Dear Mauricio,
Thank you for raising the issues in such a timely manner.
One key issue in 'research through design' is to identify the answers to,
'What are the specific real outputs of "research through design" in each design realm?'
For this, I don't mean generalised loose language explanations such as 'knowledge' or 'information' or 'experience'. These can be claimed as the output of any activity including sweeping the floor.
Instead, it appears helpful to ask about the specific and concrete, 'What are the specific real outcomes that result from real acts of 'research through design'?
To give an example from engineering design, specific real outcomes that result from practical 'research *through* engineering design' include:
* Models for prediction of behaviours of physical entities
* Models for prediction of behaviours of boundaries of solution spaces
* Models for prediction of changes needed to theories due to identification of new relationship behaviours
* Models for prediction of dynamics of problem spaces
These research outputs emerge in the course of practical engineering design work that assumes designers have the responsibility to predict the outcomes resulting from their designs.
Identifying the specific research outputs resulting from the design activity provides a simple and straightforward way to identify how 'research through engineering design' occurs.
Identifying the specific research outputs of other design realms similarly offers a simple and straightforward way to identify how 'research through design' occurs in that realm of design.
So it would be helpful to know 'What are the specific research outcomes from 'research through design' in e.g. graphic design, product design, interior design , typographic design, photography-based design, illustration, communication design...'?
To know the specific outputs of these realms would help in identifying in a simple and straightforward way how 'research through design' occurs in those realms of design and might help in updating the discussion?
Best wishes,
Terry
===
Dr Terence Love, FDRS, PMACM, AMIMechE, MISI
PhD, B.A.(Hons), PGCE
School of Design and Art
Curtin University
0434975848
[log in to unmask]
===
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of G. Mauricio Mejía
Sent: Thursday, 5 March 2015 5:29 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: research trough design
Dear list members,
In my department, we have a PhD program in design and we are always discussing what is and what is not design research. There are several students that hope to use practice as the central part of the research activity and some have been interested in approaches such as “research through design” and “research-creation”. I argue that practice can be part of research when practice activities serve research purposes; in other words, engaging in practice may allow the researcher to answer certain types of questions or provide scenarios or products to test hypotheses. I add that “research through design” and “research-creation” are not, yet, mature approaches to reliably use them in PhD level research. Zimmerman, Stolterman, and Forlizzi (2010) identified three obstacles of research through design: a romantic view of design; theory is not an intended outcome; the need of a standard to document the design process. These are large challenges.
I have seen, with awe, in this list and elsewhere many events and calls for researchers and authors using “research through design” and “research-creation” approaches.
Is the design research community close to deal with Zimmerman and colleagues’ obstacles? Does anyone know of recent and relevant literature on this issue? This has been previously discussed in this list, but it would be interesting to update the discussion or know current developments on design research epistemology and methodology.
Thanks.
G. Mauricio Mejía, PhD
Associate professor University of Caldas, Colombia @mmejiaramirez
Zimmerman, J., Stolterman, E., & Forlizzi, J. (2010). An Analysis and Critique of Research through Design: towards a formalization of a research approach (pp. 310–319). Presented at the DIS 2010, Aarhus, Denmark: ACM Press.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|