Thank you Don,
this is a nice comment from you, which shows that you are a great design thinker! My appreciation is a given.
What happened with HCD happened with DT (Design Thinking) as well.
When we started to use DT (again 2002) at the intersection between management and design, at the conference in Cleveland, we have never thought that it would take off as a trend in management and would spread like a virus (:-) in the world. But when I look around how it is now taken by management consultants, by agencies, even by design educators as a 'new religion' I start to freeze, because it is the opposite what we intended. But it seems that we need to live with these side effects.
I do remember a reference from a great teacher I had, he pointed me to a little book from Rudolf Steiner, The Philosophy of Freedom. I do remember that in this book Steiner said, as long as people are not independent thinkers, they need to believe.
This happens in HCD and DT, many people( even the most) are believers. Remembering this quote kept me in many instances appreciative.
So what I think is the base in a design curriculum in the 21st century is the ability to foster a discourse in design, or in other words, iteratively test and revise and redesign thoughts they read, preventing believes... or, shaping own believes.
How can we make sure that students learn to maintain discourses, since discourse acting is designing?
Don I would even add this to your systemic challenges in your paper.
Your initiative, you outlined the base in your paper, is highly interesting:
You stated:
A variety of tasks will call upon the designer’s skills and creativity: interpreting the vast quantities of information that will serve to define the problem; ensuring that root causes are addressed; monitoring implementation; and developing strategic modifications or even making significant changes when implementation is not generating the expected result.
For me that is discourse as Klaus Krippendorff has framed it as well.
Klaus Krippendorff (1995), Redesigning Design, An invitation to a Responsible Future
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1046&context=asc_papers
Bringing a group of experts together to maintain a open discourse is a great idea. But what I did learn so far, there is always the need to deal with the issue of power. Who speaks, how long can she/he speak, from which institution she/he comes etc.
See as well:
Foucault, Michel (1972), The Archeology of Knowledge & the Discourse on Language.
Translated by A M. Sheridan Smith. New York: Pantheon Books
or
Jurgen Faust (2015) Discursive Designing Theory - Towards a Theory of Designing Design
https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/handle/10026.1/3210
Don, I was wondering whether you have seen the publication of B Colomina, M Wigley, Are we humans?
B Colomina, M Wigley (2016) Notes on an archaeology of design, Lars Müller Publishers
Regarding the 21st century design curricula I would always put this publication on a list of readings.
To get a first glimpse, there is an interview on youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43lDV6_jJd8
By the way, I have been retiring from my president job of the University after 7 years. Therefore I have more time again to contribute to such a discussion.
Thank you
Prof. Dr. Jurgen Faust
[log in to unmask]
Macromedia University, Munich
This is a response to Jürgen Faust. But it is not actually a response in
the usual sense. It is a wholehearted agreement.
On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 6:01 AM Prof. Dr. Juergen Faust <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
There is no doubt that human centered design (especially the framing and
naming) was a great achievement, but don't we need to overcome the human
centeredness in order to prepare students for the future, taking
responsibility for what they generate?
For instance the first statement,... 'Focus on the people' we could extend
to
1. Focus on the people within their environment and the world
2. Solve the underlying problems and be aware the problems are the outcome
of design decisions, problems are artifacts
3. Everything is a part of a system. Design for a system, but be aware that
we might never comprehend the entire system, take responsibility for that.
4... no suggestion for the moment.
(Comment by Don: Jürgen is referring to the need to iteratively test and
revise. I see no need to change this, except that as we study societal and
environmental issues, prototyping and testing is extremely difficult and
requires special consideration. I recommend the philosophy of
incrementalism, championed in the extremely important and influential paper
on Muddling Through.
Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of 'muddling through'. Public
Administration Review, 19, 79–88. Retrieved from
https://faculty.washington.edu/mccurdy/SciencePolicy/Lindblom%20Muddling%20Through.pdf
(Important and influential in political science: Political Scientists tell
me "everyone knows this paper." My experience is that few people outside of
that field have heard of it. Too bad-- it is critically important.)
Back to Jürgen:
What I try to state here since i have been watching students and designers
working with the HCD framework, that the system aspects are somehow second
choice, when we call it human centered design.
For the moment I do not have any great alternative wording (but I am
thinking about this) how we need to call the important development, where
designers take in consideration that each product is as well a waste issue,
thinking in terms of product ‘Half-Life’. Or considering that we act in
systems without knowing the systems and system boundaries.
Such a similar discussion has already happened. But it seems worth it to
bring this up here again:
Thomas, Vanessa; Remy, Christian; Bates, Oliver (2017). The Limits of HCD:
Reimagining the Anthropocentricity of ISO 9241-210. In: Third Workshop on
Computing within Limits, Santa Barbara, 22 June 2017 - 24 June 2017.
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3080561
I agree with all these statements. The abbreviated list of "HCD
principles" that I frequently state and publish are abbreviated. They are
not sufficient.
Jürgen concluded by suggesting that we move "from HCD to (WDR) world design
responsibility" And he recommended
Thomas, Vanessa; Remy, Christian; Bates, Oliver (2017). The Limits of HCD:
Reimagining the Anthropocentricity of ISO 9241-210. In: Third Workshop on
Computing within Limits, Santa Barbara, 22 June 2017 - 24 June 2017.
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3080561
I was unaware of both that paper and the conference in which it appeared.
https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.1145/3080556
I have now looked over the conference proceedings and downloaded and read
the Thomas, Remy, and Bates paper. I strongly recommend the paper. I
approve of their argument. Here is what they say about my work:
We, the authors, align ourselves with Norman and Schweikardt,
who both declare that focusing purely on human needs is insuff-
cient. Furthermore, Norman’s suggestion that we should focus our
design efforts on activities resonates with our individual projects
related to design activities [34], food preparation at home [6], and
public policy development [43]. However, we feel that Norman
and Schweikardt’s perspectives fall slightly short of our broader
environmental and social justice ambitions. We believe HCD should
expand beyond its anthropocentric scope by incorporating interaction
design approaches and concepts that address ecosystems,
animals, and objects. In this section, we introduce and discuss
three existing design concepts: Sustainable Interaction Design (SID),
Animal-Computer Interaction (ACI), and Object Oriented Ontology
(OOO).We also briefly describe what these concepts can and cannot
offer to a reimagining of HCD and its ISO.
So yes, Jürgen, we do have a responsibility to the World. And more and more
of my work focusses upon that. You may have to wait until my next book (at
the moment, not only not yet written but not even started -- however I have
been thinking about it for the past year or two).
Thanks for the wonderful and thoughtful post.
Don
--
I start my 5th retirement on July 1, 2020. ((In order to give me time to
write that book.)) UCSD is searching for my replacement. Interested? See
https://designlab.ucsd.edu/jobs/faculty-and-staff/
Why recycling is so complex: A two-part article.
https://www.fastcompany.com/90452707/im-an-expert-on-complex-design-systems-even-i-cant-figure-out-recycling
https://www.fastcompany.com/90463116/waste-is-an-enormous-problem-but-recycling-is-the-wrong-solution?partner=feedburner
Don Norman, UC San Diego
Distinguished Prof (emeritus) and Director, Design Lab
[log in to unmask] www.jnd.org <http://www.jnd.org/>
Executive Assistant:
Olga McConnell, [log in to unmask] +1 858 534-0992
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
