Türkiye’de Endüstriyel Tasarım Stüdyo Eğitiminde Konu ve Yaklaşım Odaklı Değişimler

Öz

Endüstriyel tasarım disiplinin sınırları son yıllarda ortaya çıkan hizmet tasarımı, deneyim tasarımı, sürdürülebilirlik için tasarım ve toplumsal tasarım gibi yeni kavramlar aracılığı ile hızla genişlemektedir. Ayrıca, birlikte tasarlamayı ön plana çıkaran iş birliği ve disiplinler arasılık gibi yaklaşımlar tasarım alanının gündeminde yer almaya başlamıştır. Alandaki gelişmeler çerçevesinde, bu çalışma endüstriyel tasarım stüdyo eğitiminde son yirmi yıl içinde gerçekleşmiş olan konu ve yaklaşım odaklı değişimleri keşfetmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu doğrultuda endüstriyel tasarım eğitiminin temel taşı olarak tanımlanan zorunlu tasarım stüdyosu/proje dersi araştırma alanı olarak belirlenmiş ve verilerin toplanması için nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme tekniği kullanılmıştır. Eğitimciler ile gerçekleştirilen görüşmelerin sonucunda, bu araştırma tasarım disiplininin değişen ilgi alanları bağlamında endüstriyel tasarım stüdyosu derslerindeki konu ve yaklaşım odaklı uygulamaları açığa çıkarmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Endüstriyel tasarım
• Tasarım eğitimi
• Tasarım stüdyosu
• Proje konuları

Changing Paradigms, Subjects, and Approaches in Industrial Design Studio Education in Turkey

Abstract

Boundaries of industrial design discipline are expanding rapidly through new concepts that have emerged in recent years such as service design, experience design, sustainability, and social design. Additionally, the new approaches featuring co-design as collaboration and interdisciplinary approaches have started to take part in the agenda of design. In the framework of these developments, this study aims to discover subject and approach centered changes in industrial design studio education over the last twenty years. Accordingly, the compulsory design studio course, which is considered as the cornerstone of industrial design education, was defined as the research field and the semi-structured interview technique as a qualitative research method was used. As a result of the interviews carried out with the design educators, this research revealed the subject and approach oriented practices in industrial design studio courses within the context of changing interest areas of the design discipline.

Keywords

• Industrial design
• Design education
• Design studio
• Design project topics

References

1. Armstrong, L., Bailey, J, Julier, G., & Kimbell, L. (2014). Social design futures: HEI research and AHRC. Brighton: University of Brighton and Victoria and Albert Museum.
2. Aydınlı, S. (2015). Tasarım eğitiminde yapılandırıcı paradigma. Tasarım ve Kuram, 11 (20), 1–18. DOI: 10.23835/tasarimkuram.239579
3. Brandenburg, T. (2018). Friendship, collaboration, and service: How Shelley Evenson and Birgit Mager designed a movement. Retrieved from https://www.service-design- network.org/community-knowledge/friendship-collaboration-and-service-how-shelley-evenson-and-birgit-mager-designed-a-movement
4. Beucker, N. (2004). Research skills as basis for Industrial collaboration in design education. International Engineering and Product Design Education Conference,1–8,. Delft, The Netherlands.
5. Bhamra, T., Lofthouse, V., & Cooper, R. (Ed.) (2007). Design for sustainability: A practical approach.(Design for Social Responsibility series). UK: Gower.
6. Buchanan, R. (2001a). The problem of character in design education: Liberal arts and professional specialization. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011286205584
7. Buchanan, R. (2001b). Design research and the new learning. Design Issues, 17(4), 3–23.
8. Burns, C., Cottam, H., Vanstone, C., &Winhall, J. (2006). RED PAPER 02: Transformation design. London: Design Council. Retrieved from: https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/red-paper-transformation-design.pdf

9. Carroll, J. M. (1997). Human-computer interaction: Psychology as a science of design. Annual Review of Psychology, 48(1), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.48.1.61
10. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design : qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Davey, C. L., Wooton, A. B., Thomas, Cooper, R., & Press, M. (2005). Design for surreal world a new model of socially responsible design. In International Conference of the European Academy of Design, Bremen, Germany.
12. Definition of Industrial Design (n.d.). World Design Organisation. Retrieved April 10, 2020 from: https://wdo.org/about/definition/
13. Dewey, J. (1980). Art as experience. Perigee Books.
14. Fuad-Luke, A. (2009). Design activism: Beautiful strangeness for a sustainable world. London: Earthscan.
15. Goedkoop, M., van Halen, C., te Riele, H., & Rommes, P. (1999). Product Services Systems, Ecological and Economic Basics, Report 1999/36. The Hague: VROM.
16. Green, L. N., & Bonollo, E. (2003). Studio-based teaching: History and advantages in the teaching of design. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 2(2), 269–272.
17. Inns, Tom, ed. (2007). Designing for the 21st century: Interdisciplinary questions and insights. Hampshire, England: Gower Publishing.
18. Jones, P.H. (2014). Systemic design principles for complex social systems. In G. Metcalf (Ed.), Social systems and design (pp. 91-128). Springer Japan.
19. Kagermann, H., Helbig, J., Hellinger, A., & Wahlster, W. (2013). Recommendations for Implementing the Strategic Initiative INDUSTRIE 4.0: Securing the Future of German Manufacturing Industry, Final Report of the Industrie 4.0 Working Group. Frankfurt: Germany Forschungsunion.
20. Kaptelinin, V., & Hassenzahl, M. (2013). User experience and experience design. In The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, (2nd ed., pp. 1–35). The Interaction Design Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.interaction-design.org/encyclopedia/user_experience_and_experience_design.html
21. Kelly, T. (2005). The ten faces of innovation: IDEO’s strategies for beating the devil’s advocate & driving creativity throughout your organization. New York: Currency/Doubleday.
22. Knemeyer, D. & Svoboda, E. (2006). User experience - UX. Retrieved from http://www.interactiondesign.org/encyclopedia/user_experience_or_ux.html
23. Kolko, J. (2007). Thoughts on interaction design. Austin, TX: Brown Bear, LLC.
24. Lowgren, J. (2013). Interaction design-brief intro. In M. Soegaard & R. Friis Dam (Eds.), The encyclopedia of human-computer. (2nd ed.). Aarhus: The Interaction Design Foundation.
25. Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. Translated by Rachel Coad. Cambridge: MIT Press.
26. Manzini, E. (2016). Design Culture and Dialogic Design. Design Issues, 32 (1), 52-59.
27. Manzini, E. & Rizzo, F. (2011). Small projects/large changes: Participatory design as an open participated process. CoDesign, 7(2-3),199-215.
28. Meroni, A., & Sangiorgi, D. (2011). Design for services. Gower Publishing, Surrey.
29. Moggridge, B. (2007). Designing interactions. MIT Press.
30. Morelli, N. (2002). The design of product / service systems from a designer’s perspective. In Proceedings of the Common Ground Design Research Society International Conference (pp. 5–7). Retrieved from http://www.score-network.org/files/825_15.pdf
31. Morelli, N. (2007). Social innovation and new industrial contexts: Can designers “industrialize” socially responsible solutions? Design Issues, 23(4), 3–21.
32. Morelli, N. (2009). Beyond the experience. In search of an operative paradigm for the industrialization of services. In First Nordic Conference on Service Design and Service Innovation. November 24-26, 2009, Oslo, Norway.
33. Moritz, S. (2005). Practical access to emerging field: Service design. (Master’s thesis), London.
34. Norman, D. (2010). Why design education must change. Retrieved from https://www.core77.com/posts/17993/why-design-education-must-change-17993
35. Norman, D., Miller, J., & Henderson, A. (1995). What you see, some of what’s in the future, and how we go about doing it. In Conference companion on Human factors in computing systems - CHI ’95 (p. 155). New York, USA: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/223355.223477
36. Palinkas, L., M Horwitz, S., Green, C., Wisdom, J., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
37. Papanek, V. J. (1972). Design for the real world : Human ecology and social change. Pantheon Books.
38. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Sanders, E.B.N. & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4 (1), 5-18.
40. Schön, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner : How professionals think in action. New York.
41. Simpson, T. W., Parkinson, M., Celento, D., Chen, W., McKenna, A., Colgate, E., & Leifer, L. (2010). Navigating the barriers to interdisciplinary design education: Lessons learned from the NSF Design Workshop Series. In Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference (Vol. 6, pp. 627-637). https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2010-28575
42. Sleeswijk Visser, F., Stappers, P.J., Van der Lugt, R., & Sanders, E.B.N. (2005). Context mapping: experiences from practice. CoDesign, 1(2),119–149.
43. Strauss, A. L. & Corbin J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
44. Tischner, U., & Charter, M., (2001). Sustainable product design. In M. Charter & U. Tischner (Eds.), Sustainable solutions: Developing products and services for the future (pp.118-138). Wiltshire, UK: Greenleaf.
45. Tukker, A., & Tischner, U. (2006). Product-services as a research field: past, present and future. Reflections from a decade of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14,1552–1556.
46. Yang, M.Y., You, M., & Chen, F.C. (2005). Competencies and qualifications for industrial design jobs: implications for design practice, education, and student career guidance. Design Studies, 26(2), 155–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.09.003
47. Yıldırım, A. &Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (6. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.