Portfolio-2 Teaching Statement & student projects (original) (raw)
Related papers
Design for experience: a new rationale
Design and technology education : an international journal, 2006
Solving problems is a dominant rationale for technology education students engaging in design. This is evident throughout various technology education curricula; and subsequently influences teaching and learning. An alternative design paradigm supported by prominent examples within commercial design theory and practice examines the notion of ‘design’ as facilitating human experiences rather than predominantly solving technological problems. It argues that this ‘new’ paradigm has, through social and commercial imperatives, become the dominant rationale for most contemporary design contexts. Applied within an educational context, both paradigms have implications for teaching and learning. The design as problem solving paradigm of technology education has been elaborated for a number of years through curriculum documentation and teacher support material. The design as experience paradigm of some commercial designers is developing, and may represent a new and progressive dimension of st...
Editorial: Journal of Design Research - Special Issue on Futures of Design Education
The articles in this special issue on Futures of Design Education have been selected from the 9th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education conference proceedings. This international conference was held at Newcastle upon Tyne in the UK in September 2007 and brought together representatives from education and industry that have an interest in shaping the future of design education. The conference provided a forum for educators and researchers from product development, engineering and industrial design, together with industry and government representatives to discuss current educational issues as well as how design education might ‘be’ in the future. Themes explored at the conference included: curriculum development, responsible design, global issues, learning environments, and industry-university collaborations. Seven articles from the conference have been included in this special issue with aim of providing a range of papers from the interdisciplinary field of product design education. The authors of these articles come from different disciplinary backgrounds and different countries, including the Netherlands, South Africa, Israel, Australia, the USA and the UK. The outcome is an edition that tackles diverse design education issues from a variety of perspectives, both disciplinary and institutional. Further, the articles are written from various pedagogical perspectives, ranging from those informed by psychology to those incorporating socio-cultural theorisations of learning. The opening article, by Carolina Gill and Blaine Lilly, titled ‘Bridging design disciplines: preparing students for unpredictable challenges’, explores strategies that promote student cross-disciplinary collaboration and learning. The authors provide three case studies of students working across the disciplines of industrial design and mechanical engineering. They suggest that adapting tools and methods from each of the disciplines involved in the collaboration leads to an improved understanding across these disciplines. The article ‘Distributed collaboration in design education – practising designer and client roles’, by Kristina Lauche, Erik Bohemia, Chris Wilson and Petra Badke-Schaub, outlines a case study of a distributed design studio undertaken between three universities. This article illustrates the ways in which cross-institutional design studios can contribute to enhancing student-learning experiences. It also highlights the importance of providing design students with skills for operating in cross-cultural teams in distributed design studio context. Tania Humphries-Smith, in her article ‘Sustainable design and the design curriculum’, presents data from a pilot study that begins the process of considering how education should deal with the issue of sustainable design specifically in the context of the education of graduate designers in the fields of product, design engineering and interior design. Furthermore, a number of questions related to shaping the future of design and engineering education and designers/engineers are explored. This research addresses whether sustainability, or more specifically sustainable design, should or can be an integral part of engineering/product design programmes or whether it should/or can be developed as a separate design discipline. Humphries-Smith also discusses the difference between, eco-design and sustainable design and the implications of the understanding of this difference for design education. Hernan Casakin and Kevin Miller in their article ‘Individual learning styles and design performance in the metaphorical reasoning process’, explore the relationships between metaphor, experiential learning and learning preferences in the context of product design in a studio based environment. They argue that the relationships between these elements provide a fruitful area for ongoing research in the field of design education. Michael Rodber and Paul Wormald, in their article ‘Aligning industrial design education to emerging trends in professional practice and industry’, provide an industry perspective on the theme of design futures. They argue that the nature of design business in the UK has changed in recent years, and that these changes need to be taken into consideration in university-level product design education. They discuss these changes in relation to curriculum development, new module teaching and learning, and areas of academic research. They propose that university-level product design education shouldbecome more evidence-based and be more user-focused. Gaurang Desai’s article, ‘An activity-theory framework for industrial design’, explores the usefulness of activity theory as an approach for undertaking design research. Using an activity theory framework, Desai examines the design of classroom furniture in India. The article concludes that activity theory, with its emphasis on human activity as the essential unit of study, is a useful methodology for industrial design. Activity theory offers potential for design educators to examine classroom activity through a sociocultural lens, thus drawing to attention to the broader context in which teaching and learning take place. The closing article, ‘Ontologically shaping a designed future: design education as revelation’, by Johann van der Merwe, draws on actor-network theory to explore the construction of knowledge. van der Merwe asks salient questions such as: ‘is learning concerned with epistemology or ontology?’ He also examines the assumptions that underpin ‘how we know’. In illuminating complex processes whereby knowledge is constructed, van der Merwe encourages us to rethink pedagogy in design education. The articles in this Special Issue engage with many of the key issues that are currently impacting on higher education including: internationalisation of curriculum, establishing cross-disciplinary programmes, linking research and teaching, widening participation and an increased focus on collaboration with industry (Hanna, 2003; Barnett, 2005; Jones and Brown, 2007; Barnett and Di Napoli, 2008). These are indeed changing times. Therefore, it is important that space be made for design educators to continue to review their educational practices and the assumptions underpinning these practices. This Special Issue on Futures of Design Education contributes to opening up this space. References Barnett, R. (Ed.) (2005) Reshaping the University: New Relationships between Research, Scholarship and Teaching. Maidenhead, UK: SRHE and Open University Press. Barnett, R. and Di Napoli, R. (Eds) (2008) Changing Identities in Higher Education. London, UK: Routledge. Hanna, D.E. (2003) ‘Building a leadership vision: eleven strategic challenges for higher education’, EDUCAUSE Review Articles, Vol. 38, pp.25–34. Jones, E. and Brown, S. (Eds) (2007) Internationalising Higher Education. London, UK: Routledge.
Abstract: This paper sets out to clarify the relationship between the ‘research process’ and the ‘design process’ in the context of research in postgraduate Arts & Design education. The relationship between these processes is not well understood, and this is further complicated by terms such as ‘research design’ and ‘design thinking’ when applied to planning research activities, including selecting the qualitative and quantitative methods employed as well as applying systems design techniques. In addition, ‘practice-based research’ is still controversial in terms of academic rigour, and in some arts and design schools may lead, unintentionally, to the design process (with, say, only a novel product as the outcome) being interpreted as a research process of sufficient academic depth and originality for a PhD. However, as will be explained, the two processes are not necessarily the same although there are valuable analogous functions which enhance the research outcomes when applied sensibly. This paper will use process modelling tools, diagrams and actual case studies from PhD projects to show how the research and design processes are interrelated leading to better informed research experiences and outcomes for students and supervisors. Biographies: 1. Dr. Elivio Bonollo – Emeritus Professor, Industrial Design University of Canberra Dr. Elivio Bonollo PhD (Melb) is emeritus professor of industrial design, in the Faculty of Arts and Design, at the University of Canberra (UC). He was foundation professor of industrial design at UC (1997-2002) and a Pro Vice-Chancellor (1999-2001): earlier he was Dean of the Faculty of Environmental Design (1997-98). Elivio (Livio) was professor and director of the Centre for Industrial Design at Monash University (1989-96) and before this senior lecturer in charge of industrial design in the Faculty of Art at RMIT (1979-89). He is the founder of the industrial design discipline at Monash University and the principal author of the original industrial design degrees at RMIT (1982) and Monash University (1989). He is a PhD supervisor and currently a member of the Space, Place and Object Research Cluster. 2. Dr. Carlos Alberto Montana-Hoyos, Associate Professor, Industrial Design University of Canberra Dr. Carlos Montana-Hoyos was born in Bogotá, Colombia. He graduated cum laude from an MAID and a PhD from Kobe Design University (Japan Scholarship). As a designer, Carlos has developed multidisciplinary projects related to concept, product, graphics, exhibition and urban design. Several of his projects have received diverse international design awards. As an academic, Carlos was an Adjunct Assistant Professor in the Product Design Engineering course of EAFIT University in his country (2001-03). He was also a Fellow and Assistant Professor (2006-10) in the ID Program of the National University of Singapore. He is currently an Associate Professor in the ID course of the Faculty of Arts and Design, University of Canberra. His main research is in Biomimicry and Design for Sustainability, and he recently published a book on these topics.
Architectural design is an activity of synthesis and integration of many elements related to architectural design, such as construction, building technology, culture, etc., in order to develop their own original creativity. This article depicts the design teaching at The Bartlett School of Architecture at University College London, where design is considered as a kind of integrated cultural representation. The Bartlett style is all different kinds of thinking, attitudes and creating. They want students to think independently and to work in an interdisciplinary fashion. Meanwhile, Bartlett design studio is set up as a collection of units. Using the studio examples of Diploma curriculum and Unit 20, the educational philosophy of architectural design for the Bartlett school is illustrated to develop the individual and guide him or her to make the most of his or her creative and design potential.
The design process. Past, present, and future.
A strange phenomenon is presented when we approach the subject of design and trends when we consider terms of education, since much has been set for the first two terms (design and trends), but what about the education of it, more specifically in Industrial Design? In the brief history of the practice, different trends have been experienced, which have led to changes not only in terms of how are designed objects of the daily lives of people, but also in the way in which Industrial Design is considered, which then undoubtedly affects the education of future designers. Through a retrospective which shows the evolution of the components considered for the configuration of objects, starting from the Industrial Revolution, passing through different movements like Arts & Crafts, Bauhaus, Functionalism, Post-modernism, and concluding with our days, is seen how the dominant vectors, by tradition, as the form and function, have been overcome due to different requirements (for both users and global market), allowing the inclusion of other vectors, such as technology, the generation of experiences, and the value of innovation. Following this trend, and considering others in a globally scale, such as accelerated education and the importance that will represent the creative industries in the future, it is highlighted the need to reconsider the way in which students are formed in design, especially what regards to the design process, the way they approach problems, and how they proceed to provide a solution, embodied in an object or service. Disassociating from any mystical relationship in the generation of ideas, and a linear process that could lead to the same results always, it is proposed a design process in a fluctuating way, which can mutate and is totally dependent on the needs of the project or problem. This will provide the possibility to students to implement a methodology that enables the adaptability, experimentation and rationality needed to develop a successful design process which results in a product with a high design value contribution.