Dear Luke
Sorry for my late reply
First i think i still like better frailings for into and through design, though it is very insufficient.
I wrote an extensive paper on the theme of design research. you can find it here: https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/formakademisk/article/view/137/134
I think we need to contiune to discuss research through or by design.
Most design projects do have learning components and are concerned about soemthing partly new. When this becomes a systematiced inquiry and it is sytematized and communicated and peer reviewed and critizised it surely qualifies as knowledge production and it might qualify to be called research depending on the conception of research.
I did not discuss what research method was best for designers. The intention of the post was simply to state that there are different existing approaches and that fixing on one will not work for everybody or for all types of design research.
I dont think it is easy to alway distinguish design activity and research activity. In large yes but there are many blurring issues. One argument that comes in mind is Glanvilles nice article stating all research is design. I dont think design is research per se. I think some design is development and some is knowledge production that qualifies as research. I dont think as said it is easy to draw a sharp line but i think its more a question of gradients and weighting.
I resently was waching a unpublished and classified video from our maritime research lab showing a totally new interface. It is clear that this could not have been developed without an integrated design process. Maybe this might be classifed as a development project rather than a research, but there are really many aspects of research present. The project builds on many research and technology fields and its methods and results will eventually be analyzed and the concepts generalized and reused in other situations. Theres no way this could have been done other than through design.
Birger Sevaldson (PhD, MNIL)
Professor at Institute of Design
Oslo School of Architecture and Design
Norway
www.birger-sevaldson.no
www.systemsorienteddesign.net
www.ocean-designresearch.net
________________________________________
Fra: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [[log in to unmask]] på vegne av Luke Feast [[log in to unmask]]
Sendt: 18. mars 2013 14:32
Til: [log in to unmask]
Emne: Re: Verification, Falsification, validation, design and wicked problems
Dear Birger, Tiiu, and list
Tiiu wrote:
-snip-
When working on a Ph.D., we are interested in... contribut[ing] new
knowledge to disciplines... designing is not "research" in the way that one
does research to earn a Ph.D... research in the disciplines of design... is
grounded in the concept of a Ph.D. where new knowledge is constructed.
-snip-
I agree with Tiiu's position. It's important to distinguish between design
activity which aims to produce a design, and research activity which aims
to produce knowledge. I think Horvaìth (2001, p.1) puts it well when he
defines design research as "generating knowledge about design and for
design". I like this definition because in only a few words it clearly
states that the aim of research is to produce knowledge, that this
knowledge concerns understanding design (what is it and how does it work?)
and that this knowledge should be used to improve or support the design
process and design practice.
Emphasising the distinction between design activity and research activity
is separate from the debate as to whether designing should be
scientific (Cross,
1981), a debate which has recurred throughout the history of design
methodology at least since the 1960's and perhaps back to the 1920s (and
I'm sure superior historians such as Eduardo can find many earlier
references).
And I wish to sidestep the debate about which "research method" is best for
"designers". Empiricism or rationalism, deduction or induction... there are
many many more approaches to "generating knowledge about design and for
design" than Popper's method of falsification, or ethnography (a
methodology) or grounded theory (another methodology).
Instead, as I see it, the key point is whether individual doctoral
programmes in design choose to locate themselves in either Isolationist or
Situated relationships with the other disciplines and faculties (Biggs,
2008, p. 6). The Isolationist position claims that design research is
somehow special and should be granted special criteria and regulations. In
contrast, the Situated position maintains that because design research is
positioned in a comparative competitive environment it must place itself in
relation with its peers by finding commonalities with the academic
community as a whole.
My guess is that doctoral programmes in design that take an isolationist
position will probably degenerate over the long term while doctoral
programmes that take a situated position will be progressive (see Lakatos's
Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes in Lakatos 1970). I don't
have a knock down argument for this, it just seems intuitive to me that
taking an isolated approach is kind of like incarcerating yourself -
disciplinary incarceration. That's what you do to people who have been
misbehaving.
warm regards,
Luke
Biggs, M. A. R., & Buchler, D. (2008). Eight criteria for practice-based
research in the creative and cultural industries. *Art, Design &
Communication in Higher Education, 7*(1), 5-18.
Cross, N., Naughton, J., & Walker, D. (1981). Design method and scientific
method. *Design Studies, 2*(4), 195-201.
Horvath, I. (2001, August 21-23). *A contemporary survey of scientific
research into engineering design.* Paper presented at the International
Conference On Engineering Design ICED 01, Glasgow.
Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (Eds.). (1970). *Criticism and the growth of
knowledge : proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy
of Science, London, 1965 Volume 4*. London: Cambridge University Press.
--
Luke Feast | Early Career Development Fellow | PhD Candidate | Faculty of
Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia |
[log in to unmask] | Ph: +61 3 9214 6165 |
http://www.swinburne.edu.au/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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
