Discussing – Jono

Introduction

 

When I get ready to talk to people, I spend two thirds of the time thinking what they want to hear and one third thinking about what I want to say.”

Abraham Lincoln

Definition

Discussing ¹: Verb

• to consider or examine in speech or writing
• speak with others about (something); talk (something) over in detail

Preface

The design and architectural professions tend to be a combination of passion, creativity and tenacity with the rigors of discipline, structure and order. Strong communication skills are vital in a service industry to present, explain, support, critique, defend and supplement design thinking through reasoned argument and dialogue.   

 

Discussing

 

“Language in all its forms is a most powerful tool in problem solving.”

                                                                         Rubenstein

Language

This posting will focus on how we as humans comprehend language and which forms of the English language influences our thoughts. What I am searching for is how those involved in a discussion extract meaning from thought, and how the form of language influences that form of thought.

Intra-personal discussion

As design professionals, we discuss our design thoughts and generating principles with ourselves, reframe problems and re-asses the implications of our own design thinking.

Inter-personal discussion

As design professionals, we use speech to convey complex mental representations from ourselves to others across dimensions of time and space. These could be with clients, approving authorities, sub-consultants, contractors or even the community at large and eventually the users. We cannot consider our course subject of ‘Design Thinking’ unless we consider language and its use whilst discussing design.

Brief History of Language

In classical Greece Plato and Aristotle considered language and its effects, as did St. Augustine in the later classical Roman period. In 1582 the Academie Della Crusca was formed with the specific task of defining the Italian language, eventually publishing a dictionary in 1612. Shortly afterwards Cardinal Richelieu established the Academie Francaise with a similar task of defining the French language and then the English Royal Academy published its own dictionary in 1755. All of these academies were given the task of setting a structure for the use of words and to define the nature of language itself, which was the start of formal linguistics.

Descriptive Language

Descriptive linguist theories dominated the early 20^th century, concerned with the differences between languages and how they developed through anthropological and historical records. Differences between the languages were believed to influence the thoughts of the speakers and general psychological ‘laws of learning’ would explain how people learned to use language to describe the external world and elements such as design, becoming the vehicle for thought.

Formalist Language

Formalists took a ‘top down’ approach to language dictated from theory, emphasising the universal features and rules found in the worlds languages. The description of language is recognised as a thing in itself, with the goal of developing an accurate empirical description of these language universals.

Opinions on Discussion

Bever [1996] promoted that in order to understand how humans use language we first have to understand what language is. We then have to understand how the brain and mind make language work.

Many linguists and psycholinguists assert that there is a single language of thought that is used to form ideas. External speech and writing is simply an expression of those ideas

Language is probably not the first type of representation thought of when considering design, rather visual forms such as sketches and drawings are a more obvious representation for architects or screen shots and story boards for web designers. However, these visual representations need to be supplemented by language-based descriptions, to give designers a vehicle to explain the basis of their design.

Michel Foucault [1994] suggests that the analysis of the language of design moves “towards the place where things and words are conjoined in their common essence, and which makes it possible to give them a name.” Language can be seen as expressing the possibilities of design

Donald Schön [1983] treated language use in design as the “elements of the language of designing” or descriptors of what takes place during design and the consequences of actions as described by the language. Schön studies the essence of “reflection” as a design professional and how this reflective process is put into action. Designers make numerous aesthetic and quality judgments during a working day, however cannot always state adequate criteria for these judgments. Schön uses the term “knowing-in-action” to describe the process of turning thoughts into actions such as sketching an idea for a building form, allowing further reflection on the understandings which have been implicit in the action of sketching and subsequently leading to further discussion.

Lloyd [2000] treats accounts of design in text as a type of story-telling process which can be analyzed and interpreted much as a novel or film is studied. The product is considered the ‘end’ of the story.

Eris [2003] suggests that asking ‘generative design questions’ during the design development process assists in facilitating cognitive processes and to associates creativity to the quantity of distinct noun phrases during conceptual design.

Austin [1962] distinguished between ‘locutionary’ speech which utter and ‘illocutionary’ and ‘perlocutionary’ speech acts which accompany or create actions. When the production of an utterance is the performing of an action, Austin called this type of utterance ‘performative’, which suggest that utterances produce through naming. That is, the action of writing concepts in a text is a form of design practice and representing the designed work linguistically, the language produces the designed work.

Linguistic Resources

There are a number of linguistic resources available to design professionals to communicate the design product and process.

·      Affect -      How the design professional describes cognitive and cognitive-behavioural environments which represent design thinking and how the designer is behaving in a cognitive behavioural sense.

·      Judgment – How the design professional appraises in relation to the accepted standards of society, industry best practices or accepted design methods.

·      Appreciation – How the design professional evaluates design in relation to personal experience, intuition and subjective interpretations.

·      Capability -        How the design professional describes capability or the implementation of design-related activities to others.

Language Techniques

These linguistic resources can take the form of many varied language techniques to persuade or change the minds of other people, or to be more convincing in the delivery of information, or simply to describe and appreciate the design, for example:

·      Spatial Action – attributing actions to elements of the design as though they were creating form and organizing the space. This technique also tends to assist in the consideration of how users may experience the spaces or design.

·      Implications – during the process of design development, actions tend to have ramifications on the design itself, hence the designers decisions tend to yield systems of implications, eg “if we do this, then that will occur”. Discussions here tend to be what those implications are and if future impact on the design, on balance, they are beneficial to the process.

·      Intensifiers – involves increasing the emotional impact by adding an adverb. This suggests to the discussion partner will how they might be feeling, causing them to consider this and subsequently be influenced by it – either to increase or decrease the natural emotional content of a verb, eg “this is extremely …”.

·      Object Focus – involves making the object of the sentence the focus with a subsequent de-intensification of the subject.

·      Final Impact – a verbal technique of putting the main impact of your discussion at the end. Tension before the Final Impact can be built through suggestions and promises to increase its effect. If the partner in a discussion believes that they know what you are saying and think that they understand the message, they cognitively ‘shut off’, even if the information has been misinterpreted. The tension that builds and the allure of the final information keep the partner interested and engaged in the discussion.

·      Hidden Commands – involves burying commands within a sentence or discussion. Straight verbal commands are often seen as aggressive and confrontational, as though the issuer is in the position of authority. Commands can be a persuasive in the discussion, so be less detectable, they can be softened by hiding them within other phrases which distract the discussion partner and temper resistance.

·      Power Words – involves using words which have a special meaning. These may include: jargon; ‘in’ words; socially accepted attitudes and values and ‘politically correct’ phrases; safety oriented words such as “guarantee, safe, strong”; greed –orientated words such as “cash, deserve, more, free”; control orientated words such as “simple, best, quick, learn, grab”; belonging-orientated words such as “you, good, love, favourite”; trust-orientated words such as “proven, sure, true, certain”.  

·      Pronouns – involves using pronouns to add power to a discussion and personally involving the discussion partner with words like “I, you, us, he, it”, creating a more personal bond.

·      Sensory Language – involves using language which evokes the human senses, seeking to stimulate and create more evocative messages.

·      Short sentences – work. Make an impact. Every time. With short sentences, the discussion partner gets the whole message in one easy to comprehend powerful piece of communication.

·      Pauses – adds gravitas to a discussion at places where an impact is desired.

·      Language domains – separates design language into a series of domains: program (use, function of design); siting (features of the site); building elements (components); organization of space (interrelationships); form (shaping, geometry, organization); structure (supports, technologies); scale (magnitude, relationship between elements); cost (financial relevance); building character (style or character); precedent (historical references); representation (language and notation); explanation (interaction between designer and others).

Conclusion

Drawing and talking tend to be a parallel or inter-connected way of designing, with the verbal and non-verbal dimensions closely linked and together forming the language of design. Unintended consequences of design development shape the situation and inform the ongoing process, where further drawing and talking allow a redefining of the problem, a strategy for further action.

As an active and functional mechanism of design, language becomes a constituent of design. By supporting other design processes, such as concept generation, language implicates itself as part of design thinking. Language has a role in shaping reality and reflecting the potential of the designed work that is intended by the designer. As reinforcement for design processes such as concept design, language implicates itself as part of enacting design and as such a performative process itself.

    

References

1         http://wordnetweb.princton.edu

2         Bever, T.G. (1996) Experimental Psycholinguistics: Then, now, and thence. Advanced Psycholinguistics: A Bressanove Retrospective for Giovanni Flores d’Arcais. Nijmgen, The Netherlands: Max Planck Institute

3         Foucalt, M (1994) The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences

4         Schon, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books

5         Hunt, E (2002) Thoughts on Thoughts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Exploring, a Disignerly act

The following text aims at understanding some of the main issues related to exploring as a “designerly” act.  The word “design” can be used as a verb or a noun.  It means to “Plan something for a specific role, purpose or effect” (wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn). As Petra Falin states, “The term design covers a broad field of activities from systematic processes of engineering to the artistic processes of haute couture. There are elements of design that are common to all or most of the fields of design but still we cannot assume that the term would denote equal meaning to all designers.”(Petra Falin 2007)

Exploring means “to traverse or range over for the purpose of discovery… to look into closely / scrutinize / examine” (The Macquarie Dictionary 1990)

Andrew Eisenberg – Essay 1 – Modelling

Modeling

Introduction
The design thinking process seems to be a process that is divided in two distinct regions of thought.  One region represents the steps of thinking, designing, and construction of a concept, while the other region represents reflection and critique of that concept.  In between those two regions, exists the important step of modeling.  Modeling is an important step in the process of design because it’s the first place where the designer produces a tactical and physical example of all the work they’ve put in during the first few steps.  It also serves as a point of unification for collaborating designers; taking the relatively similar ideas that are floating around in the minds of the group and creating one solid, physical example for all the designers to proceed with.  This step can also act as an important “escape hatch” with a concept.  By physically creating a model, the designer can better understand how this concept will be constructed and it’s function in the real world and if that concept will be successful or not.  If not, modeling represents a step where the designer can go backwards and re-examine his original concept and see where changes need to be made.  Modeling proves to be a pivotal step in the design thinking process because it acts as a central point between the first few steps of pure thinking and the next few steps of reflection.

Modeling – What is it?
According to the dictionary, a model is “a representation, generally in miniature, to show the construction or appearance of something.” (“Model”)  And while the dictionary definition may be accurate, it is not an all-encompassing definition of what a model is for the designer.  A model can be a sketch, a flow chart, a 3D graphical image or a physical miniature built with sticks and stones.  A model will vary across the fields depending on what type of designer is producing it.  An architect is more likely to work with sketch paper and building materials and a web designer might work entirely with a keyboard, mouse, HTML and CSS.
The important thing to note about modeling is it represents a physical element.  Like in the definition, many models are representations in miniature.  Depending on what type of concept one is designing for, such as an apartment building or a bridge, this might be the exact case; build the object in miniature before building it to the full scale.  However, if one were designing something that is smaller, a teacup, for example, then making a model smaller than the original would seem impractical, as the process of shrinking the object would be counterproductive.  It’s important for designers to consider the usage of objects that they’re creating by relying on research and critical thinking.
“The product does not exist, yet the designer will need to evaluate his or her intent within the idea.” (Wylant 13)   This strongly applies to concepts that aren’t modeled in the traditional formats.  For objects that never may have a “physical” representation, a website or a piece of graphic design, for example, modeling is still a step of physicality.  While these objects may never be tangible, meaning one could never hold it in their hand or lean against it, they exist on or in physical viewers such as paper or a computer screen.

What it isn’t
What models don’t have to be are full-blown working products.  While prototyping can and should be considered a step in modeling, developing a working product tends to come towards the end of the design thinking process, after the phases of critiquing model are investigated.  Models in the earlier stages are going to be rough and are most likely going to change a great deal throughout the process.   For example, if one were in the process of designing a calculator, a rather complex instrument with a physical element and a software element, many different types of models are going to be constructed by many different people throughout the design process.  In the initial stages, these might be modeled separately, with a team of product designers creating the physical calculator, a team of programmers working on functionality, and software designers creating and dealing with performance issues.
And while it’s important for these designs groups to maintain communication with each other, early stages of design aren’t going to need detailed intricacies of each part in order to see an early sketch. An early physical model of the calculator wouldn’t have to be able to do correct arithmetic if the goal of this model is to make sure the calculator fits correctly in a persons hand.  That physical model would have to have all the buttons would need to be represented in appropriate height, weight, and placement. These are just the early types of modeling. Later, in the prototyping phase, that’s when all the parts come together to make sure that all the parts or separately modeled bits are able to work together.  It’s important to note that models exist in different levels of sophistication and are going to be developed and changed at different points along the design thinking process.

Design Thinking as a Process
The exact definition of design thinking varies among the many different groups of scholars.   One thing that remains constant is that they all agree in design thinking as a process.   “While the design-thinking approach may sound rather seat-of-the-pants, the troth is that it’s surprisingly regimented, consisting of three phases: observation, ideation and implementation.” (Wasserman)  The first two steps of observation and ideation are important to development of an idea and the creation of concepts that could lead to a final product. However, these steps are ones that deal with research and analysis.  These steps are the first “jumping off” points for design thinking. After the initial steps of observation and critical thinking, designers enter into what could be considered a two-tier step of modeling, one tier being a fluid, rough state of sketching and the other tier being a more refined step of creating a prototype or polished model.

Lo-Res Modeling – Sketching
The first tier of modeling is a rough and fast phase; a phase normally associated with passing out and creating fast, low-level types of models.   Perhaps the most common type of modeling done by a designer is sketching. Sketching is ”…sloppy and messy and not nearly as disciplined as the scientist, but we do trial and error and we hypothesize and test and we see what we learn and then we go back and try again.” (Rae-Dupree) Sketching is modeling on the fast and loose track.  Almost like a physical form of brainstorming, this lo-res type of modeling, has a means of communication associated with it.  These are the first physical forms and designers can look at and communicate with each other over it.  There are initial critiques and discussions that immediately change and remodel the design.
By sketching, a designer is able to do more with the idea than just develop it.  “In other words, creative thinking does not generate standard answers, and moreover, the creative approach often demands answers that lie outside conventional modes of thoughts” (Chen 228) Sketching allows for the exploration of these answers.  By moving through these ideas and on paper or in a physical element, they exist for review and they exist as a means of reference so a designer can look back on them as the idea evolves.  Problems will arise in this stage of modeling and they will also be solved in this stage as more and more rough models are produced.  It’s also important to remember that while this is the creation of models, sketching, in the process, it’s just another step.
These lo-res models act as key points to the rest of the steps in the design thinking process but it can also serve as a escape point, a point where you can reject your initial idea and go back to step one.  While going through the firsts steps in design thinking, the eventual concept that emerges is bound to be a great one in the designers mind.  He wouldn’t have moved forward to the modeling step if he hadn’t thought so.  However, the physical process of moving the idea to the real world means examination of aspects of the idea that could have been absent from the mind.  “It is one that requires considerable knowledge, since the discussions associated with this sort of exploration of solution spaces draw on understanding of technologies, particular implementations, technology costs, and histories of design rationale.” (Petre 7-8) Building a physical model of the intended product forces the designer to think of such implications, even on a small scale, and when confronted with those limitations, changes may have to be as the model is being constructed. As a result, what you had in your head may not be what you find once you complete the model.  From there, you have the ability to either move forward and continue through the process or, if you don’t like what the eventual model turn out to be, scrap it and restart.  The modeling point serves as a turning point or examination point to move forward or backwards.

High-Res Modeling – Prototyping
“In implementation, the final phase of design thinking, low-res prototypes go high-res and then become actual products.” (Wasserman)  Sketching and other methods of low-res modeling are means to a more refined product.  From the many lo-res models that are created in the process, only a few move on to a high-res model.  “Moving beyond skills, attitude, and motivation, it also is intriguing to note the spatial quality to the designer’s thinking in the design effort, where aspects of temporality, dominance, and scale are at play in the weighing of issues and the contemplation of design problems.”  (Wylant 14) These high-res models become touched up models, ones that go beyond just the basic layout and design that lo-res modeling established. These models have much more time spent on them and an end product and can act more like a prototype.
Sometimes these models represent a physical element.  “This use of representations to depict a space of design possibilities (rather than a design solution) is a significant, enabling use of representation to assist the thinking ‘out of the box’.” (Petre 8) While sketching is done on paper, many times, High-res models are done with architecture materials, refined or other high class or high quality tools and resources.  It’s something for the designer to examine from multiple viewpoints in a way that is closer to the final product than a simple sketch.  These physical models have to stand up to the laws of physics and rules of materials.   Hence the use of sketching during the first tier of modeling and the use of physical tools later one in the modeling stage.  “People will respond to sketches or notes, as stimuli, in differing and original ways leading again to more unique ideas.”  (Wylant 11)  By placing concepts into the physical and tangible realm, this acts as a step for learning by doing and sets up collaboration and criticism.
Designers “explicitly or implicitly rely upon ‘first principles’ in both the origination of their concepts and in the detailed development of those concepts.” (Cross, “Expertise” 8)  These first principles can come from any variety of different backgrounds and different designers have expertise in many different areas.  When collaborating with different designers with different backgrounds, the concept originally exists only within the minds of each individual designer and what each designer is thinking off is not exactly the same as the designer next to them.  While on projects where there is only two designers working, the concepts can be very similar, there exist the possibility that larger projects, projects that could include dozens of designers, the concept could vary much between designers.  As a result, the modeling portion of the design thinking process is important to as it’s the first time all designers will see one example of their combined first steps.  The use and basic form of the concept may be understood by all, the physical creation of a model or prototype serves as a collaboration way to deal and smooth out all aspects that may not have been directly thought of in the initial stages, such as small details, construction problems, or limitations against a physical realm.  Model of the concept is bound to bring these types of issues up even if it’s only on a small and quick front.

Modeling as a term of Solution

In certain situations of design, occasionally a ‘wicked’ problem comes up, or rather, a problem whose analysis is best done in terms of a solution.  “In this context a solution-focused strategy is clearly preferable to a problem-focused one: it will always be possible to go on analyzing ‘the problem,’ but the designer’s task is to produce ‘the solution.’” (Cross, “Designerly Ways” 244)  In the modeling step of the design thinking, wicked problems can either be solved or created to the physical creation.  While modeling a problem may occur in the process and as a result the designer, midway through, is forced to come up with a solution or scrap the model.  This type of situation presents the designer with a simple forward/backwards step and he must look at solutions to the problem rather than just looking at problem itself.  His work is impeded until a proper solution can be reached.

Opinion

Originally, I was a little hesitant to discuss sketching in with Modeling because I tended to believe that sketching was an activity associated with planning or thinking or some of the earlier stages of design thinking.   I still believe that but after reading about the two-tiered system of modeling, sketching makes more sense as a part of modeling.  I also tend to believe that what we sketch is a very low-resolution model of what the final production should be.  It acts as a stepping-stone model, a model that just serves as a pointer to more refined model.  It’s these cleaner, fancier models that I originally through of when I began to research modeling.  I still believe that high-resolution models are what most people think of when they think of models but I can understand and appreciate the use sketching in developing more defined models.  I can also see models as being useful tools for discovering and developing problems.  When I start to think of a design, I get a ton of great ideas, but visualizing them and trying to figure out exactly how their going to work in my mind becomes too taxing.  I know what I want it to look like but sometimes what goes on in my head isn’t what can actually happen in on paper of in the physical world.  Translating that into the another medium allows me, and by extension, other designers, the chance to figure out and construct a solid, fleshed out design.

Conclusion

The design thinking step of modeling proves to be an important, if not the most important step, in the processing of a concept.  Modeling proves to be the step between two regions of distinction.  While the first region exists in the nebulous minds of designers, the modeling step takes those ideas and makes them into tangible objects for designers to hold and examine.  They can take these models and use them for all the following steps in design.  In addition, the shear movement of the thought to physical form can give the designer feedback and see the object in a light that they may not have seen before.  In addition, the modeling step, acts as a root for all those collaborating together on the project.  By showing and having one physical object to reference back to, the group can proceed forward all on the same step instead of only having their own imagines in their minds to reference back to.  Modeling can also cause the surfacing, and sometimes a solution, of wicked problems that designers occasionally have to tackle.  These problems come to light in the modeling stage and can help the designer either decide to continue out with the concept or scrap it for a new one.  Modeling acts as the pivotal point in the design thinking process.

pway2005 – Researching

IDEA9106 - Assignment 1

by

Peter Way

308123697

 

 

 

Research

 

 

1. INTRODUCTION

 

Research, in relation to the field of design, has two possible interpretations. One interpretation is that design research is the act of studying what we design; the other interpretation is that design research is the act of studying how we design. What we design encompasses the idea of researching existent forms and instances of a design to further their knowledge on solutions to a design problem. How we design means understanding the ways we think about design and the elements which influence this thinking.

 

In this paper, I will briefly explain design research regarding what we design, preferring instead to delve more comprehensively into the topic of studying how we design. This is due to the rich discourse regarding how we design and the relatively recent and interesting formulation of design as a discipline of study.

 

Manita C. Essay1: Reflecting

Reflecting: reframing, confirming, reinterpreting and reviewing

 

In the process of design thinking, there are a wide range of methods involved to conceive an idea. Designerly acts are the activities of design used as a thinking process to come up with from a hypothesis to a product. It starts from understanding a task, such as a problem or a question, as an interpreting process to presenting act and finally celebrating an outcome.  As each activity goes by, the processes of thinking of each individual have actively been developing along.

 

Reflection is one of the designedly acts. It is to deeply rethink of what one is doing, consider it with deliberately understand and be able to come up with one own learning process. There are many methods in reflection which can be applied in many disciplines. Those methods are reframing, confirming, reinterpreting and reviewing.

 

The purpose of this paper is to introduce methods of reflection which effectively support the process of rethinking. Each method will be given the definitions and examples which can be valid for an individual and group in various disciplines.

Man Chau Chau(Eric)-Essay 1-Exploring

Introduction:

Design is not a new term in the world. Many people hear about it or work in design industry. Nevertheless some people still do not understand and they are dreading design. They thought design is merely a simple design process. That is because that they have not tried to understand and learnt how to design. In fact, design is the main platform for people to show their creative and personality. Every person has his or her own way to design. In design industry, there are different ways and no simple correct way to design. Every design method is real and absolute. Design is not a hard term to understand, but the quality of design depends on the designer’s understanding and knowledge of things. Understanding design is the first step to become a good and professional designer. There are many ways for different designers to understand what design is. One of the most important process is exploration.

 

Essay 1 : Exploration in Design – Pete Chemsripong

The first meaning of the word “explore” in the Concise Oxford Dictionary Tenth Edition is “to travel through an unfamiliar area in order to learn about it.” (Smith 2000) As an acknowledged and significant phase in the design process, Exploration has been the subject of study for many years. (Gero 2006) This paper will discuss what exploration in design is, methods for exploration and personal opinions.

What is Exploration

Unlike problems commonly found in Science or Human philosophy, design problems are considered “ill-defined” or “wicked” problems. (Rittel and Webber 1973)  One cannot rely on gathering and analysing data in design problems since many parameters are constantly changing. Any attempt to test an hypothesis and achieve a reliable result requires testing on real problems, often with irreversible consequences. In order to tackle the problems in a “solution-oriented” style, “exploration” of ideas must be used to generate as many possibilities as possible.