>> > graduate/Masters level.
>>> >
>>> > If you look at your problem from that perspective, it is easy to see
>>> > student motivations. They want the tools of the trade. They are very
>>> > visual, immediate, and concrete. The Gen Ed courses are an absolutely
>>> > useless rite for them. Do not bother them with theory, even less with
>>> > philosophy.
>>> >
>>> > The vocational attitude drive these students to admire the tangible, the
>>> > things that can be seen, touched, and quantified directly. Students also
>>> > admire tangible skills with somewhat exoteric nature. I have observed
>>> > students in awe of young professionals that demonstrate rendering with
>>> > Photoshop. It looks like a miraculous ability that they want to master.
>> And
>>> > Photoshop is a high school scrap book software, we all know that.
>> Students
>>> > admire faculty who teach them hand rendering. Again, a skill that many of
>>> > them cannot master and they envy and respect everyone who is skillful
>>> > enough to make a line drawing vivid with rendering. This drives to some
>>> > extent the curriculum, the teaching process, and the professional
>> hierarchy
>>> > in the design programs.
>>> >
>>> > There is also influence from some practice-based faculty. It is not an
>>> > exception to hear practitioners talking with disdain about theory. Some
>> of
>>> > the practitioners that teach as adjuncts are job captains, at best, and
>>> > occasionally, even newbies. For them, the most important thing in the
>> world
>>> > is to put the project together, because if the project is not completed,
>>> > there are no fees. That is natural. But they also perceive only the
>>> > tangible deliverables, like presentation drawings, construction drawings,
>>> > detailing, and speck writing. Most of them have managed to stay on the
>>> > market and even lead the profession by perfecting their project delivery
>>> > skills. The reality is that the market doesn't stimulate theoretical
>>> > thought, conceptualization, great design ideas, etc. The market wants the
>>> > project delivered on time, on budget, and without technical errors. In
>> this
>>> > environment, thinkers might experience drawbacks, and job captains
>> thrive.
>>> > After that these thriving people go to teach and share their job skills.
>>> > What skills --the skills related to the technical aspects of project
>>> > delivery. Of course, without such skills we are done. However, these are
>>> > not the core design skills, the design innovation and invention skills.
>>> > Again, I am aware that without technically literate project, no design
>> idea
>>> > can be materialized.
>>> >
>>> > Many programs conduct alumni surveys about skills needed in practice, in
>>> > the "real world." After that, the programs "improve" their curriculum
>>> > accordingly and by develop new courses in these domains. The majority of
>>> > the alumni surveyed have "paradesign" positions or do paradesign work on
>>> > the job. However, they believe that this is the real world; they want to
>>> > fit and progress into that real world (not my real world); and they wish
>>> > they have developed skills for that real world. When asked what design
>>> > skills they wish they have mastered, alumni talk about software,
>>> > construction documents, and speck writing. Not a single one have
>> mentioned
>>> > a curricular deficit in philosophy of design, theory, and design methods.
>>> > Not a single one ever thinks about design research, even in the intuitive
>>> > way lay people do research. Not a single one experiences deficit in these
>>> > areas because of their job tasks do not require such skills.
>>> >
>>> > There are many other issues to consider, and the issues I have mentioned
>>> > are sketched just impromptu. It is good to talk about this, to develop a
>>> > support community, and to develop the curriculum of the 21st Century in a
>>> > new ways, balancing the "clerical" requirements of the design profession
>>> > with the core design thinking.
>>> >
>>> > Best wishes,
>>> >
>>> > Lubomir
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related
>>> > research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>] On
>> Behalf Of Susan
>>> > Hagan
>>> > Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 5:52 AM
>>> > To: [log in to unmask] <javascript:;><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>
>>> > Subject: Re: How to teach argument ability to design students?
>>> >
>>> > Hi Enbo,
>>> >
>>> > It’s such a good question. The link that already appeared from Tom
>> Fischer
>>> > might be the answer to your question.(I haven’t read that article, so my
>>> > apologies if what I’m about to say is already explained in more detail
>>> > there.)
>>> >
>>> > This is what hit me. Since so many students seem to want to begin
>>> > discussion with the tangible because they value it, here’s how you might
>>> > handle it.
>>> >
>>> > To start, I would say that your students are interested in the argument,
>>> > but from a perspective that is too limited.
>>> >
>>> > I hope that this will make sense. I know that I won’t be able to stay in
>>> > the conversation because of a busy week, but here goes. If the idea of
>>> > argument emerges from the Aristotelian model (invention, arrangement,
>>> > style, memory, and delivery), the focus on the Creative Suite taps into
>>> > some aspects of invention because the tool helps students consider what
>>> > they want to communicate; arrangement because they consider the big
>>> > relationships of one element to another; style because they look at the
>>> > smaller relationships; memory because they remember how to use the tool
>>> > (but here is one area where i think that you might be able to explore
>>> > memory as a function of audience); and delivery in the final
>> presentation.
>>> > Unfortunately, in the assumption that the tool is the argument, they miss
>>> > out on a lot.
>>> >
>>> > The question is how do you find a way in to persuade your students that
>>> > more is needed? In other words, what's your argument?
>>> >
>>> > In their assumption, the tool is the argument, you have the first part of
>>> > the given/new contract. The idea behind the given/new contract is to
>> start
>>> > with something that the audience understands (i.e. they know addition and
>>> > that is performs helpful functions). In your case, the given would be the
>>> > Creative Suite and how it contributes to the argument. To that you
>>> > introduce the new (i.e. but addition cannot do everything so you need
>>> > subtraction).
>>> >
>>> > To your given the new could be inventional, such as, you claim that the
>>> > way Photoshop was used here shows mastery of the tool. Your proof is in
>> the
>>> > the artifact. But once we get past what the object can say for itself,
>> what
>>> > other claims does it make? Is it an empty vessel? Give your students a
>>> > limited amount of time, working in small groups to come up with other
>>> > claims about the object. And once they make a claim, ask why you should
>>> > believe it. Their claims must have proof if they are going to convince
>>> > anyone. Where do we see the proof in that work to the claim that you are
>>> > making? You might include examples where you demonstrate this process.
>>> >
>>> > The given/new can also be related to memory as something that the
>> audience
>>> > contributes. You can ask how an exploration of the world that their
>>> > audience inhabits has found its way into the design. In other words, how
>>> > has looking around inspired their use of the tool? You can argue either
>>> > that their serious exploration of how the audience sees the world, can
>>> > increase the inventional elements that they bring to their exploration in
>>> > Photoshop, or that their understanding of audience memory is part of the
>>> > proof that is embedded in their claims.
>>> >
>>> > I hope that this is useful to you.
>>> >
>>> > All the best,
>>> >
>>> > Susan
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Susan M. Hagan, Ph.D., MDes | Carnegie Mellon University in Qatar
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On May 9, 2015, at 7:23 PM, Enbo.Hu12 <[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>
>>> > <mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>>>> > ><mailto:[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Dear all,
>>> >
>>> > How to teach argument ability to design students?
>>> >
>>> > I choose to study design since I believe there are much more interactions
>>> > between people, teachers and students. The university life proved my
>>> > expectation. However, I also see there have room for improvement.
>>> >
>>> > From my observation, some of students prefer to seek for tangible skills,
>>> > for example Photoshop, Cero and sketching. They are tangible because I
>>> > think they present the result of a design rather than rationales behind a
>>> > design. The material of an IKEA Frosta stool is labeled but the
>> rationale,
>>> > meaning and original inspiration are neither labeled. The material is the
>>> > result of a design. The meaning is the rationale of a design. The meaning
>>> > of a design is interpreted by man rather than a software. Argument or
>>> > interpretation ability is not the focus of students.
>>> >
>>> > Students asked for teaching sources of tangible skills. Students show
>>> > their admiration to whom good at tangible skills. However, there are no
>>> > such requirements and admirations after deep silence happened in review
>>> > section. Why students can't see the value of argument ability? How much
>>> > value it is for a designer? How to teach argument ability to design
>>> > students?
>>> >
>>> > This is a question raised from an undergraduate industrial design student
>>> > who studies at Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU), Suzhou,
>> China.
>>> > This may be an annoying question to the list members so that please
>> ignore
>>> > it. Please accept my apologies.
>>> >
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Enbo.Hu
>>> > Email address [log in to unmask] <javascript:;><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <javascript:;>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>> <mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>>
>>> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or
>>> > Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>> <mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>> Discussion of PhD studies
>> and related
>>> > research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at
>>> > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>> <mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>>
>>> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
>>> > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>> <mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>><mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>>
>>> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
>>> > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>
>> <mailto:
>>> > [log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>>
>>> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
>>> > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>
>>> > Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
>>> > Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>>> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask] <javascript:;>>
>> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
>> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>
>
> --
> *Juan Alfonso de la Rosa M.*
> Profesor Asociado
> *Escuela de Diseño Gráfico*
> Universidad Nacional de Colombia
> tel 3165000 ext.16715 - www.facartes.unal.edu.co
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|