dear Martin,
in 2004 i was awarded a PhD in Design from the Politecnico di Milano.
my thesis focused on the approaches to doctoral education in design.
It was based on a literature review and an empirical inquiry about
several PhD programmes from Italy, France, Germany, the UK, the USA,
Asia, and Australia. after submitting my PhD i moved mainly to
practice "design" and "design research", but i taught for ten years a
course about the approaches to the doctoral research in Design... i
left this discussion list for more than a decade, and i recently re-
subscribed!
i agree with you, the call for papers and the introduction article
were introduced "in such a 'problematized' manner". i will also add
"in such a confusing manner". a 'good' introduction about the nature
of the PhD in Design could be based on:
1. a philosophical framework (for example as in the contributions of
Victor Margolin); or
2. maybe by tracing the 'recent' historical background of this issue,
based on the great contributions of Bruce ARCHER, Nigel CROSS, Klaus
KRIPPENDORF, Christopher FRAYLING, Victor MARGOLIN, Richard BUCHANAN,
Wolfgang JONAS, and Alain FINDELI; or
3. maybe through an epistemological or methodological framework or
perspective (for example as in the contributions of Alain Findeli...).
in 2018, the topic of PhD in Design can not be introduced in this
'problematic' way (it will offend, going back in time, from William
Morris all the way to Plato)... i copied below a couple of inspiring
quotations that helped me introduce this topic in my doctoral thesis:
Cross (1999):
"Design research is alive and well, and living in an increasing number
of places. I find encouraging evidence for this the growth of research-
based journals in the design world over the last ten to fifteen years.
[¡]. Compared with the academic design scene in the 1970s, we now have
a rich culture in which to grow our design research seedlings."
Krippendorf (1999):
"[¡], I contend that designers allow their discourse to become
colonized by the commercialism of marketing, the conservatism of
science, the individualism of art, and the mechanism of engineering."
Buchanan (1999):
"Should the doctorate in design be modelled on the traditionally
established doctorates in other fields, or should it be shaped in a
new way that may better serve the future of design?"
Findeli (1999):
"Do the design disciplines have a scientific and / or academic status
of their own, distinct enough from other disciplines to require and
justify the use of specific methodologies when carrying out design
research? In other words, we questioned the possibilities, the
necessity, or the relevancy, for design to develop original methods
for research without loosing sight of its claim for scientificity,
i.e. for yielding what Pierre Bourdieu calls ¡®an explicit and systemic
knowledge.¡¯"
best regards,
Fatina
Fatina Saikaly
Managing Director
Co-Creando
Viale Molise 55
20137 Milan Italy
Phone +39 02 5462303
Mobile +39 338 7038997
www.cocreando.it
Il giorno 23/mar/18, alle ore 11:08, Salisbury, Martin ha scritto:
> Hi Ken,
>
> I think we may be misunderstanding each other? This shouldn't be the
> case as we have communicated off-list. Just to reiterate what i have
> explained in those communications- yes, I was referring to your
> introductory 'PhD in Art and Design'. Introductions are important in
> setting the tone. I was wondering why, given that there are no doubt
> problematic PhD programmes across many subject areas, the debate
> around the PhD in Art and Design was introduced in such a
> 'problematized' manner, with the various references to bad practice
> being conflated with or mentioned by association with Art and
> Design. I thought there might have been a little more in the
> introduction about the exciting new programmes and possibilities
> opening up in the area of research through practice. But as you say,
> this will clearly be explored by many distinguished contributors.
> Perhaps the misunderstanding can partly be explained by the very
> different situations in the USA and the UK. The notion that PhDs in
> Art and Design should be awarded for advanced practice seems to me
> to have been left well behind here.
>
> And I must confess to being amused by the use of the term 'promoted'
> to describe the merging of art schools with universities- '...this
> has often been the case at debates staged in art and design schools
> newly promoted to university status...'. Art schools in the UK had
> degree awarding status from the late 1970s (I was at art school when
> the change over from the previous Diploma in Art & Design award went
> through). It may be that some of us didn't see the loss of our art
> schools as 'promotion'.
>
> I very much welcome this symposium and look forward to reading more.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Martin
>
> Martin Salisbury
> Professor of Illustration
> Director, The Centre for Children's Book Studies
> Cambridge School of Art
> 0845 196 2351
> [log in to unmask]
>
> http://www.cambridgemashow.com
>
> http://www.anglia.ac.uk/ruskin/en/home/microsites/ccbs.html
>
> ________________________________________
> From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and
> related research in Design [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of
> Ken Friedman [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2018 2:37 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Call for Papers: PhD in Art and Design
>
> Dear Martin,
>
> Thanks for your comments. As I understand your reply, you only read,
> ¡°PhD in Art and Design.¡± This is the introduction, not a full
> discussion. If you only read the introduction, you missed the
> answers to the question you asked me.
>
> The book chapter ¡°Now That We¡¯re Different, What¡¯s Still the
> Same?¡± answers the question you asked earlier. It explains why some
> PhD programs in art and design are troubled. You¡¯ll find the answers
> to your questions in the book chapter:
>
> https://we.tl/Z3oPOJiEVf
>
> You wrote that people from the studio disciplines would bring
> ¡°different voices to the debate and introduce some balance.¡± I¡¯m
> not sure why that would be the case. All the Leonardo authors work
> in studio disciplines.
>
> Virginia Maksymowicz is a sculptor and a studio professor. Blaise
> Tobia is a visual artist and theorist, and a studio professor. Diane
> Zeeuw is a painter and studio professor. Linda Candy is an artist in
> several media and a professor in both art and computing. Ernest
> Edmonds is a professor of art as well as a professor of HCI and
> computing. Meredith Davis is an award-winning graphic designer and a
> professor of design. All have held the kinds of administrative
> roles, program directorships, and professional roles that one
> expects of experienced professors. Some have been deans, department
> chairs, and heads of school with responsibility for undergraduate
> and graduate studio education as well research supervision.
>
> You asked a complex question. I offered material to answer it. This
> requires reading more than the introduction. It¡¯s easy to ask a
> short, simple question. A deep question requires detailed
> information for a real answer, especially when you requested the
> ¡°factual basis¡± for the issues I raised. I offered facts ¡ª you¡¯ll
> find them at different points within the articles, and especially in
> the book chapter, ¡°Now That We¡¯re Different, What¡¯s Still the
> Same.¡± This last explicitly describes some of the facts behind the
> question you challenged ¡ª including curriculum structure and
> historical development.
>
> You asked for facts. I provided articles containing facts. Not all
> facts are assembled in statistics. Some facts involve the
> description of programs, curriculum issues, and historical patterns.
> The symposium articles and the book chapter present both educated
> opinion and carefully assembled facts.
>
> Here is one example concerning key differences between an art PhD in
> Australian or the UK and a PhD in the North American system.
>
> The Bologna 3+2+3 system for a PhD in art moves from a 3-year studio
> BA through a 2-year studio to a 3-year PhD. However, there are only
> studio courses prior to the PhD. In the UK and Australia, most
> universities prohibit a taught course series for research skills and
> methods. At many Australian universities, the student presents a
> thesis proposal to gain acceptance ¡ª before he or she has done any
> kind of research. The question may be interesting, but it is often
> an uninformed question. Meredith Davis¡¯s article explains why the
> MFA provides insufficient preparation for the PhD.
>
> The North American system from starting university to completing the
> PhD generally runs 4+2+5 years. This starts with 4-year
> undergraduate degree that is half studio courses and half courses
> across other disciplines and fields. The master¡¯s degree teaches
> research skills and deepens subject-field knowledge. The PhD program
> has a string of courses in research skills and research methods
> prior to the thesis proposal. The research question is therefore
> well informed and the student has done much of the work needed
> before starting the deep research leading to the thesis.
>
> These issues involve more than the research content of the PhD
> degree. This involves the research skills that anyone with a PhD
> should have regardless of the field to which he or she belongs. This
> is not a matter of people in the natural science, social sciences,
> or the arts and humanities looking at art. It is a matter of
> research skills.
>
> The Leonardo symposium is about the PhD in fine and creative arts
> and in design. It does not involve people from other fields looking
> at the PhD in art and design. Some of the people in the symposium
> work in several fields ¡ª nevertheless, an artist who is also an
> astrophysicist is still an artist. I also work in several fields,
> but my book chapter covers the PhD in the fine arts and the creative
> arts, as well as architecture and design.
>
> Yours,
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Friedman | Editor-in-Chief | Éè¼Æ She Ji. The Journal of Design,
> Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in
> Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| Email [log in to unmask]
> | Academia http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
> ¡ª
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> TAKE CARE: this message originates from an email service outside of
> our University. Do not click on any links or open attachments unless
> you recognise the sender and are absolutely sure that the content is
> safe
>
>
> --
> Please click here to view our e-mail disclaimer http://www.anglia.ac.uk/email-disclaimer
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
