Theory and practice: reconciling design-as analogies with 'real' talk in design education

UTSePress Research/Manakin Repository

Search UTSePress Research

Advanced Search


My Account

Show simple item record Lasserre, Barbara en_US
dc.contributor.editor en_US 2012-02-02T11:05:15Z 2012-02-02T11:05:15Z 2010 en_US
dc.identifier 2009004474 en_US
dc.identifier.citation Lasserre Barbara 2010, 'Theory and practice: reconciling design-as analogies with 'real' talk in design education', Intellect Books, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 17-29. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1753-5190 en_US
dc.identifier.other C1 en_US
dc.description.abstract This article focuses on two linguistic forms of discourse that are essential to the way knowledge is created in the discipline of design. One form is that found in academic written texts, and at the other end of the spectrum, spoken texts such as those of the design critique, or `crit?. Students at tertiary institutions are asked to decode both, but they perceive them differently, and often feel that academic texts are unrelated to the perceived `real? talk, such as that found in the spoken crit, about producing and evaluating designs. Examples of crit discourse are set against examples taken from the literature on design, and in particular in texts wherein the processes and purpose of design are described by way of analogy. These texts are referred to as `design-as? analogies, as an attempt is made to find a way to point to existing connections hitherto not explored between the two forms of discourse. Ultimately, an intricate connection between the discourse of the crits and the more formally expressed concepts of design theorists will be shown. This article refers to three examples of `design-as? analogies, namely design as bricolage (Louridas 1999); design as moral problem solving (Dorst and Royakkers 2006); and designing as disclosure (Newton 2004). The authors' explanations of these analogies are held up against the spoken texts of the crits, and an investigation is made of how their theories are enacted in this type of discourse. Some pedagogical implications of the findings are suggested, with activities that could help students to bridge the perceived gap between the metadiscourse of the literature and the discourse of the studio. en_US
dc.language en_US
dc.publisher Intellect Books en_US
dc.title Theory and practice: reconciling design-as analogies with 'real' talk in design education en_US
dc.parent Journal of Writing in Creative Practice en_US
dc.journal.volume 3 en_US
dc.journal.number 1 en_US
dc.publocation Bristol UK en_US
dc.identifier.startpage 17 en_US
dc.identifier.endpage 29 en_US DVCTLE.ELSSA Centre en_US
dc.conference Verified OK en_US
dc.for 190300 en_US
dc.personcode 000253 en_US
dc.percentage 100 en_US Journalism and Professional Writing en_US
dc.classification.type FOR-08 en_US
dc.edition en_US
dc.custom en_US en_US
dc.location.activity en_US
dc.description.keywords discourse, cognitive metaphor, analogy, design as, design education, design critiqu en_US
dc.staffid en_US
dc.staffid 000253 en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record