This investigation explores relations between 1) a theory of human cognition, called Embodied Cognition, 2) the design of interactive systems and 3) the practice of ‘creative group meetings’ (of which the so-called ‘brainstorm’ is perhaps the best-known example). The investigation is one of Research-through-Design (Overbeeke et al., 2006). This means that, together with students and external stakeholders, I designed two interactive prototypes. Both systems contain a ‘mix’ of both physical and digital forms. Both are designed to be tools in creative meeting sessions, or brainstorms. The tools are meant to form a natural, element in the physical meeting space. The function of these devices is to support the formation of shared insight: that is, the tools should support the process by which participants together, during the activity, get a better grip on the design challenge that they are faced with. Over a series of iterations I reflected on the design process and outcome, and investigated how users interacted with the prototypes.
DOCUMENT
Academic design research often fails to contribute to design practice. This dissertation explores how design research collaborations can provide knowledge that design professionals will use in practice. The research shows that design professionals are not addressed as an important audience between the many audiences of collaborative research projects. The research provides insight in the learning process by design professionals in design research collaborations and it identifies opportunities for even more learning. It shows that design professionals can learn about more than designing, but also about application domains or project organization.
DOCUMENT
The model of the Best Practice Unit (BPU) is a specific form of practice based research. It is a variation of the Community of Practice (CoP) as developed by Wenger, McDermott and Snyder (2002) with the specific aim to innovate a professional practice by combining learning, development and research. We have applied the model over the past 10 years in the domain of care and social welfare in the Netherlands. Characteristics of the model are: the interaction between individual and collective learning processes, the development of (new or better) working methods, and the implementation of these methods in daily practice. Multiple knowledge sources are being used: experiential knowledge, professional knowledge and scientific knowledge. Research is serving diverse purposes: articulating tacit knowledge, documenting the learning and innovation process, systematically describing the revealed or developed ways of working, and evaluating the efficacy of new methods. An analysis of 10 different research projects shows that the BPU is an effective model.
DOCUMENT
This overview can be regarded as an atlas or travel guide with which the reader can follow a route along the various professorships. Chapter 2 centres on the professorships that are active in the field of Service Economy. Chapter 3 is dedicated to the professorships that are focussed on the field of Vital Region. Chapter 4 describes the professorships operating in the field of Smart Sustainable Industries. Chapter 5 deals with the professorships that are active in the field of the institution-wide themes of Design Based Education and Design Based Research. Lastly, in Chapter 6 we make an attempt to discover one or more connecting themes or procedures in the approach of the various professorships. This publication is not intended to give a definitive answer to the question as to what exactly NHL Stenden means by the concept of Design Based Research. The aim of this publication is to get an idea of everything that is happening in the NHL Stenden professorships and to pique one’s curiosity to find out more.
DOCUMENT
Design and research are two fields of knowledge that each has its traditions, methods, standards and practices. These two worlds appear to be quite separate, with researchers investigating what exists, and designers visualising what could be. This book builds a bridge between both worlds by showing how design and research can be integrated to develop a new field of knowledge. This book contains 22 inspiring reflections that demonstrate how the unique qualities of research (aimed at studying the present) and design (aimed at developing the future) can be combined. This book shows that the transdisciplinary approach is applicable in a multitude of sectors, ranging from healthcare, urban planning, circular economy, and the food industry. Arranged in five parts, the book offers a range of illustrative examples, experiences, methods, and interpretations. Together they make up the characteristic of a mosaic, each piece contributing a part of the complete picture, and all pieces together offering a multi-facted perspective of what applied design research is, how it is implemented and what the reader can expect from it.
MULTIFILE
Designing solutions for complex behaviour change processes can be greatly aided by integrating insights from the behavioural sciences into design practice. However, this integration is hampered by the relative inaccessibility of behavioral scientific knowledge. Working in a multidisciplinary of design researchers and behavioural scientists may bridge the gap between the two fields. This paper shares our experiences in working as such a multidisciplinary group on a large project, amongst others consisting of the design of interventions for workplace safety. Our cooperation was fruitful, both for design researchers – being able to better structure the messiness of the design process –, behavioural scientists – gaining in ecological validity of their methods –, and commissioners – increased trust in potential outcomes of the design process. However, difficulties preventing synergy also transpired.
MULTIFILE
This book offers a comprehensive, practice-based exploration of Systemic Co-Design (SCD) as it is applied to society’s most complex and urgent transitions. Drawing on collaborative projects from the Expertisenetwork Systemic Co-Design (ESC), it portrays Systemic Co-Design not as a fixed framework but as a reflexive, evolving practice. The chapters present diverse collaborations and inquiries, ranging from inclusive design and digital accessibility to fostering safety cultures and urban co-creation, that illustrate Systemic Co-Design’s capacity to build awareness, trust, and communities, as well as systemic capabilities. The book promotes mutual learning and generates knowledge products such as maps, canvases, cards, games, and embodied interactions that enable meaningful engagement. Key themes that run throughout include continuous reflection, the blending of action research and design experimentation, and collective sense-making across disciplines. The contributions demonstrate how new values, methods, and communities are co-developed with design practitioners, policymakers, educators, and citizens. Together, they demonstrate how Systemic Co-Design achieves practical outcomes while fostering the longterm capacities and cultural shifts necessary for systemic change.
LINK
The transition to an inclusive society through design Inclusive design can play a critical role in shaping a more equitable society. When products and services are intentionally created to be inclusive, they become more accessible to a wide audience, including people who might otherwise struggle to engage with them. In this way, designers become agents of social transformation. The project Active Inclusive Design (AID) addresses this challenge directly. It aims to enhance the capabilities of professional and future designers to create inclusive products and services, both digital and non-digital. In doing so, it supports a responsible and digital society central to the Expertise network Systemic Co-design (ESC) agenda, and is closely connected to all ESC Dynamic Learning Agenda (DLA) themes: Systemic Co-Design (SCD) in me, SCD with others, SCD in reality and SCD in time.
LINK
In programmatic assessment (PA), an arrangement of different assessment methods is deliberately designed across the entire curriculum, combined and planned to support both robust decision-making and student learning. In health sciences education, evidence about the merits and pitfalls of PA is emerging. Although there is consensus about the theoretical principles of PA, programs make diverse design choices based on these principles to implement PA in practice, fitting their own contexts. We therefore need a better understanding of how the PA principles are implemented across contexts—within and beyond health sciences education. In this study, interviews were conducted with teachers/curriculum designers representing nine different programs in diverse professional domains. Research questions focused on: (1) design choices made, (2) whether these design choices adhere to PA principles, (3) student and teacher experiences in practice, and (4) context-specific differences between the programs. A wide range of design choices were reported, largely adhering to PA principles but differing across cases due to contextual alignment. Design choices reported by almost all programs include a backbone of learning outcomes, data-points connected to this backbone in a longitudinal design allowing uptake of feedback, intermediate reflective meetings, and decision-making based on a multitude of data-points made by a committee and involving multi-stage procedures. Contextual design choices were made aligning the design to the professional domain and practical feasibility. Further research is needed in particular with regard to intermediate-stakes decisions.
LINK
DOCUMENT
