A course for teaching design research methodology

Abstract Design research informs and supports practice by developing knowledge to improve the chances of producing successful products. Training in design research has been poorly supported. Design research uses human and natural/technical sciences, embracing all facets of design; its methods and tools are adapted from both these traditions. However, design researchers are rarely trained in methods from both the traditions. Research in traditional sciences focuses primarily on understanding phenomena related to human, natural, or technical systems. Design research focuses on supporting improvement of such systems, using understanding as a necessary but not sufficient step, and it must embrace methods for both understanding reality and developing support for its improvement. A one-semester, postgraduate-level, credited course that has been offered since 2002, entitled Methodology for Design Research, is described that teaches a methodology for carrying out research into design. Its steps are to clarify research success; to understand relevant phenomena of design and how these influence success; to use this to envision design improvement and develop proposals for supporting improvement; to evaluate support for its influence on success; and, if unacceptable, to modify, support, or improve the understanding of success and its links to the phenomena of design. This paper highlights some major issues about the status of design research and describes how design research methodology addresses these. The teaching material, model of delivery, and evaluation of the course on methodology for design research are discussed.

[1]  Yoram Reich,et al.  Layered models of research methodologies , 1994, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[2]  B. Skinner.  Is it behaviorism? , 1986, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[3]  Victor Kaptelinin,et al.  Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design , 2006, First Monday.

[4]  John R. Dixon,et al.  A review of research in mechanical engineering design. Part II: Representations, analysis, and design for the life cycle , 1989 .

[5]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  The Validation Square: How Does One Verify and Validate a Design Method? , 2006 .

[6]  Andrew T. Olewnik,et al.  On Validating Engineering Design Decision Support Tools , 2005, Concurr. Eng. Res. Appl..

[7]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  Instructional Design Theories and Models : An Overview of Their Current Status , 1983 .

[8]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  An approach to functional synthesis of mechanical design Concepts: Theory, applications, and emerging research issues , 1996, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[9]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[10]  S. Thompson.  Social Learning Theory , 2008 .

[11]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. , 1957 .

[12]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  Understanding the Knowledge Needs of Designers During Design Process in Industry , 2008, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[13]  Frank-Lothar Krause,et al.  The Future of Product Development , 2007 .

[14]  Farrokh Mistree,et al.  VALIDATING DESIGN METHODS & RESEARCH: THE VALIDATION SQUARE , 2000 .

[15]  Pj Clarkson,et al.  Engineering design - theory and practice. A symposium in honour of Ken Wallace , 2005 .

[16]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Formal Engineering Design Synthesis: Function-Based Synthesis Methods in Engineering Design , 2001 .

[17]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  Validation of design methods: lessons from medicine , 2006 .

[18]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  Formal Engineering Design Synthesis , 2005 .

[19]  Daniel D. Frey,et al.  Validation of Design Methods and Theories: Lessons from Medicine , 2006 .

[20]  Amaresh Chakrabarti,et al.  A design research methodology , 1995 .

[21]  Kværner Oil,et al.  THE ‘ VALIDATION SQUARE ’ – VALIDATING DESIGN METHODS – by , 2022 .

[22]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  DRM, a Design Research Methodology , 2009 .

[23]  Gokula A Vijaykumar.  Understanding Knowledge Needs And Processes In Design , 2009 .

[24]  John R. Dixon,et al.  A review of research in mechanical engineering design. Part I: Descriptive, prescriptive, and computer-based models of design processes , 1989 .

[25]  Petra Badke-Schaub,et al.  Designers : the key to successful product development , 1998 .

[26]  Amaresh Chakrabarti.  The Future of Product Development in India , 2007 .

[27]  Marco Cantamessa.  Design research in perspective: a meta-research upon ICED97 and ICED99 , 2001 .

[28]  Kristin L. Wood,et al.  Function-based synthesis methods in engineering design: state of the art, methods analysis, and visions for the future , 2001 .

[29]  Saeema Ahmed,et al.  Understanding the use and reuse of experience in engineering design , 2001 .

[30]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Teaching engineering design research , 2005 .

[31]  Steve Culley,et al.  The application of an automatic document classification system to aid the organisers of ICED01 , 2001 .