Hi Jesse, This is exactly why I eschewed a pure design education back in the late 90s, both as an undergrad and grad. The explanation I received from my instructors (two leading US design schools) about their design decisions / rational left me completely dissatisfied as a young design student. Most of these institutions have since introduced design research electives into their programs as well as interdisciplinary team projects / theses. What kind of research training those courses actually provide, I don't know. Having taught research methods to industrial design graduate students, I do realize that they are not always receptive to pure research or fail to see the real value (I probably would not have recognized either as a college student), but I may have been partially to blame for that.
On the other contrary, I also find that pure researchers / engineers / business people often get caught up in a sort of analysis paralysis, where every design decision must have supporting data, which is in itself is an impossible problem as you know, given that such data does not always exist (or is simply reflective of past solutions). Moreover, I often come across design recommendations (or "managerial implications") in research publications generated by engineers, marketing science, human factors folks that are completely devoid of creativity or innovation. I feel that human factors / marketing / engineering doctoral programs need to include additional interdisciplinary design education (as Davis suggests), along the lines of Stanford's d school model, and perhaps this is where doctoral programs in design find their niche. Long story short, I agree with Davis's statement that the lines are no longer clear: businesses are aware that design has a real effect on consumer behavior with the fast transfer of information on the web multiplying any effect of good / bad product design (online product reviews, etc.) and this makes design research all the more important. Design students need to be trained to understand (business / engineering / social sciences) research, and there is a definite need for good infrastructure / database to support the transfer of information (a designer's version of ACM's digital library or PsycInfo), and talented educators...designer / research hybrids...to fill the current gaps. I think there are a lot of highly qualified people on this mailing list who can do it. Phil “Few undergraduate design students, especially those in single-discipline colleges of art in the USA, engage in original, disciplined inquiry intended to inform design decisions, nor do most learn how to read and apply research findings from other fields." . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=38981 ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
