Collaborative and Multidisciplinary Designing: Contemporary

Challenges for Design Studio Teaching

Author:
Talbot, Jonathan
Publication details:
Proceedings of ConnectED 2007 International Conference on Design Education
9780646481470 (ISBN)
Event details:
ConnectED 2007 International Conference on Design Education
Sydney, Australia
Publication Date:
2007
DOI:
[Link]
License:
[Link]
Link to license to see what you are allowed to do with this resource.

Downloaded from [Link] in https://

Collaborative and multidisciplinary designing: contemporary

University Of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION

Industrial Design education in Australia tends to Design is as a useful way of dealing with particular classes
promote a comprehensive view of the role of designers; of complicated problems and it has been recognised that the
commercially aware form-givers who can deal with the thinking and processes that constitute designing are
technical, material and production issues related to the applicable to a widening range of challenges that arise in
implementation of their designs. The Design Studio contemporary society. Buchanan (2005) categorises the
experience is generally regarded as the central educational scope of design practice under “four orders”. He describes
device which is used to expose students to the principles, these as: a first order of design which focuses on problems of
practices and possibilities of designing. It is also seen as a communication; a second order of design which focuses on
venue for acquiring understandings of various concepts and the problem of constructing artifacts; a third order which is
disciplines related to the field, and learning to integrate these concerned with the design of activities services and
within designs. Collaborative and multidisciplinary activities processes; and the fourth order of design which deals with
are often used within the design studio to connect students systems, environments and organizations. He argues that the
with these contributing disciplines. While much has been third and fourth orders are more recent additions to the gamut
written on the nature of the studio as an educational setting, of design’s areas of application.
this paper identifies some of the challenges in contemporary This framework provides a useful starting point for the ideas
design studio teaching using examples from an Australian presented in this paper. Industrial design practice became
university context. One central aspect of these challenges is established during the 20th Century as one of the fields
concerned with Buchanan’s second order of design. Its
the manifold nature of learning outcomes intended to be
primary focus has been the design of physical, tangible
gained through the studio experience. Each student is
products and its contribution might be described as
expected to develop a capacity to define and resolve design
complementing engineering design (and other contributing
problems; to understand and internalise the discipline’s ways
disciplines) to make these physical products accessible,
of operating and to appreciate and identify with (industrial)
desirable and usable for users/consumers. The scope of the
design as a discipline in its own right. In addition, each industrial designer’s concern spans engineering issues and
student has to develop some understanding of particular product functional capability as well as emotive aspects of
knowledge areas related to the design of products and product ‘appeal’ (aesthetics) and perceived quality and value.
systems; the social, cultural, technological, commercial and Industrial Design, like other design disciplines, applies a
environmental where-with-all that is required in designing. creative, solution-focused approach to the structuring and
Further, the studio typically seeks to foster the students’ resolution of the multi-faceted problems within its domain.
ability to collaborate with other designers and other specialist And, like other design disciplines, Industrial Design
disciplines in the corporate activity of designing, developing education tends to follow established models based around
and distributing new products. The management of these the design studio as the central learning/teaching context for
different types of learning outcome is being affected by developing appropriate skills and knowledge. Green and
issues such as the changing technology used in design work, Bonollo (2003) describe the historical development of the
the bourgeoning complexity of products and systems (and studio-based teaching of industrial design and they identify
services) being designed and the increasing sophistication of changes in the nature and complexity of many industrial
all the disciplines involved in product development and their design problems. These changes are caused mainly by the
own methods of inquiry and knowledge-building. This paper growing recognition that the outputs of industrial design tend
presents the view that contemporary industrial design is now not to be discreet artifacts, but rather sub-components of
a field of such breadth and complexity that the traditional increasingly complex material and social systems.
undergraduate studio teaching model is unable to provide a It does appear that, in the 21st Century, it is difficult to
comprehensive educational response. characterise industrial design as a strictly ‘Second order’
activity. Much of contemporary industrial design practice
carries with it an involvement with ‘third’ and ‘fourth order’
problems. A question for educators is how our educational
settings might deal with the implications of this. The

1
understanding of design activity, the qualities that In designing, there is a division between skills and
characterize the expert designer and the educational activities knowledge that are accepted as part of the ‘design core’ and
that support development of these qualities are the subject of skills and knowledge that can be seen as belonging to other
various, developing lines of scholarly inquiry (Dorst 2005). It disciplines. The actual point of division can be quite difficult
seems however that educational models in industrial design to define. For example, in order to propose a design that can
are still, in general, following the established conventions of be implemented, a designer needs to know ‘enough’ about a
studio-based teaching and seeking to adapt these to this particular material and manufacturing process. The answer to
expanded design agenda. Industrial design has always the question: How much is enough? depends on a whole
involved an engagement with various disciplines that range of issues to do with the context of the work such as the
contribute to the development and distribution of products. stage of the design process and the expectations and
And engaging students in cross-disciplinary collaborations capabilities of others involved in the project. This example
has long been seen as a way of allowing them to establish a considers one aspect of designing. Along each of the many
base-line, generalist knowledge of other disciplines and and varied dimensions of a design problem which involve
allowing them to learn about their role in relation to each other disciplines, this division exists; a point of departure
discipline’s specialists. Many educational challenges in from the designer’s knowledge-in-practice and the specialist
today’s design climate stem from the expanding number of domain. These points may be explicitly stated, tacitly known
disciplines which are connected to industrial design activity, or actively negotiated in the realization of a design.
their own expanded complexity and the increasing Conventional educational settings tend to isolate the
sophistication of their own methods and processes. This individual ‘learner’. They seek to help to strengthen the
paper gives some examples of responses to these challenges individual’s ‘core’ of design knowledge and skills and then
based on experiences in the Bachelor of Industrial Design ‘extend’ her/him along the various disciplinary dimensions.
Program at the University of NSW (UNSW). These will The UNSW program was originally structured to give a
relate primarily to the Australian context but the implications reasonably complete representation of the types of disciplines
will also apply elsewhere. which contribute ‘second order design problems’. It linked to
these disciplines very effectively through formal course
delivery across science, engineering and commerce and the
I. A ‘COMPREHENSIVE’ DESIGN EDUCATION
integrating activities of the studio. You could say it sought to
The Bachelor of Industrial Design at UNSW was ‘stretch’ all students quite extensively along well-defined
established in 1990. Rather than being based on an Art disciplinary dimensions. The studio class was (and still is)
School background, the 4 year program was developed pivotal in allowing students to explore, develop and
within a faculty of architecture with strong connections to understand the links between their own knowledge and the
faculties of science, engineering and commerce. The program knowledge, processes and practices of other disciplines.
involved a studio-based core with complementary studies in Collaborative projects with marketing, engineering and
various specific disciplines and contributing knowledge materials students not only served to model future
areas. This is a well-established model for industrial design professional activity, but they help students to ‘work out’ the
education where the studio supports the learning of design scope of their discipline and their own strengths and
process skills and knowledge as well as the integration and weaknesses within that scope. Industry-linked studio
application of understanding of various contributing projects have also had an important role in this by exposing
disciplines such as materials science, engineering, human students to the contributing disciplines within participating
factors and marketing. organizations. This function of the studio is common to most
The aim was to provide students with a comprehensive industrial design programs but it is particularly important in
experience of design and its role with regard to the the integrated model that was established at UNSW.
commercial objectives of organizations, the needs of their
customers and the technology of manufacturing and
II. INDUSTRIAL DESIGN’S EXPANDED AGENDA
distributing products. The program also aimed to equip
students with a fairly high level of baseline knowledge across In the 17 years since its introduction, there have been a
the various disciplines covered. Successful graduates from number of periodic revisions of the UNSW Industrial Design
this program had particular areas of strength but they would program; each responding to a range of forces for change.
be required to also show an ‘all-round’ capability which Among the most challenging forces has been the expansion
allowed them to contribute to the full breadth of design and change across the range of knowledge areas with which
issues. This concern for all-round capability rather than the design discipline interacts. Within the studio classes there
focusing solely on the ‘front-end style wizard’ has tended to has been a parallel, more organic evolution. While overall
be a characteristic of Industrial design education in Australia. changes in the Studio courses have been linked to the formal
It appears to be linked to the relatively small scale of local program revisions, ongoing review and development
manufacturing enterprises and design practices and the processes have continually re-shaped each semester’s
resultant need for versatility among team members. I suspect offerings. As importantly, the studio has been influenced
it is also linked to a broader pragmatic leaning within through the recruitment of staff, their developing research
Australian culture. interests and their own cross-disciplinary networks. One
result of these changes is that new dimensions have been

2
added to the integrated course model and previously ‘minor’ internationally. But one has to consider how the expanded
dimensions, have been given greater emphasis within the skill and knowledge base involved affects students’
program. Various studio teachers have embraced different experiences of other aspects of the program and the overall
emerging themes in contemporary industrial design and have outcomes generated.
woven these into their studio courses, often using action
research models to document evaluate their developments.
Some examples of these are briefly described below:
III. THE ‘INTEGRATED’ MODEL AND SOME ALTERNATIVES
A. The green imperative As the demands on, and impact of, industrial design activity
The relationships between industrial design and the have shifted from focus on the discrete product to include the
environmental impact of mass consumption have gained level of socio-technical system it has become increasingly
greater importance in design education in the latter part of the difficult to present a cohesive, integrated model of industrial
20th Century. Developments in this area have been reflected design in which the design student can gain adequate
in the changes to the UNSW program. Earlier Studio work command of all the various dimensions involved. In the
might have focused on ‘eco’ materials and life cycle analysis Australian context there appears to remain an expectation
issues whereas more recent work is concerned with product- that a student can emerge from a four year undergraduate
service systems and related resource implications (Ramirez, program with an ‘all-round’ capability that prepares them to
Andrews and Tonkinwise 2004). This kind of development develop as commercially aware form-givers who can deal
opens up a new range of methodological and educational with the technical, material and production issues related to
dimensions. the implementation of their designs. Relatively few industrial
design graduates in Australia pursue postgraduate study
B. New manufacturing within design schools; they tend to broaden out into other
In the same vein, changes in the technology and areas. Given a four-year window of undergraduate
management of manufacturing have had to be incorporated education, is it feasible to present an integrated experience of
into the program. Green and Bonollo (ibid) map out some of studio learning and related courses that adequately represents
these developments; from design-for-manufacture and design contemporary industrial design and allows the development
for disassembly through to mass customization and lean and of adequate competence across all the discipline dimensions
agile manufacturing. They note that these “compete for represented? My concern is that this is only possible when
consideration within the design studio” working within a fairly narrow and outmoded view of what
industrial design is. I would argue that the UNSW program
C. User-system interaction has departed from an integrated model to one where it is less
This is another example of a changing dimension in the concerned with comprehensive exposure of student to all the
industrial design paradigm. It may be helpful to expand on major disciplines that contribute to design. It as taken on a
the developments in this area and related changes in the hybrid form where, through its discipline-based courses and
UNSW program. Since the establishment of the program, studio projects, it still seeks to establish the ‘all-rounder’
Human Factors/Ergonomics has been taught in discrete capability in relation to materials, production and commercial
specialist courses as well as within the studio classes. The objectives. But the studio carries the dual role of integrating
role of these was to set out the principles of physical and these capabilities into design projects as well as exposing
cognitive interaction with products and systems and the students to some of the expanding number of emerging
application of these within design activity. By the early 90s alternative views of design and designing. This makes the
product usability was seen as a key issue. The developing range of cross-disciplinary involvements across the program
range of tools and processes related to user-centred-design difficult to manage from semester to semester and difficult to
were being incorporated into the courses and studio projects. link to associated coursework outside the studio. A current
Towards the end of the 90s, and over the past few years, danger that we face is that some students may develop a
concern for a more formal consideration of affective fragmented view of design and have difficulty in articulating
responses to designs has permeated the human factors and and pursuing a sound approach to defining and resolving
design fields. Methods derived from the social sciences have problems. In response to this, Green and Bonnollo (2003)
been employed in design research and practice and these too propose adoption of a more systematic and structured
have been reflected in the teaching of human methods framework to anchor and inform student
factors/ergonomics and in the design studio classes. The progression through studio projects. Aspects of this have
impact of these changes on studio projects is profound. In the been introduced in the UNSW program but a wide range of
case of ‘affective human factors’, project briefings have been methods is required in order to support the range themes and
founded on a cultural discovery process rather than a client- processes explored through the studio courses. Teaching staff
driven requirement for a new product. Contributing have also not established a uniform overall approach and
disciplines and collaborators have included psychologists, common descriptors required to reinforce this framework
social researchers and media professionals (Talbot and across the program.
Pandolfo 2003; Bernabei and Talbot 2002). These projects Another model is to allow elective pathways within the
have been valuable educational experiences and have yielded design program so that students can focus on an area of
results that have been highly regarded both in Australia and specialization giving them a more cohesive experience of

3
fewer particular design fields and associated disciplines. specialist pathways through which they explore the links
This does ‘cut against’ the Australian tendency to develop between their design learning and a particular specialized
the ‘all-rounder’. field. This is not typical of Australian industrial design
Feijs and Kyffin (2003) outline another model which has programs. Context/Competency based learning such as the
been established at Eindhoven University of Technology. TU Eindhoven model represent a huge departure from the
Citing changes in the industrial design paradigm similar to current UNSW model. Such an approach if used here might
those noted in this paper, they outline a context-based need to be aligned with a particular, and perhaps narrower,
program centred around social themes or units of: home, range of contexts due to the population base and scale of
entertainment, communication, health, mobility and work. Australian industry. More likely, such a program would be
This involves a complete re-aligning of curricula around the networked internationally. This might be a workable option.
themes. This is attractive in the way it focuses the context of To consider an even larger shift, perhaps the time is coming
learning activities. This kind of program, compared to when design learning can be ‘redistributed’ across the
Australian design schools, appears to require a large ‘critical various contributing disciplines which influence new product
mass’ of students, staff and resources to provide a suitably and system development. This might involve a kind of
diverse range of learning modules. It should also be noted dismantling of industrial design as a separate discipline in
that the TU Eindhoven program is aligned to the theme of lieu of development of design as a strong capability within
‘ambient intelligence/ intelligent products’ and so is the various related fields. As design educators we need to
presenting industrial design with a particular ‘leaning’ (albeit explore the possible future models with some urgency to
a far-reaching one). ensure that our students will to be able to equip themselves
for the rapid changes ahead.

IV. CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

The Bachelor of Industrial Design at UNSW has changed Bernabei, R and Talbot, J., 2002, Terra Nova: reflections of
from a comprehensive, integrated program to a hybrid blend student design work as exhibited in the Salone Satellite
2001, in Collina, L. and Simonelli, G. (Eds) Designing
of ‘traditional core content’ and new knowledge areas and Designers: Design for a local, global world –
practices emerging within the field. This change has been International Convention of University courses in
brought about through periodic overall revision as well as Design 3rd Edition, p249-255, Politecnico di Milano
incremental development of studio courses. It can be argued Publishers
that the program in its current form provides students with a Buchanan. R. 2005, Design as Inquiry: The Common, Future
and Current Ground of Design in Redmond, J., Durling,
good ‘all-round’ foundation and fosters engagement with D. and de Bono, A. (Eds) FutureGround, Proceedings of
new changes in industrial design’s scope of application. the Design Research Society International Conference
However, I would suggest that this trajectory of program Melbourne.
development has its limits as the capacity of students and Dorst, K. 2005 Investigation of the Nature of Design
staff to negotiate the widening range of relevant knowledge Expertise, in Redmond, J., Durling, D. and de Bono, A.
(Eds) FutureGround, Proceedings of the Design
continues to be stretched. New educational models need to be Research Society International Conference, Melbourne.
considered. If UNSW is a representative case, it seems that Feijs, L. and Kyffin, S. 2003, The Industrial Design Program
industrial design schools in the Australian context need to and Faculty in Eindhoven: Competence based learning
review their focus on educating the ‘all-rounder’. Perhaps and designed intelligence, in Collina, L. and Simonelli,
the shortest path to a new model for UNSW is to reconfigure G. (Eds) Designing Designers: Design Schools as
Factories of Knowledge–International Convention of
the hybrid model. This might be done by revising the make- University courses in Design 4th Edition, Politecnico di
up of the ‘traditional core content’ so that it reflects the Milano Publishers
profile of the ‘design specialist’ rather than the ‘product Green, L. and Benollo, E. 2003, Studio-Based Teaching:
design/development generalist’ This involves the challenge History and Advantages in Teaching Design, World
of articulating a more essential set of foundation Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education
Vol 2, No2 p1-4
characteristics of the discipline that will still allow students to Ramirez, M, Andrews, T and Tonkinwise, C. Designerly PSS
create a platform from which they can continue to engage Design: Orientating designers towards sustainable system
effectively with the rapid changes surrounding new product outcomes, In van den Berg, C and Tukker, A. Eds 2004.
and system development. This is not a trivial task. As design Product Service Systems: Practical Value -Proceedings of the
is learned through its application- its essence cannot be 2nd International SusProNet Conference. Delft Netherlands
distilled from its context- it is difficult to envisage the Talbot, J. and Pandolfo, B. 2003, Enhancing investigation
and insight in design studio projects: ‘The great divide’-
facilitation of foundation learning that will empower students a studio project case study, in Collina, L. and Simonelli,
to grapple with an increasing diversity of complex design G. (Eds) Designing Designers: Design Schools as
tasks within a 4 year undergraduate program. Perhaps it is Factories of Knowledge–International Convention of
time to consider alternative models which accept a greater University courses in Design 4th Edition, Politecnico di
degree of fragmentation/specialization within the field of Milano Publishers
industrial design. Many programs allow students to pursue