 |
 |
Hi Gavin, You might be aware of the paper: Pedgley, O., & Wormald, P. (2007). Integration of Design Projects within a Ph.D. Design Issues, 23(3), 70-85. The authors cite and analyse a few completed PhD projects in Design. They use the projects to support the idea that PhDs in Design can be based on practice. Cheers The paper: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/desi.2007.23.3.70 On Feb 12, 2008 1:59 PM, David Sless <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hi Gavin, > > I recall one such thesis to do with illustrating chemical production > processes at Coventry University. Get in touch with Clive Richards at > Coventry. He can probably help. My recollection is that the student > was European. > > David > -- > > > > blog: www.communication.org.au/dsblog > web: http://www.communication.org.au > > Professor David Sless BA MSc FRSA > CEO • Communication Research Institute • > • helping people communicate with people • > > Mobile: +61 (0)412 356 795 > Phone: +61 (0)3 9489 8640 > > 60 Park Street • Fitzroy North • Melbourne • Australia • 3068 > > > > > On 12/02/2008, at 11:03 AM, Gavin Melles wrote: > > > Hello PhDisters > > I would appreciate it if anyone knew of completed PhDs in Design > > fields > > (hopefully available as digital dissertations or contact details to > > request this and discuss) with a practice based material focus > > (including the production of artefacts or studio projects as part of > > the > > submission - so I don't want design history etc., as the focus), which > > make any theoretical claims about pragmatism (Dewey, James, Rorty) > > and/or use mixed methods. I don't particularly care what designerly > > discipline it is from architecture, built environment, through to > > interior, industrial etc. The aim, in addition to other things I am > > attempting to pull together in writing, is to illustrate and > > exemplify a > > point. Appreciated. > > > >>>> David Durling <[log in to unmask]> 24/01/2008 9:17 am >>> > > I thought that this article, which apparently appeared in the 2 > > November 2007 issue of the USA Chronicle of Higher Education, may be > > of interest to members of phd-design list too. > > > > --- > > > > HOW EDUCATED MUST AN ARTIST BE? > > > > By Daniel Grant > > > > Job security is a relatively new concept in the ancient field of > > teaching art. Historically artists have created, and been judged > > on, their own credentials - that is, their art. And the master > > of fine-arts degree, often described as a "terminal degree," or > > the endpoint in an artist's formal education, has long been > > sufficient for artists seeking to teach at the college level. > > But significant change may be on the horizon, as increasing > > numbers of college and university administrators are urging > > artists to obtain doctoral degrees. > > > > We shouldn't be surprised; the M.F.A. has been under attack for > > some time now. The M.F.A. has become a problem for many > > administrators, who are increasingly uncomfortable with > > different criteria for different faculty members. They > > understand the lengthy process required to earn a doctorate - of > > which the master's degree is only a small, preliminary part - > > and see hiring a Ph.D. over an M.F.A. as the difference between > > buying a fully loaded showroom automobile and a chassis. > > Administrators like the background Ph.D.'s have in research, > > publishing, and grant writing (though if their principal concern > > were the teaching of studio art to undergraduates, they wouldn't > > focus so much on the doctorate). > > > > Holders of M.F.A.'s - often adjunct instructors or would-be > > instructors at universities - have noticed the trend, and many > > believe that their degree holds them back in a realm where > > advancement and larger salaries go to Ph.D.'s. > > > > The most recent development in the studio-doctorate trend is the > > creation of the new Institute for Doctoral Studies in the Visual > > Arts in Portland, Me., which offered its first classes this past > > May for a Ph.D. program in philosophy, aesthetics, and art > > theory. A studio M.F.A. is a prerequisite for admissions, and > > the institute's president claims that the program "will provide > > rigorous training that will help artists expand their studio > > practice." His aim is to turn artists into theoreticians of art, > > fully versed in critical theory and able to teach it at the > > college level, but still be practicing artists. > > > > Other doctorate programs can be found at the University of > > Rochester, Ohio University, and Texas Tech University (though a > > large percentage of their students have performing, literary, or > > studio-art backgrounds). More may be on the way: The School of > > the Art Institute of Chicago, the California Institute of the > > Arts, and the Rhode Island School of Design are expected to be > > offering studio doctorates within the next several years. > > > > Studio doctorate programs do have high-minded and practical > > aspects. They try to make artists better versed in critical > > theory, which would presumably be helpful for their art, and to > > help graduates get and keep university jobs. Another benefit of > > a doctoral degree, artists and university administrators say, is > > the ability to teach a wider variety of courses, such as classes > > in art theory and history, previously the province of art > > historians. However, the first goal has yet to be achieved - can > > anyone name a great Ph.D. artist of our time? - and the second > > merely indicates what is wrong in academe, which is that it > > elevates credentials over everything else. > > > > And what of the students? Students by and large want their > > studio instructors to be working artists. In fact, art schools > > and university art departments promote their studio faculty > > members to prospective students in terms of those > > artist-teachers' presence in the art world, their commissions, > > or their work in the realm of nonprofit and for-profit > > galleries. > > > > I am not opposed to artists who want to pursue doctoral programs > > in critical theory. My complaint is that, without a doctorate, > > professional artists are finding it increasingly difficult to > > get and keep a full-time job with benefits teaching B.F.A. and > > M.F.A. students. > > > > M.F.A. and Ph.D. programs move in different directions. Earning > > an M.F.A. means spending another year or so in the studio, > > developing a body of work that, ideally, prepares students to > > enter the art market. The program is a timeout from the world of > > galleries and selling that helps graduates re- enter that world > > more successfully after graduation. Doctoral programs, on the > > other hand, are research-based. > > > > Pushing artists toward doctoral programs fundamentally changes > > their focus and goals. The Ph.D. says to the university, "I am > > committing myself to aca- deme," whereas the M.F.A. primarily > > reflects a commitment to developing one's skills as an artist. > > Requiring studio artists to become researchers as well would > > diminish their ability to keep one foot in the exhibition world. > > Some might be able to do it all - teach studio art, research, > > publish, and exhibit - but not many. There are only so many > > hours in a day. > > > > Devaluing the M.F.A. or making the doctorate the fine-art > > world's terminal degree is likely to drive away professional > > artists who have a lot to offer in terms of guidance and > > example. Having active, commercially viable artists working in > > colleges and universities is something that should be > > encouraged. Are we likely to have artists of high caliber > > employed at the college level if they are required to undergo an > > academic program that takes five or six years, rather than just > > one or two? Requiring a Ph.D. is also likely to drive artists > > away from art, as time spent working on the dissertation equals > > time away from the studio. Some artists may leave the field of > > fine arts entirely, becoming theoreticians, historians, and > > fine- arts scholars instead of practitioners. > > > > Inevitably, the years spent focused solely on theory will > > diminish other areas of instruction. The training of artists has > > already largely moved away from techniques and skills - how many > > artists now can mix their own paints or even know what is in the > > paints they buy? - and toward theory. Concept-based art is what > > a good many schools already encourage their students to create. > > The current training of artists barely maintains a delicate > > balance of studio practice and art history, criticism, and > > theory. Could such a balance be maintained with professors whose > > education is weighted so heavily on the side of theory? It > > hardly seems possible. > > > > Another scenario is that the same type of instruction currently > > offered will continue to exist but will be provided by > > overqualified instructors. Aestheticians, rather than working > > artists, will teach basic drawing. Performing-arts faculties at > > some universities are already seeing plenty of this. (A friend > > of mine, a pianist who studied at the Juilliard School, Oberlin > > College, and the New England Conservatory, needed to obtain a > > Ph.D. in music to get a job as an adjunct teaching students at > > the University of Vermont how to play the piano.) Writers, too, > > are being told to get doctorates in order to teach college > > students. The M.F.A. in creative writing is losing its hold, as > > more and more writers seeking college-level teaching work are > > choosing doctoral programs that have a "creative dissertation" > > requirement. > > > > The shift toward requiring Ph.D.'s is likely to be slow and > > uneven, as some institutions will balk at the trend while others > > jump in with both feet. But ultimately more graduate schools > > will have to create studio doctorate programs to meet the > > demand. > > > > We are already on the slippery slope. Before we slide any > > farther, we should set out what is actually desired in the > > education of artists; what is the balance of manual, perceptual, > > and conceptual skills that artists need to have; and to what > > ends are those artists being trained. Judging artists on the > > basis of their academic credentials rather than of their art, > > and devising programs that lead them away from making art, is > > absurd and ahistorical. University departments of art history, > > the likely employers of this new hybrid group, should reconsider > > this focus on academic qualifications. Do we really want to turn > > the creation of art into a thing of the past? > > > > Daniel Grant is a contributing editor for American Artist > > magazine and author of Selling Art Without Galleries: Toward > > Making a Living From Your Art (Allworth Press, 2006). > > > > Copyright (c) 2007 by The Chronicle of Higher Education > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > David Durling PhD FDRS | Professor of Design > > School of Arts & Education, Middlesex University > > Cat Hill, Barnet, Hertfordshire, EN4 8HT, UK > > tel: 020 8411 5108 | international: + 44 20 8411 5108 > > email: [log in to unmask] | [log in to unmask] > > web: http://www.adri.org.uk | http://www.durling.info > > http://www.dartevents.net > > _______________________________________________ > > > > ----- > > Swinburne University of Technology > > CRICOS Provider Code: 00111D > > > > NOTICE > > This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended only for > > the use of the addressee. They may contain information that is > > privileged or protected by copyright. If you are not the intended > > recipient, any dissemination, distribution, printing, copying or use > > is > > strictly prohibited. The University does not warrant that this e-mail > > and any attachments are secure and there is also a risk that it may be > > corrupted in transmission. It is your responsibility to check any > > attachments for viruses or defects before opening them. If you have > > received this transmission in error, please contact us on +61 3 9214 > > 8000 and delete it immediately from your system. We do not accept > > liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay, > > interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment. > > > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > > > -- edgar rodriguez lecturer industrial designer, phd candidate school of design, victoria university of wellington po box 600, wellington new zealand office: +64 (0)4 463 6245 mobile: +64 (0)21 0561515