Search

This work scrutinizes the PhD research conducted on the changing role of the designers and co-design education through the lens of sustainability. As emphasized by various researchers, the designers’ role is less about ‘designing for’ but more about ‘designing with’ users [1, 2, 3]. This shift is caused mainly by the clear understanding of the fact that the active involvement of the users in design processes may lead to real innovation. However, it is seen that how to better facilitate the co-design sessions has not been integrated into the design education curricula [4]. Thus, this PhD research aims to develop a game-based toolkit (‘Co-design Facilitator’s Game’) that would inform, motivate and/or guide design students in the facilitation of the co-design sessions. In this poster, the topic itself and the tangible outcome of this PhD research, which is a phygital game-based toolkit, have been put under the microscope in relation to sustainability. During this PhD research, several sustainability issues have been encountered and strategies have been developed to cope with them. On the technocentric level, the first coping strategy was ‘dematerialization’, which is a crucial concept for environmental sustainability that aims to reduce the use of natural sources to prevent waste [5]. On the human-centric level, the participants’ contribution is recognized and attributed through small gifts and certificates, being one of the most essential principles of design justice [6]. The ‘Co-design Facilitator’s Game’ can be still improved in relation to sustainability. First, to be more inclusive, multiple senses will be engaged in this toolkit. Moreover, in order to break the linguistic hegemony, the game-based toolkit will be designed to allow transferability and adaptability to several contexts. Lastly, the research-through-design process of this game-based toolkit will continue with the active involvement of design students, designers, and design educators through co-design sessions.

There is a shared understanding that design educations’ conventional approaches need to be chal-lenged, however, most studies only present research on a micro level, that is, discusses innovations on a single course and neglect a holistic and strategic revision of design education including of the meso and macro levels. Therefore, this study adds to the discussion by presenting a critical litera-ture review that reflects on previously conducted systematic reviews and focus groups. The out-come of this procedure are ten scenarios that show possibilities for the future of design education mapped on a macro, meso, and micro framework. It was found that design education in the future could (and should) incorporate collaborations and awareness on a macro level; question conven-tional university structures; and un-tangle and clarify students’ knowledge acquisi-tion processes. By presenting these scenarios the authors hope to contribute to the discussion on what the future of design education should entail. ispartof: pages:1-10 ispartof: https://learnxdesign.net/lxd2021/ pages:1-10 ispartof: DRS LEARNxDESIGN 2021: 6th International Conference for Design Education Researchers location:Shandong University of Art & Design, Jinan, China (Virtual Conference) date:24 Sep - 26 Sep 2021 status: published

In recent years, the responsibilities of designers in industry have drastically shifted. One of these developments is that designers are increasingly growing into jobs where they need to facilitate innovation in multidisciplinary teams [1]. Correspondingly, educators advocate for an adaptation of design education in relation to the advances in industry and society [2], [3]. The question therefore is how to design the future of design education, and to what extent can we continue with existing practices when re-modeling education? How can we scrutinise curriculum reforms for developing resilience to the challenging future world circumstances? Traditionally, university curricula are changed by slowly introducing new knowledge through disciplinary research. By researching into and about design, the extent of specialized knowledge grows and alters the content of university curricula. Under this standard practice, programs update one course at a time for the related users (current students and faculty members), but hardly any other stakeholders are involved [4]. Moreover, most curricula reforms are designed at the course or department level and mostly neglect a strategic, holistic, and multidisciplinary approach [5]. By reviewing universities’ practices towards reforming their curricula worldwide, it was found that design programs can in fact benefit from incorporating design research methodologies into those procedures, specifically, empathising, benchmarking, questionnaires, design probes, focus groups, personas, prototyping, and the application of an iterative mindset. In other words, it was suggested that a designerly way of thinking was needed. The term ‘designerly’, articulated in the 1980s by design theorist Nigel Cross [6], hints at the use of design specific ways to know things and find knowledge. Already, Umeå Institute of Design (UID) in Sweden and Aalto University in Finland, utilised this approach to handling their curricula reform by prototyping solutions and making future decisions based on these prototypes [5]. In addition, by implementing a more human-centred approach in which all relevant stakeholders get involved in developing design propositions, this research wants to point out at the potential benefits of a designerly way of developing curricula. By re-considering traditional approaches regarding curricula reform practices, this paper presents recommendations for designing design education to define future university study programs. [1] T. A. Björklund, T. Keipi, and H. Maula, ‘Crafters, explorers, innovators, and co-creators: Narratives in designers’ identity work,’ Des. Stud., vol. 68, pp. 82–112, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2020.02.003. [2] D. A. Norman, ‘When You Come to a Fork in the Road, Take It: The Future of Design*,’ She Ji, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 343–348, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.sheji.2017.07.003. [3] L. Justice, ‘The Future of Design Education,’ Des. Manag. Rev., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 33–37, 2019, doi: 10.1111/drev.12159. [4] M. Gibbons, ‘What Kind of University ?,’ Lancet, 1997, doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(70)90419-8. [5] A. Valtonen, ‘Designing Universities of the Future,’ DRS2016 Futur. Think., vol. 2, pp. 1–16, 2016, doi: 10.21606/drs.2016.205. [6] N. Cross, ‘Designerly Ways of Knowing : Design Discipline,’ Des. Stud., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 221–227, 1982, [Online]. Available: https://larossa.co/cross_1982_designerlywaysofknowing.pdf.

"Multi-perspectivism as a philosophy of education" has a predominant role in the mission statement of Ghent University [1]. It opens up a path towards a critical and active participation into the society of today and the future. Within the framework of multi-perspectivism, a novel course has on "Co-creation" been set-up that is offered as an elective course in all educational programs of the university [2]. The course focuses on methods for creativity, transdisciplinary research, entrepreneurship, communication and collaboration, system thinking and design. The leading lecturers are members of the department of "Industrial Systems and Product Design" of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture. Students, researchers and lecturers from different faculties are actively participating in a transdisciplinary project to solve a real societal need. Each project brings all involved stakeholders – experts from different specialisms, designers and end-users – together in an iterative collaborative change process (using cocreation methods). Prototyping real-life experiences in a living space plays a central role as integration and communication method throughout the development cycle. During every iteration, a co-experience is obtained by all involved stakeholders through direct interaction with the prototype in a real "make" or "use" context. These interactions gradually reveal affordances and disturbances by iterative adaptations. This particular education method is illustrated by ongoing student project cases in the domain of health-care and societal problems. An overview will be given on how to identify and set-up projects, how students perform these projects, and on how the obtained knowledge and results are valuated and transferred back to society.

This paper reports on a study currently conducted in the scope of an Erasmus+ KA2 project on the subject of co-creation in design education. A case study was carried out on a third-year bachelor design engineering course (“Co-creation”) at which 48 students from different study disciplines, levels and countries worked together in groups to tackle societal challenges. This research aims to gain insights into students’ experiences and problems with regard to taking part in a multidisciplinary co-creation process by scrutinising student’s self- and peer-assessment reports. Findings refer to the essentials and challenges of multidisciplinary co-creation processes from a student perspective. In particular, soft skills were highlighted as fundamental skills while working with peers. Moreover, challenges in collaboration, specifically, in a remote learning environment during the COVID-19 pandemic, were noted. Recommendations were provided for design educators to ameliorate the multidisciplinary co-creation and learning environment in order to sufficiently prepare students for Industry 4.0.

Paper wraps up the basic intention of the conference which was to make an initial account on the issues of visual culture of the Balkans within the context of industrial modernization. Theory insights are combined with the arguments raised throughout the symposium.