Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:44:54.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE DARK SIDE OF METHODS – AN EXPLORATION OF THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF METHOD USE AND METHOD REFLECTION IN DESIGN

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Björgvin Hjartarson ,
Jaap Daalhuizen  and
Karoline Fogh Gustafsson
Björgvin Hjartarson*
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark
Jaap Daalhuizen
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark
Karoline Fogh Gustafsson
Affiliation:
Technical University of Denmark
*
Hjartarson, Björgvin, Technical University of Denmark, Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Denmark, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The proper use of methods is increasingly important as design challenges are more complex and involve more stakeholders. Such work also demands high reflective ability from designers. Reflective thought processes do not necessary produce positive outcomes for the process and the individual involved. Positive reflection is goal oriented while negative reflection is typically self-oriented. In design education, reflection by students is often treated as rather trivial or only rudimentary support is offered. Research in cognitive science shows that poor reflection can hurt students' well-being, abilities and confidence over time. Thus, there is a need to better understand method use and reflection in design education more specifically when done poorly. We take a theory-building approach and interviewed 12 design students and recent graduates and investigated instances of method use where these led to negative experiences and effects. In doing so, we show different types of negative experiences that students have when using methods, the effects that these experiences have and how they relate to problematic use of methods and poor reflection practices. We end with implications for design education and design research.

Keywords

Design methodsDesign educationReflective practiceReflective abilityCase study
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 3001 - 3010
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Adams, R. S., Turns, J. and Atman, C. J. (2003) “Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice”, Design studies. Elsevier, 24(3), pp. 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, M. M. (2011) “45 Years with design methodology”, Journal of Engineering Design. Taylor & Francis, 22(5), pp. 293–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreasen, M. M., Hansen, C. T. and Cash, P. (2015) Conceptual design, Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Araujo, C. S. de (2001) Acquisition of product development tools in industry: a theoretical contribution, Lyngby, Denmark, Technical University of Denmark. Citeseer.Google Scholar
Birkhofer, H., Jänsch, J. and Kloberdanz, H. (2005) “An extensive and detailed view of the application of design methods and methodology in industry”, in DS 35: Proceedings ICED 05, the 15th International Conference on Engineering Design, Melbourne, Australia, 15.-18.08. 2005, pp. 276–277.Google Scholar
Bucciarelli, L. L. and Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994) Designing engineers. MIT press.Google Scholar
Cash, P. J. (2018) “Developing theory-driven design research”, Design Studies. Elsevier, 56, pp. 84–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crismond, D. P. and Adams, R. S. (2012) “The informed design teaching and learning matrix”, Journal of Engineering Education. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 101(4), p. 738.Google Scholar
Cross, N. and Roy, R. (1989) Engineering design methods. Wiley Chichester.Google Scholar
Currano, R. M., Steinert, M. and Leifer, L. J. (2011) “Characterizing reflective practice in design–what about those ideas you get in the shower?”, in DS 68-7: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Impacting Society through Engineering Design, Vol. 7: Human Behaviour in Design, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08. 2011, pp. 374–383.Google Scholar
Daalhuizen, J. et al. (2019) “An architecture of design doing: A framework for capturing the ever-evolving practice of design to drive organizational learning”, International Journal of Design, 13(1), pp. 37–52.Google Scholar
Daalhuizen, J. J. (2014) “Method Usage in Design: How methods function as mental tools for designers”.Google Scholar
Dorst, K. (2008) “Design research: a revolution-waiting-to-happen”, Design Studies. Elsevier Ltd, 29(1), pp. 4–11. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2007.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fresco, D. M. et al. (2002) “Distinct and overlapping features of rumination and worry: The relationship of cognitive production to negative affective states”, Cognitive Therapy and Research. Springer, 26(2), pp. 179–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricke, G. (1999) “Successful approaches in dealing with differently precise design problems”, Design Studies. Elsevier, 20(5), pp. 417–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gericke, K. et al. (2020) “Supporting designers: moving from method menagerie to method ecosystem”, Design Science. Cambridge University Press, 6.Google Scholar
Hébert, C. (2015) “Knowing and/or experiencing: a critical examination of the reflective models of John Dewey and Donald Schön”, Reflective Practice. Taylor & Francis, 16(3), pp. 361–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, T. E. and Andreasen, M. M. (2010) “Design methods in practice-beyond the'systematic approach'of Pahl & Beitz”, in DS 60: Proceedings of DESIGN 2010, the 11th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, pp. 21–28.Google Scholar
Joffe, H. (2012) “Thematic analysis”, Qualitative research methods in mental health and psychotherapy. Wiley Online Library, 1.Google Scholar
Kunrath, K., Cash, P., & Kleinsmann, M. (2020). Designers’ professional identity: personal attributes and design skills. Journal of Engineering Design, 31(6), 297–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyubomirsky, S. and Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1993) “Self-perpetuating properties of dysphoric rumination.”, Journal of personality and social psychology. American Psychological Association, 65(2), p. 339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, M. W. and Norman, D. (2020) “Changing Design Education for the 21st Century”, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation. Elsevier, 6(1), pp. 13–49.Google Scholar
Pahl, G. and Beitz, W. (2013) Engineering design: a systematic approach. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Papageorgiou, C. and Wells, A. (2004) Depressive rumination: Nature, theory and treatment. Wiley Online Library.Google Scholar
Pavlovich, K. (2007) “The development of reflective practice through student journals”, Higher Education Research & Development. Taylor & Francis, 26(3), pp. 281–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roozenburg, N. F. M. and Eekels, J. (1995) “Product design: fundamentals and methods”. CUMINCAD.Google Scholar
Schön, D. A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic books.Google Scholar
Trowler, V. et al. (2020) “Penitent performance, reconstructed rumination or induction: student strategies for the deployment of reflection in an extended degree programme”, Higher Education Research & Development. Taylor & Francis, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar