What design education tells us about design theory: a pedagogical genealogy

In design theory, we often come across scholarly efforts that seek to define design as a unique discipline and to characterize it as a distinct category of practice, with its own epistemology in that it differs from sciences, arts and humanities (Cross, N. 2011. Design Thinking: Understanding How De...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bardzell, J. (Author), Ghajargar, M. (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Routledge 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 03072nam a2200325Ia 4500
001 10.1080-14626268.2019.1677723
008 220511s2019 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 14626268 (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a What design education tells us about design theory: a pedagogical genealogy 
260 0 |b Routledge  |c 2019 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1080/14626268.2019.1677723 
520 3 |a In design theory, we often come across scholarly efforts that seek to define design as a unique discipline and to characterize it as a distinct category of practice, with its own epistemology in that it differs from sciences, arts and humanities (Cross, N. 2011. Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Oxford: Berg.; Dorst, K. 2015. Frame innovation: Create New Thinking by Design. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Nelson, H. G., and E. Stolterman. 2012. The Design Way: Intentional Change in an Unpredictable World. The MIT Press.; Redström, J. 2017. Making Design Theory. MIT Press.). Although such efforts are helpful in teasing forward the nature of design epistemologies and practices, we question them by critically engaging with epistemic paradigms informing design education, its structural forms, origins and purposes, historically, while suggesting the time has come to reevaluate design’s relationships with other epistemological traditions, including the sciences and humanities. We unpack history of design education, in order to problematize what we have come to view as overly schematized epistemological distinctions, most notably the asserted opposition between (what Schön calls) technical rationality and an alternative epistemology broadly linked to pragmatism and/or phenomenology. We do so by offering a genealogy of design education showing that since the nineteenth century, design programmes have continuously, if diversely, taught novice designers, methods, crafts, and attitudes that reflect diverse epistemological traditions. Theorists and educators of design have a shared interest in balancing the needs to appreciate and help develop that which is distinctive of design and also to build upon design’s rich epistemological connections to the sciences and humanities. Whereas the former helps the field improve its abilities to contribute to society, the latter provides many of the theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical resources that make such contributions possible. © 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. 
650 0 4 |a Cambridge 
650 0 4 |a Design 
650 0 4 |a Design education 
650 0 4 |a Design Education 
650 0 4 |a design epistemology 
650 0 4 |a design theory 
650 0 4 |a Design theory 
650 0 4 |a Design thinking 
650 0 4 |a History 
650 0 4 |a History of designs 
650 0 4 |a hybrid pedagogy 
650 0 4 |a hybrid pedagogy 
650 0 4 |a Pedagogical resources 
650 0 4 |a Presses (machine tools) 
650 0 4 |a Structural form 
700 1 |a Bardzell, J.  |e author 
700 1 |a Ghajargar, M.  |e author 
773 |t Digital Creativity