"The Reed-Kellogg diagram is a tool of the classroom and of the textbooks that codify the rules for its production. But grammar textbooks share a problem similar to the one Thomas Kuhn noted for science textbooks: they tend to efface the history of their subject. Indeed, grammar textbooks are far more ahistorical that science textbooks. The average science textbook will contain some history, however Whiggish. There will be at least a cursory mention of the scientists who formulated the theories under discussion, some suggestion that scientific knowledge is subject to change and accretion. Grammar, however, comes to students as an abstract whole. The sources from which the textbook authors derived their accounts normally go unacknowledged. There is no sense of grammar as a theory—or, more precisely, a constellation of competing theories—with its own intellectual history."
(Karl Hagen, 17 October 2015)
"The Ulm School of Design was founded in 1953 by Inge Aicher–Scholl, Otl Aicher and Max Bill, with the main task of incorporate design into industry and to shape our material culture. In the post–war years, the process was marked by a crisis of values and resources, and this fact drove the Ulm School to re–think the meaning of creating forms in the contemporary world and to democratize the access to design. The exhibition explores the concept of 'system', related with a set of rationally components capable of generating an object, and also the systematic approach of the school, which included for the first time, the integration of science and art.
The importance of the Ulm School in the history of design comes from the strict methodology they imposed on project development. Focusing on an inter–disciplinary work and objective design analysis, it rejected design as an artistic activity and spread through industry to all walks of life. The school was recognized worldwide for its approach of focusing on the design of the system rather than the object."
(Ethel Baraona Pohl, 13 February 2012, Domus Magazine)
"But design faces an uncertain future. The traditional design fields create artifacts. But new societal challenges, cultural values, and technological opportunities require new skills. Design today is more human–centered and more social, more rooted in technology and science than ever before. Moreover, there is need for services and processes that do not require the great craft skills that are the primary outcome of a design education.
Although design can sometimes bring creative insight to new problems, this ability is more of an art than a science, limited to a few especially talented individuals and design firms. In order to expand beyond chance successes, design needs better tools and methods, more theory, more analytical techniques, and more understanding of how art and science, technology and people, theory and practice can commingle effectively and productively. ...
Design is still mainly taught as a craft. There are remarkably few fundamental principles, almost no science. If design is to live up to its promise it must create new, enduring curricula for design education that merge science and technology, art and business, and indeed, all the knowledge of the university. Design is an all–encompassing field that integrates together business and engineering, the social sciences and the arts. We see a tremendous opportunity for students that learn design in this integrated way. ...
For design to succeed, grow, achieve its potential, and train future leaders, we envision a new curriculum. In our vision, these new programs combine learning the art and craft of beautiful, pleasurable well–crafted design with substantive courses in the social and biological sciences, in technology, mathematics and statistics, and in the understanding of experimental methods and rigorous reasoning. Programming and mechatronics are essential skills in today's product world. Not only will this training make for better practitioners, but it will also equip future generations of designers to be better at developing the hard, rigorous theory design requires.
Design is an exciting powerful field, filled with promise. To meet the challenges of the 21st century, design and design education must change. So too must universities."
(Don Norman and Scott Klemmer, 25 March 2014)
"A great deal of art or design or technology activity entails some research, or orthodox or unorthodox kinds, in support of the main activity. It is not quite so certain that the activity itself is the same as research activity per se. One has to ask, was the art or design or technological activity an enquiry whose goal was knowledge? Was it systematically conducted? Were the data explicit? Was the record of the conduct of the activity 'transparent', in the sense that a later investigator could uncover the same information, replicate the procedures adopted, rehearse the argument conducted, and produce the same result? Were the data employed, and the outcome arrived at, validated in appropriate ways? Most academic institutions with higher level art, design or technology departments can point to at least a few cases of practical activity where an effort has been made, successfully, to meet these criteria. So can a few research institutes and professional design offices. In these cases the activity can properly be equated with research, and should be recognised and rewarded accordingly. Where any activity, whether it claims to be 'research' or not, fails to meet the criteria which define research activity as 'a systematic enquiry whose goal is communicable knowledge', it cannot properly be classed as research or equivalent to research. Where an activity does meet the criteria, it can be classed as research."
(Bruce Archer, 2004, p.28, The Design and Technology Association)
Archer, B. (2004). "Designerly Activity and Higher Degrees", The Design and Technology Association.
"In practical terms PRE is a process in which teachers, tutors, lecturers and other education professionals systematically enquire into their own institutional practices in order to produce assessable reports and artefacts which are submitted for academic credits leading to the awarding of degrees, certificates and diplomas of universities, colleges and professional associations."
(Louis Murray and Brenda Lawrence, 2000, p.10)
Murray, L., & Lawrence, B. (2000). Practitioner–based enquiry: Principles for postgraduate research. London: Falmer Press.