Teena,

You are not alone in your concerns. I have had this discussion on this
forum a number of times. There are some contributors on PhD Design who
favour a long contribution that says essentially nothing over a short
contribution with content.

I can assure you that the same rules of logic apply in academia as in
the outside world. Quality is more important than quantity. An original
idea that is good is better than many references to old ideas that do
not have substance. Of course some references do have substance. The
search for real knowlege and understanding can't be found in a writer's
style manual.

At issue is the knowlege that design is a profession directed toward
change and academia is more concerned with studying and teaching about
what already exists. It is one of the most conservative of all
occupations. You are just seeing the emporer has no clothes. A creative
academic like Einstein who designs is a very rare animal.

Rather than condemning the role of teacher I am saying that as design
academics we should value the contribution of designers even if they
choose not to follow our conservative methods of discussion because
these methods are more concerned with form than function.

The forum's long debate about food metaphors during the discussion about
Universty of California at Irvine reminded me that such a discussion was
pointless if the University Graduates lacked the skills to work in the
real world.

Does anyone on the forum know whether the proposal for a design school
at Irvine was accepted by the University?



______________________________

R   o   b     C   u   r   e   d   a   l   e
Professor, Chair Product Design
College for Creative Studies Detroit
201 East Kirby
Detroit MI 48202-4034

Phone: 313 664 7625
Fax:      313 664 7620
email: [log in to unmask]
http://www.ccscad.edu
______________________________
>>> teena clerke <[log in to unmask]> 09/19/04 5:55 PM >>>
Dear all,

Cindy requested that I post my response to her to the group.

I am new to design research. My design education began in the dying
trade stage in 1977, I began practising as a designer at the
beginning of the digital age in 1987, and have only just begun the
research journey several months ago, in the third stage of design
development as a discipline.

My brief contribution to the discussion on rice and potatoes was in
fun, but I perhaps mistakenly felt ridiculed for not being scholarly
in my responses. I reacted defensively, but meant no offense to
anyone listening.

By way of explanation - the reference to censorship was in response
to a comment which I believed was an attempt to stifle 'unscholarly'
contributions, so if anyone is offended, I apologise. The reference
to inequitable power relationships was addressing the comment about
the quality/value of short messages and commentary and the value of
each 'voice'. This may have touched a nerve, coming as I am as a
practising designer and design educator, and now, a research student.
I hear researchers discuss design theoretically yet they have often
not practised design themselves - this irks me I guess, and may have
been a little of an inverted elitist kneejerk reaction on my part.

kind regards, teena
--
Teena Clerke
PO Box 1090
Strawberry Hills NSW 2012
0414 502 648