Hi Enbo,
It’s such a good question. The link that already appeared from Tom Fischer might be the answer to your question.(I haven’t read that article, so my apologies if what I’m about to say is already explained in more detail there.)
This is what hit me. Since so many students seem to want to begin discussion with the tangible because they value it, here’s how you might handle it.
To start, I would say that your students are interested in the argument, but from a perspective that is too limited.
I hope that this will make sense. I know that I won’t be able to stay in the conversation because of a busy week, but here goes. If the idea of argument emerges from the Aristotelian model (invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery), the focus on the Creative Suite taps into some aspects of invention because the tool helps students consider what they want to communicate; arrangement because they consider the big relationships of one element to another; style because they look at the smaller relationships; memory because they remember how to use the tool (but here is one area where i think that you might be able to explore memory as a function of audience); and delivery in the final presentation. Unfortunately, in the assumption that the tool is the argument, they miss out on a lot.
The question is how do you find a way in to persuade your students that more is needed? In other words, what's your argument?
In their assumption, the tool is the argument, you have the first part of the given/new contract. The idea behind the given/new contract is to start with something that the audience understands (i.e. they know addition and that is performs helpful functions). In your case, the given would be the Creative Suite and how it contributes to the argument. To that you introduce the new (i.e. but addition cannot do everything so you need subtraction).
To your given the new could be inventional, such as, you claim that the way Photoshop was used here shows mastery of the tool. Your proof is in the the artifact. But once we get past what the object can say for itself, what other claims does it make? Is it an empty vessel? Give your students a limited amount of time, working in small groups to come up with other claims about the object. And once they make a claim, ask why you should believe it. Their claims must have proof if they are going to convince anyone. Where do we see the proof in that work to the claim that you are making? You might include examples where you demonstrate this process.
The given/new can also be related to memory as something that the audience contributes. You can ask how an exploration of the world that their audience inhabits has found its way into the design. In other words, how has looking around inspired their use of the tool? You can argue either that their serious exploration of how the audience sees the world, can increase the inventional elements that they bring to their exploration in Photoshop, or that their understanding of audience memory is part of the proof that is embedded in their claims.
I hope that this is useful to you.
All the best,
Susan
Susan M. Hagan, Ph.D., MDes | Carnegie Mellon University in Qatar
On May 9, 2015, at 7:23 PM, Enbo.Hu12 <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Dear all,
How to teach argument ability to design students?
I choose to study design since I believe there are much more interactions between people, teachers and students. The university life proved my expectation. However, I also see there have room for improvement.
From my observation, some of students prefer to seek for tangible skills, for example Photoshop, Cero and sketching. They are tangible because I think they present the result of a design rather than rationales behind a design. The material of an IKEA Frosta stool is labeled but the rationale, meaning and original inspiration are neither labeled. The material is the result of a design. The meaning is the rationale of a design. The meaning of a design is interpreted by man rather than a software. Argument or interpretation ability is not the focus of students.
Students asked for teaching sources of tangible skills. Students show their admiration to whom good at tangible skills. However, there are no such requirements and admirations after deep silence happened in review section. Why students can't see the value of argument ability? How much value it is for a designer? How to teach argument ability to design students?
This is a question raised from an undergraduate industrial design student who studies at Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University (XJTLU), Suzhou, China. This may be an annoying question to the list members so that please ignore it. Please accept my apologies.
Best regards,
Enbo.Hu
Email address [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[log in to unmask]>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|