It has been argued that teachers need practical principled knowledge and that design research can help develop such knowledge. What has been underestimated, however, is how to make such know-how and know-why useful for teachers. To illustrate how principled knowledge can be “practicalized”, we draw on a design study in which we developed a professional development program for primary school teachers (N = 5) who learned to design language-oriented mathematics lessons. The principled knowledge we used in the program stemmed from the literature on genre pedagogy, scaffolding, and hypothetical learning trajectories. We show how shifting to a simple template focusing on “domain text” rather than genre, and “reasoning steps” rather than genre features made the principled knowledge more practical for the teachers.
LINK
Het lectoraat Co-Design van Hogeschool Utrecht doet met een systemisch-inclusieve ontwerpende aanpak praktijkgericht onderzoek, om complexe maatschappelijke vraagstukken te helpen oplossen. Binnen die onderzoeken stellen we vragen over het ontwerpproces en de mensen die daarbij betrokken zijn. Hoe kun je goed co-designen in de weerbarstige werkelijkheid? Wat kan helpen in die ontwerpende aanpak? Hoe kunnen mensen die niet zijn opgeleid als ontwerpers volwaardig meedoen in het ontwerpproces, en wat hebben zij daarvoor nodig aan ontwerpend vermogen? De kennis over ontwerpend vermogen die we de afgelopen vier jaar hebben opgedaan, delen we in dit boekje. We hebben dat proces getekend en beschreven als een reisverhaal van Co, die ons meeneemt op een boot over een rivier, door stroomversnellingen en langs landschappen. Met bijdragen van: Marry Bassa, Anita Cremers, Tanja Enninga, Anita van Essen, Christa van Gessel, Berit Godfroij, Joep Kuijper, Remko van der Lugt, Caroline Maessen, Lenny van Onselen, Dirk Ploos van Amstel, Karlijn van Ramshorst, Carolijn Schrijver, Fenne Verhoeven, Danielle Vossebeld, Rosa de Vries
DOCUMENT
Design academics struggle in effectively reaching out to design practice, while design practitioners have difficulties in appropriating academic output. In their turn, design practitioners create new local knowledge that may not be recognised (as such) by design academics. This situation is seen as suboptimal and problematised as the research-practice gap. This paper addresses how knowledge exchange between design research and practice can be understood and improved. We therefore introduce and investigate a social co-design case study which bridged the gap between research and practice and which shows how knowledge development within academia, professional design practice, and non-professional design practice are interwoven. We analyse the case through an alternative template analysis incorporating four perspectives on ‘the gap’: abstraction, communication, alignment of knowledge needs, supporting local knowledge production. We compare and interrelate these four perspectives. This refines our theoretical understanding of the research-practice gap and provides implications and actionable insights about practitioner-centred knowledge production for design academics who want to contribute to design practice.
LINK
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
Author supplied from the article: ABSTRACT Increasing global competition in manufacturing technology puts pressure on lead times for product design and production engineering. By the application of effective methods for systems engineering (engineering design), the development risks can be addressed in a structured manner to minimise chances of delay and guarantee timely market introduction. Concurrent design has proven to be effective in markets for high tech systems; the product and its manufacturing means are simultaneously developed starting at the product definition. Unfortunately, not many systems engineering methodologies do support development well in the early stage of the project where proof of concept is still under investigation. The number of practically applicable tools in this stage is even worse. Industry could use a systems engineering method that combines a structured risk approach, concurrent development, and especially enables application in the early stage of product and equipment design. The belief is that Axiomatic Design can provide with a solid foundation for this need. This paper proposes a ‘Constituent Roadmap of Product Design’, based on the axiomatic design methodology. It offers easy access to a broad range of users, experienced and inexperienced. First, it has the ability to evaluate if knowledge application to a design is relevant and complete. Secondly, it offers more detail within the satisfaction interval of the independence axiom. The constituent roadmap is based on recent work that discloses an analysis on information in axiomatic design. The analysis enables better differentiation on project progression in the conceptual stage of design. The constituent roadmap integrates axiomatic design and the methods that harmonise with it. Hence, it does not jeopardise the effectiveness of the methodology. An important feature is the check matrix, a low threshold interface that unlocks the methodology to a larger audience. (Source - PDF presented at ASME IMECE (International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition
DOCUMENT
The sources of productivity have always been the main subject of economic debate because they are the main determinants of profitability and competitiveness. In order to improve productivity we should be able to identify the sources of productivity. This article presents a method for measuring the sources of knowledge productivity in order to give direction to knowledge management initiatives. The method is based on a theoretical framework which combines two different perspectives (economic and process) on knowledge productivity. This article presents the methodological and theoretical framework, the initial design of the method and the results of the first two case studies. The relevance of this article is that it combines the concepts of knowledge management and intellectual capital measurement in the relatively new concept of knowledge productivity.
DOCUMENT
From the article: Abstract Knowledge is essential to the product designer. It contributes to a better understanding of the difficulties in a design. With the right knowledge, design errors can be recognised in the early stage of product design, and appropriate measures can be applied before these errors escalate and delay the project. The axiomatic complexity theory, part of the Axiomatic Design methodology, can warn the designer in this process by disclosing his lack knowledge to fully understand the design. The Cynefin framework is a sense-making framework that distinguishes an organisational situation within four contexts. The state of relevant knowledge is the most important parameter to determine the actual context where an organisation, system, or design process is currently located. When knowledge is acquired, the context changes. Axiomatic Design and the Cynefin framework are applied in this paper to characterise the relation between the quality of the design and the knowledge of its designer. It is investigated if one follows the other, and how prompt that relation is. The outcome is that the quality of a design is proportional to the accumulation of applied knowledge to the product design. Therefore the quality of the design follows knowledge implementation but does not exceed the level of relevant knowledge of the designer. Knowledge should not be restricted to the designers only. Other people, e.g. production and maintenance-engineers, will also need the knowledge to take care of the product as the life cycle advances.
DOCUMENT
Purpose – purpose of this article is to report about the progress of the development of a method that makes sense of knowledge productivity, in order to be able to give direction to knowledge management initiatives. Methodology/approach – the development and testing of the method is based on the paradigm of the Design Sciences. In order to increase the objectivity of the research findings, and in order to test the transferability of the method, this article suggests a methodology for beta testing. Findings – based on the experiences within this research, the concept of beta testing seems to fit Design Science Research very well. Moreover, applying this concept within this research resulted in valuable findings for further development of the method. Research implications – this is the first article that explicitly applies the concept of beta testing to the process of developing solution concepts. Originality/value – this article contributes to the further operationalization of the relatively new concept of knowledge productivity. From a methodological point of view, this article aims to contribute to the paradigm of the Design Sciences in general, and the concept of beta testing in particular.
DOCUMENT
Knowledge from academic design research projects does not always help design professionals to actually strengthen their work. Based on a multi-case study, this paper describes how researchers view the impact of their design research projects on design practice and what they do to achieve this. Even in projects where impact on design practice is a stated ambition, several challenges can stand in the way, such as a lack of funding opportunities and unclarity on the needs of design practice. The paper provides tips for researchers and funding parties who want to inform design practice by research, including tips to operationalize design practice roles.
LINK
The numerous grand challenges around us demand new approaches to build alternative sustainable futures collectively. Whereas these so-called co-design processes are becoming more mainstream, many multi-stakeholder coalitions lack practical guidance in these dynamic and systemic challenges based on entangled relationships, interactions, and experiences between stakeholders and their environments. Although scholars and practitioners convey a lot of co-design theories and methods, there does not seem to be a practical instrument beyond methods that supports new coalitions with an overview of a co-design process to come and in making shared and fundamental co-design decisions. Therefore, this paper proposes the empathic Co-Design Canvas as a new intermediate-level knowledge product existing of eight co-design decision cards, which together make up the Canvas as a whole. The Canvas is based on an existing theoretical framework defined by Lee et al. (2018), an empirical case study, and a diversity of experiences in education and practice. It aims at supporting multi-stakeholder coalitions to flexibly plan, conduct, and evaluate a co-design process. Moreover, the Canvas encourages coalitions to not only discuss the problematic context, a common purpose, envisioned impact, concrete results, and each other’s interests and knowledge, but also power, which can create trust, a more equal level playing field and empathy, and help manage expectations, which is greatly needed to overcome today’s grand challenges.
LINK
