A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
The Culture of Academic Rigour: Does Design Research Really Need It?
Historically, the culture of design education reflects an uneasy liaison between the mediaeval monastic (‘book’) and the crafts guilds (‘design studio’) traditions. For this reason it has been difficult to integrate both modes of knowledge in design education. Common misunderstandings about ‘scholastic rigour’ are symptomatic of this confusion. ‘Rigorous’ writing is fundamentally rule-based and organizational, and can therefore be at odds with the situated, opportunistic judgements involved with much design practice. We should therefore re-design academic writing protocols for design education.
By thinking about ‘rigour’ we may absolve it, perhaps adopting a more empathetic model to make writing more like designing for a specified client. The standard school essay implies a 180° relationship between authors and their unknown readers. It is profoundly linear, fact-based and rhetorical, therefore it may be useful in the competitive culture of bureaucratic work. For this reason, we need better practices of ‘self-teaching’ and ‘thinking-through’ to make the culture of design education a wiser one. Empathetic modes of writing - i.e. those with an author-reader relationship of less than 90° - enable designers to focus onto shared issues by ‘thinking-as,’ ‘thinking-for,’ and ‘thinking-into’ their nominated reader.
The Culture of Academic Rigour: Does Design Research Really Need It?
Historically, the culture of design education reflects an uneasy liaison between the mediaeval monastic (‘book’) and the crafts guilds (‘design studio’) traditions. For this reason it has been difficult to integrate both modes of knowledge in design education. Common misunderstandings about ‘scholastic rigour’ are symptomatic of this confusion. ‘Rigorous’ writing is fundamentally rule-based and organizational, and can therefore be at odds with the situated, opportunistic judgements involved with much design practice. We should therefore re-design academic writing protocols for design education.
By thinking about ‘rigour’ we may absolve it, perhaps adopting a more empathetic model to make writing more like designing for a specified client. The standard school essay implies a 180° relationship between authors and their unknown readers. It is profoundly linear, fact-based and rhetorical, therefore it may be useful in the competitive culture of bureaucratic work. For this reason, we need better practices of ‘self-teaching’ and ‘thinking-through’ to make the culture of design education a wiser one. Empathetic modes of writing - i.e. those with an author-reader relationship of less than 90° - enable designers to focus onto shared issues by ‘thinking-as,’ ‘thinking-for,’ and ‘thinking-into’ their nominated reader.
The Culture of Academic Rigour: Does Design Research Really Need It?
Wood, John (author)
The Design Journal ; 3 ; 44-57
2000-03-01
14 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
The culture of academic rigour: Does design research really need it?
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1999
Rigour in research and peer review
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 1997
Rigour in research and peer review
| British Library Online Contents | 1997
Rigour in research and peer review
| Online Contents | 1997
Diversity and rigour in construction management research
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 1994