Goodmorning Ken and Tim and Kari,
I read all the e-mails again this morning. You are right. I totally
misread and misunderstood Kari's e-mail. I am sorry for taking your time
with my confusion.
I thought he was taking about a fixed methodology and I was super
surprised. I am a bit obsessed about making sure method and methodology
are not confused.
Your email on this is informative though.
So I ll keep believing in the power of misunderstanding.
Best,
Cigdem
Alinti Ken Friedman <[log in to unmask]>
> Dear Cigdem,
>
> To develop a methodological program does not imply a fixed method.
> One of the problems of vocabulary today is the confusion between [1]
> method and [2] methodology. Method is how to do something. Research
> methods are the ways that we do research. Methodology is the study
> of method. Research methodology is the study of research methods. A
> methodological program is a systematic program that studies
> different research methods. Methodology and the concept of a
> methodological program do not mean a program of fixed methods, but a
> comparative study of many methods.
>
> Mautner (1996: 267) defines methodology as ?1. The discipline
> which investigates and evaluates methods of inquiry, of validation,
> of teaching, etc. 2. a theory within that discipline. Note that
> methodology is about method and not the same as method.?
>
> Bunge (1999: 178) distinguishes between method, as ?a regular and
> well-specified procedure for doing something: an ordered sequence of
> goal-directed operations? and methodology as ?the study of methods.
> The normative branch of epistemology; a knowledge technology. Often
> confused with method, as in ?the methodology used in the present
> research.?
>
> To speak of a methodological program as a ?fixed methodology?
> grows from this confusion. The repertoire of methods in any living
> field is always growing and developing.Since methodology studies
> method, there cannot be a ?fixed methodology.?
>
> The comparative study of method presumes that some methods exist,
> but methodology implies no choice among existing methods. The
> situation is quite the contrary. Methodological sophistication leads
> to appropriate choices among methods. It can also lead researchers
> to develop and apply new methods.
>
> A term that is rarely used in our field is ?methodics.? This is
> the ?collection of methods employed in a research field. Not to be
> confused with methodology.? (Bunge 1999: 179)
>
> Methodics is the comprehensive repertoire of research methods
> available to a field. Given the wide range of disciplinary and
> interdisciplinary possibilities of research in design, themethodics
> of this area is immense rather than fixed. Kari?s post addresses the
> comparative and systemic study of a range of methods within the
> methodics of design and design research.
>
> This fact establishes the precise reason behind the importance of
> methodology ? the comparative study of research methods. One must
> compare alternatives to choose among them. One must therefore
> distinguish between comparative study of methods and the specific
> study and training in any one method.
>
> None of us can master all the methods required in any field. The
> lack of general methodological knowledge is a serious problem in
> design research and in research training courses in design. Kari
> argues that the time has come for richer and more systematic studies
> of research methods.
>
> One advantage of terms such as ?constructive research? and
> ?generative research? is that they cover research methods that
> involve making and building things without the confusion that often
> conflates the terms ?practice-based research? or ?practice-led
> research? with ?practice-as-research.? Kari?s post suggests a system
> study of methods that will enable us to understanding and use the
> range of research methods open to us. This is a methodological
> program, a systematic, comparative research program on research
> methods.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> Professor Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University
> Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology |
> Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask] | Phone +61 3 9214
> 6102 | http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design
>
> --
>
> References
>
> Bunge, Mario. 1999. The Dictionary of Philosophy. Amherst, New
> York: Prometheus Books.
>
> Mautner, Thomas. 1996. A dictionary of philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.
>
> --
>
> Cigdem Kaya wrote:
>
> --snip--
>
> Why do we need a fixed methodology for doing research through
> design activity?
>
> --snip--
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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-----------------------------------------------------------------
Y.Doç.Dr. Çi?dem Kaya
?stanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
Endüstri Ürünleri Tasar?m? Bölümü
Ta?k??la, ?stanbul 34437
t. 0212 2931300 x 2824
f. 0212 2514895
w. www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr[1]
Ms. Cigdem Kaya
Assistant Professor, MFA, PhD
Istanbul Technical University
Department of Industrial Product Design
Taskisla, Istanbul 34437, Turkey
t. 0212 2931300 x 2824
f. 0212 2514895
w. www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr[1]
Bağlantılar:
------------
[1] http://www.tasarim.itu.edu.tr
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
