David
My thesis was nearly blocked by one external examiner because of "the wrong
format" (while the two others liked my "free" format. I did not follow the
"normal" format of scientific [1] literature review [2] experiment /
practical work [3] writing up my notes / conclusions. I had to write what
amounted to a paper on the subject of "an other format" to justify my work.

During both my masters and then my thesis I was told by some that any
literature older than five years was not really allowed ... oh yeah? What
about Berger & Luckmann's "The Construction of Social Reality"? What about
Bateson, Luhmann, Maturana? If that rule is followed (which I can
understand if speaking of up-to-date scientific / engineering data) than
most of philosophy & literature & history will fall by the wayside. What
nonsense. Design is not science.

When I dared to allude to David Pye's "The nature and Art of Workmanship"
there were wails of dismay ...
So, I fully agree with you that a narrowness of focus is not altogether a
good thing ... in our general research meetings, as well as our more
specific STING- doctoral research meetings we discussed the topic of narrow
& deep (and therefore more often than not very specialised) versus a
broader approach that benefitted a larger section of the community ( STING
= Socio-Technical Interactive Networking Group).

By the way, craft-based design knowledge has and will be used as the basis
for fast-tracking someone without a degree but demonstrating a sufficient
knowledge base & writing skills to become a PhD candidate ... one of the
external examiners I used for third year student work did not have any
post-graduate degrees, but was such an acknowledged expert in his field
that we "lost" him to America ... he would have made an outstanding PhD
contribution to the field.

PhD work should not be viewed as "learning to do research"; if design
students cannot "do reseach" at undergraduate level, why would they
suddenly become researchers later on? Who teaches them?

PhD work should show 70% "originality" (your own interpretation /
invention, etc.) and 30% the work of others (I was told this by my first
real supervisor, Prof Du Ry).

PhD work in design, while showing some degree of "specialisation" (e.g.,
"direction" / focus) should not be so narrow that nothing much can be
learned by other PhD candidates (no paid work, for instance, since that
usually means signing confidentiality agreements, aka secrecy). AND, even
if the focus seems to be "narrow", what will the result be? If that result
promises to impact on more than just the "design problem" that started the
process, than that is great design research ...

Johann



-- 
Dr. Johann van der Merwe
Independent Design Researcher


-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------