The Futures of Design Pedagogy, Learning, and Education

Proceedings of DRS2018 - Catalyst , 2018

The present paper intends to present an overview the status quo of design education, pointing out aspects from its creation and evolution over timed. It was made a short analysis that confronts the teaching model with the dynamics in which the world is today. It also pointed out the characteristics of a "new" designer, active in the creative economy, but not yet trained in educational institutions. Finally, it presents possible solutions for the remodeling of the teaching and learning process with focus on projects and real problems and points to a new role of the teacher and the learning environment.

Developments in Design Research and Practice, 2022

The chapters in this section of this publication share a common denominator. From various perspectives, they deal with design education as transcending the narrow confines of a nascent design discipline. They support the notion that designerly ways of knowing require the synthesis of cognitive skills that have relevance to a wide spectrum of contexts. Thus, they represent a trend in the right direction and confirm the shift in the epistemology of design towards a wider social role for design. The chapters deal specifically with teaching and learning issues that enhance the role of design in this new context and reveal the concerns of the authors as educators to seek instructional ways that can support this shift.

2015

Government increasingly recognises design thinking as "a ubiquitous capability for innovation" (Commonwealth of Australia, 2013:90) to support a viable manufacturing sector in the Asian century, this represents an opportunity for Design and Technology teachers to provide leadership in the cultivation of these generic skills, behaviours and mindsets through secondary school education in Australia.

Dialectic, 2018

For guidance on citations see FAQs.

DS 110: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (EPDE 2021), 2021

In recent years, the responsibilities of designers have drastically shifted as the world we live in becomes increasingly more complex. Correspondingly, educators advocate for an adaptation of design education in relation to the shifting economy, technological and societal advances. The question therefore is how to design the future of design education in a way that it corresponds better to these shifts. Traditionally, university curricula are updated on a department level together with faculty members. Under this localized practice, programs update one course at a time. During this routine hardly any other stakeholders are involved. By reviewing universities' practices around the world towards reforming their curricula, it was found that design programs can benefit from shifting towards a systemic, design-based, and research-through-design approach, specifically, by using design research methodologies, namely, co-creation, stakeholder involvement, questionnaires, trend analysis, benchmarking, focus groups, interviews, prototyping and the application of an iterative mindset. In agreement with Cross (1982), the authors call for a more designerly way of thinking in order to update design curricula. By reconsidering conventional approaches regarding curricula reform practices, this paper presents recommendations for designing design education to define future university study programs.

Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference

This study aims to understand the main issues in design education and discuss solutions. We conducted two workshops on the state of implementation of design in the Singaporean education system at the Design Education Summit, a conference for educators. We found that the main issues were the inclusion of design education within curriculum and change of stakeholder mindsets. Several solutions were discussed, such as ways to introduce design as part of the organization culture. We summarize results into action items and recommendations.

2011

The global impact of ever-increasing mass consumerism set against the reality of finite resources, posits design with the responsibility as well as the ability to influence consumerism at every level, however to do this demands changing the way designers think, which in turn means re-educating, re-directing design and moving to Design Futures. The following quote is taken from a 2010 briefing paper by Professor Tony Fry: "Rather than looking at design education from the perspective of the design industry, or towards it, the Design Futures frame of reference is wider. It looks at it refracted through university education in general, beyond the industry and out into the future. This point of view does not ignore practicalities but rejects the notion that design education is purely vocational and pragmatic. Rather it asserts that first and foremost it has to be an education. Design Futures is firmly committed to the creation of educated designers. What this means is an education whereby the designer understands the world in which they are going to practice -socially, culturally, economically, politically, environmentally. It is predicated on the assumption that they have to know what they are doing, why and with what consequence. More than this, designers have to understand what design is and does in a wider worldly sense, have a basic understanding of its history beyond the narrow characterisations delivered by design history. Above all, graduate designers must realise design's implication in forming futures, and their own responsibility in this context. Students still have to acquire a wide range of technical skills BUT they have to know how to direct them and to what ends. Every educated designer needs to be equipped with a strategic sensibility, so they can steer their career path in ethically and economically viable directions. For this to be possible students need to be adequately educated so that their economic and employment opportunities will expand not contract! A design education has to be understood as expanding horizons and qualifying young people for more than just a conventional design job." The paper will discuss the process of developing an existing 3 Year Bachelor of Design degree based upon the service industry model of the past into a new 4 Year Bachelor of Design degree with embedded honours and the underlying Design Futures philosophy as the foundation of this new degree.

The landscape of design practice is undergoing substantial shifts in design thinking, problem solving, research and development. Pedagogical strategies for design teaching are required for 21 st century learning and paramount to confront the challenges present today. A quarter to semester conversion at The Ohio State University provides the Department of Design an opportunity to critically examine this emerging landscape and capitalize on the changes to offer a progressive approach to (design) education. This process enabled an established Department of Design to evaluate, reconsider, and deconstruct a forty-year-old curriculum. Advanced technologies, the growth and interconnectedness of a global culture, and global economies have cultivated new opportunities for design. An innovative and holistic design curriculum must reflect these expanding horizons responsibly. Unpacking the design curriculum methodically empowers the Department to propose new programmatic goals and objectives reflective of the new design terrain while negotiating, redefining and converging from diverse viewpoints.

IASDR 2017

To prepare students to imagine desirable futures amidst current planetary level challenges, design educators must think and act in new ways. In this paper, we describe a pilot study that illustrates how educators might teach K-12 students and university design students to situate their making within transitional times in a volatile and exponentially changing world. We describe how to best situate students to align design thinking and learning with future foresight. Here we present a pilot test and evaluate how a university-level Dexign Futures course content, approach, and scaffolded instructional materials-can be adapted for use in K-12 Design Learning Challenges. We describe the K-12 design-based learning challenges/experiences developed and implemented by the Design Learning Network (DLN). The Dexign Futures course we describe in this paper is a required course for third year undergraduate students in the School of Design at Carnegie Mellon University. The "x" signifies a different type of design that aligns short-term action with long-term goals. The course integrates design thinking and learning with long-horizon future scenario foresight. Broadly speaking, we ask how might portions of a design course be taught and experienced by teachers and students of two different demographics: within the university (Design Undergraduates) and in K-12 (via DLN). This pilot study is descriptive in nature; in future work, we seek to assess learning outcomes across university and K-12 courses. We believe the approach described is relevant for lifelong learners (e.g., postgraduate level , career development, transitional adult education).

In today's dynamic world, it is imperative to monitor and map trends that have far-reaching impact on the larger society and the resulting implications on preparing design students. Definitely the future requires a different skill set. Employers are more and more looking towards hiring quick learners who can easily swing from one role to another and in the process be more productive for an organization; a definite shift from specialized subject skills that are the primary outcome of a design education, towards life skills. This paper outlines the results of a qualitative study examining-Design education: what needs to change-Employability trends: expectation from a young graduate-Potential skill sets for the future This paper further discusses the need to reconstruct the education model to prepare a student to respond quickly to opportunities for expanding the influence of design in places we can't yet imagine.