应对设计学博士研究的不确定性

IF 1.8 2区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.sheji.2023.05.005
Meredith Davis (Emerita Professor) , Luke Feast , Jodi Forlizzi , Ken Friedman , Ali Ilhan , Wendy Ju , Gerd Kortuem , Maria Hellström Reimer , Carlos Teixeira
{"title":"应对设计学博士研究的不确定性","authors":"Meredith Davis (Emerita Professor) ,&nbsp;Luke Feast ,&nbsp;Jodi Forlizzi ,&nbsp;Ken Friedman ,&nbsp;Ali Ilhan ,&nbsp;Wendy Ju ,&nbsp;Gerd Kortuem ,&nbsp;Maria Hellström Reimer ,&nbsp;Carlos Teixeira","doi":"10.1016/j.sheji.2023.05.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The Future of Design Education working group on doctoral education included doctoral supervisors from nine programs around the world and addressed the indeterminacy of standards for the PhD in Design. Internationally, “contributions to knowledge” under the PhD degree title range from evidence-based investigations documented in a dissertation to personal reflections on making artifacts. In some programs, quantitative and qualitative research methods are taught; in others, there is no instruction in methods. The working group suggested that reflection on one’s own creative production is the role of the professional master’s degree and recommended standards for two doctoral programs—the PhD and the Doctor of Design (DDes). The group defined the PhD as addressing unresolved problems with the goal of generalizable knowledge or theory for the field. It described the DDes as a professional practice degree in which research is done in a practice setting to frame a specific opportunity space, guide in-process design decisions, or evaluate outcomes. DDes findings do not claim generalizability and result in “cases.” The working group discussed methods, sampling, standards of evidence and claims, ethics, research writing, and program management.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":37146,"journal":{"name":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","volume":"9 2","pages":"Pages 283-307"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Responding to the Indeterminacy of Doctoral Research in Design\",\"authors\":\"Meredith Davis (Emerita Professor) ,&nbsp;Luke Feast ,&nbsp;Jodi Forlizzi ,&nbsp;Ken Friedman ,&nbsp;Ali Ilhan ,&nbsp;Wendy Ju ,&nbsp;Gerd Kortuem ,&nbsp;Maria Hellström Reimer ,&nbsp;Carlos Teixeira\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.sheji.2023.05.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The Future of Design Education working group on doctoral education included doctoral supervisors from nine programs around the world and addressed the indeterminacy of standards for the PhD in Design. Internationally, “contributions to knowledge” under the PhD degree title range from evidence-based investigations documented in a dissertation to personal reflections on making artifacts. In some programs, quantitative and qualitative research methods are taught; in others, there is no instruction in methods. The working group suggested that reflection on one’s own creative production is the role of the professional master’s degree and recommended standards for two doctoral programs—the PhD and the Doctor of Design (DDes). The group defined the PhD as addressing unresolved problems with the goal of generalizable knowledge or theory for the field. It described the DDes as a professional practice degree in which research is done in a practice setting to frame a specific opportunity space, guide in-process design decisions, or evaluate outcomes. DDes findings do not claim generalizability and result in “cases.” The working group discussed methods, sampling, standards of evidence and claims, ethics, research writing, and program management.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation\",\"volume\":\"9 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 283-307\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405872623000400\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"She Ji-The Journal of Design Economics and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405872623000400","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

设计教育的未来博士教育工作组包括来自世界各地九个项目的博士生导师,并解决了设计博士标准的不确定性问题。在国际上,博士学位头衔下的“知识贡献”从论文中记录的循证调查到对制造文物的个人反思。在一些课程中,教授定量和定性研究方法;在另一些案例中,没有方法方面的指导。工作组建议,反思自己的创意是专业硕士学位的作用,并为两个博士项目——博士和设计博士(DDes)——推荐标准。该小组将博士学位定义为解决未解决的问题,目标是为该领域提供可推广的知识或理论。它将DD描述为一种专业实践学位,在该学位中,研究是在实践环境中进行的,以确定特定的机会空间,指导过程中的设计决策,或评估结果。DDes的研究结果并不声称具有普遍性,而是导致了“案例”。工作组讨论了方法、抽样、证据和主张的标准、伦理、研究写作和项目管理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Responding to the Indeterminacy of Doctoral Research in Design

The Future of Design Education working group on doctoral education included doctoral supervisors from nine programs around the world and addressed the indeterminacy of standards for the PhD in Design. Internationally, “contributions to knowledge” under the PhD degree title range from evidence-based investigations documented in a dissertation to personal reflections on making artifacts. In some programs, quantitative and qualitative research methods are taught; in others, there is no instruction in methods. The working group suggested that reflection on one’s own creative production is the role of the professional master’s degree and recommended standards for two doctoral programs—the PhD and the Doctor of Design (DDes). The group defined the PhD as addressing unresolved problems with the goal of generalizable knowledge or theory for the field. It described the DDes as a professional practice degree in which research is done in a practice setting to frame a specific opportunity space, guide in-process design decisions, or evaluate outcomes. DDes findings do not claim generalizability and result in “cases.” The working group discussed methods, sampling, standards of evidence and claims, ethics, research writing, and program management.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Editorial Reconceptualizing the Notion of Values in Design Talk Value Dimensions in Creative Collaborations for Social Innovation The Tools of the Trade: Cultures, Devices, and Valuation Practices in Urban Design Creating and Testing a Guideline for Governing Blockchain Ecosystems: A Study Informed by Design Science
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1