Research & Education in Design: People & Processes & Products & Philosophy

Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Research and Education in Design (REDES 2019), November 14-15, 2019, Lisbon, Portugal

Rita Almendra, João Ferreira

• Publisher: CRC Press
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781000097436
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Design
• Subtopic: Industrial Design

Design is about the creation of meaningful connections to solve problems and advance human wellbeing; the discipline has always explored the beneficial links between form and function, technology and meaning, beauty and utility, people and artefacts and problems and solutions, among others. This book focuses on the crucial connection between design research and design education.

Contemporary society grows increasingly hyper-complex and globally competitive. This state of affairs raises fundamental questions for both Design Education and Design Research: Should research skills be integrated into undergraduate courses? How can we modify design courses without compromising the positive aspects of the educational studio experience? Can the three cycles of higher education in design be combined into a creative and inquisitive educational continuum?

To examine the relationship between research and education in Design we must address the topic of knowledge, keeping in mind that the development and dissemination of new and useful knowledge is the core purpose of a University. If we agree that design has its own things to know and ways to find out about them, then design knowledge resides in people, processes, products, and philosophy. This book explores the intersection of these four areas with the aim of uncovering insights to advance the current state of the design discipline.

Design & Pedagogy

Facilitating complex knowledge in design education through design tools

M. Casais

CIAUD, Lisbon School of Architecture, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal

ABSTRACT: Design is a practice-based discipline, which is reflected in its education methodology. In this context, consuming complex knowledge might prove challenging, because designers think and work in a predominantly visual way. However, being able to master precise subjects offers a unique advantage in design, in contrast with a dispersed and superficial approach to knowledge. In this paper, we argue that design education can benefit from using design tools as a didactic way of conveying complex knowledge and making it actionable. To illustrate our proposition, we analysed 14 theory-focused design tools, showing how these convey knowledge and make it usable. In addition, we compared design tools with their respective sources of knowledge to showcase the contrast, proposing a three-part model of knowledge accessibility. Lastly, we describe anecdotal experiences: teaching design classes with and without design tools. The ideas discussed in this paper represent opportunities for further research.

1 INTRODUCTION

Design is a practice-based discipline, which is reflected in its education methodology, grounded in project development—notwithstanding the textual components present in design history, theory and critique. As such, making use of dense knowledge might prove challenging, because designers think and work in a predominantly visual way, and use visual representation to organize and communicate their thinking (Cross, 1982; Schön, 1983; Lawson, 2005; Wastiels, Schifferstein, Wouters, & Heylighen, 2013).

The fact that designers are visual thinkers does not mean that they do not benefit from understanding and incorporating knowledge specificity into their practice. On the one hand, multidisciplinarity has become a necessary tenet of our economy, and navigating diverse fields with some fluency and applying that information offers an (apparent) upper hand. On the other hand, it is true that being able to master a precise subject gives a unique advantage in contrast with a dispersed and superficial type of approach (Newport, 2016).

Therefore, we argue, design students can benefit from engaging with specific complex knowledge. This is particularly relevant concerning knowledge that can directly benefit the outcome of design interventions. For example, it is beneficial to deepen knowledge about materials, technology, politics, social issues, users, communities, or society at large, or about predicting or speculating on new and future situations. Its source can be anthropology, engineering, psychology, consumer research, sociology, healthcare, or other fields.

In this paper we propose that design education can benefit from using design tools originating from design research—which articulate design with different fields of knowledge—as an engaging and effective way of conveying complex knowledge and of making it actionable.

Design tools are compact vehicles of data, often with game elements, that deliver methods of working, inspire with ideas or solutions, and summarise complex information in a format that is possible to handle. Such tools have the potential to increase eloquence in intricate matters, by streamlining concepts and theories. They can offer an introduction that demystifies the apparent obscurity of complex knowledge, bridging theory and practice through an action-driven medium.

To illustrate our proposition, we conducted an analysis of information-focused design tools (as opposed to tools that offer only practical methodological support) available in physical format. We demonstrate how these convey information and make it accessible and actionable.

In addition, we provide some comparisons of the analysed tools with their respective sources of knowledge, frequently in the form of scientific articles or books, to showcase the stark contrast. Stemming from this comparison, we present a three-part model, based on the levels of accessibility of knowledge to design students.

Lastly, we share anecdotal experiences: teaching classes on design for emotion and wellbeing—knowledge based on psychology—with and without design tools. The ideas discussed in this paper represent opportunities for further research.

2 DESIGN TOOLS

Creative thinking tools are aids for creative and problem-solving tasks, using visual and textual stimuli to communicate methods, techniques or strategies. These tools often summarise complex information in the form of booklets, card decks, or digital formats, frequently using game elements.

Two widespread examples of creative thinking tools are the Thinkpak card deck (Michalko, 2006), based on the SCAMPER technique (an acronym for substitute, combine, adjust, modify/magnify, put to other use, reverse/rearrange); and 75 Tools for Creative Thinking (Cordoba Rubino, Hazenberg, & Huisman, 2013), a box with five card decks (1. Get Started; 2. Check Around; 3. Break It Down; 4. Break Free; 5. Evaluate & Select) for creative inspiration, also available as a mobile application.

Design tools—a specific form of creative thinking tools—are those developed within design research or practice, articulating diverse fields, such as healthcare, psychology, or consumer research, with design. In general, design tools aim to trigger designers in their process by providing inspiration and information in a flexible way that also allows freedom for them to apply their own understanding in their practice (Sleeswijk Visser, 2009). Design toolkits are a collection of different tools with the same theme/aim.

Several attempts have been made to categorise design tools to understand what these aim to afford in terms of assistance to designers in their processes. Roy and Warren (2018) provided an overview of existing classifications of (card-based) design tools, finding them ultimately focused on small samples and on subjects that arguably fall outside the scope of the design discipline. To tackle this, they proposed their own classification using a sample of 72 card-based design tools, grouping them under the following themes:

Systematic Design Methods and Procedures;

Creative Thinking and Problem Solving;

Human-Centred Design;

Domain-Specific Methods;

Team Building and Collaborative Working;

and Futures Thinking.

Potentially, any of these tools could be what we designate as information/theory-focused tools, that is, vehicles for summarized complex knowledge from diverse fields that can enrich the design practice in many ways.

To have a more focused understanding of how design tools convey such theory-based, dense information and make it accessible and actionable, we conducted an analysis of different specimens, directed at the knowledge-focused potential discussed above.

2.1 Analysis of design tools

24 design tools were selected through an online search using the terms design tool[s], design method[s], and design toolkit[s]. The search results were not overwhelming, and it was easy to discern examples that fitted the criteria of search, namely that the tool or toolkit would have at least partly a physical tangible component, and that it originated from design research or practice.

An analysis on those 24 tools consisted in checking them against a list of elements which could potentially be used to argue for our proposition. The aim of this preliminary analysis was firstly to grasp a range of formats, navigation styles, and presentation of information, and secondly to uncover information/theory-focused tools. Those constituent elements were:

1. Origin: Which design/education institution developed and launched the tool;
2. Format: Which elements constitute the toolkit (e.g. canvas, posters, cards);
3. Icons: Does it use symbols, icons, pictograms to structure navigation;
4. Images: Does it use images to provide examples of context or depict other related things;
5. Infographics: Does it use graphic representations of information in combination with text;
6. Linear text: Does it contain linear text;
7. Non-linear text: Does it contain non-linear text, e.g. lists, networked text/words, word-clouds;
8. Action-focused: Does it explain a method of working and/or prompt the designer to work in a directive way;
9. Information/theory-focused: Does it convey theoretical information or knowledge about a topic;
10. Colour coding: Does it use colour to structure navigation;
11. Graphs/diagrams: Does it use graphs and/or diagrams to illustrate or explain content;
12. Game elements: Does it contain explicit game instructions or elements, or does it tacitly invite the user to get involved in a gamified experience (due to its components, set of instructions, need for partnering, etc.);
13. Digital components: Does it contain digital components such as applications, photo albums, etc.;
14. Other relevant elements: Does it have other relevant elements, such as instruction manual;
15. Objectives: Description of the objectives as provided in the tool itself.

Following the preliminary analysis, we shifted our attention to the focused analysis of information/theory-focused tools, that is, those tools whose primary aim was to convey theoretical knowledge from other fields to enrich the design practice at any level (e.g. understand specific users, or people in a global sense, understand situated contexts, predict outcomes of designs, speculate about future scenarios).

2.2 Results

The analysis of the 24 design tools (see annex) showed that their origin was not indicative of their content, i.e., a tool developed by an education institution did not aim to, necessarily, convey complex knowledge. However, we did find examples of this type of theory-based tool from design research (see TU Delft examples).

While we aimed for tools with at least one tangible component, the majority had either one or more. Most analysed tools contained a card deck, canvas, posters, or booklets. One third (8) had additional digital components, such as web-based guides. However, all analysed tools were able to be downloaded or accessed digitally, and subsequently printed or ordered in printed format.

Colour frequently played a role in organizing and hierarchizing information. In addition, the tools largely contained both text and image, often both linear and non-linear text.

The tools aimed to provide information and/or methodological instructions, as well as design cases that illustrated these methods or techniques. Specifically, we found that the objectives could be divided into four types: (1) summarizing theoretical knowledge; (2) providing inspiration/displaying design cases; (3) understanding the user; and (4) providing methodological support.

Lastly, we observed over one third (9) with specific game elements or game-like instructions. We found 14 design tools in our sample that corresponded to the criterion of being information/theory-focused (see annex).

A further analysis of these 14 tools revealed that these have certain traits in common, namely:

Action: accompanying the theory, the tools presented a methodological component which allowed the knowledge to be put into practice.

Format: the tools were presented in a size that is easy to handle (in the design studio or in class), and in a portable format, such as a booklet or card set.

Pictorials: images supplement linear and non-linear text and provide a more vivid illustration of a given phenomenon.

Language: the theory is often accompanied by eliciting conditions (this happens when…) presented in simple terms.

Text: linear text is kept short and turned into graphs or illustrated when appropriate, text is highlighted or enhanced to hierarchize information.

2.3 A model of information accessibility: Three levels of communication and understanding

When we compare the information/theory-focused design tools with their respective sources, the stark contrast between how the information is presented becomes apparent. Taking the case of two design tools—Positive Emotion Granularity Cards (Yoon, Pohlmeyer, & Desmet, 2015) and SIM toolkit (Casais, Mugge, & Desmet, 2016), we can explore how information about a certain topic is accessible in different ways to design students.

We begin by looking at the original source that led to the design research work. In the two illustrated cases bellow (Figure 1 and 2) the original sources are from the field of psychology and are presented in the form of books an...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Committee members and keynote speakers
• Design & Pedagogy
• Design Studio
• Visual Design Representations
• Research in Design
• Design Thinking
• Beyond the Classroom
• Design & Society
• Community-based Research
• Author Index