Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements

Year 2018, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 42 - 58, 31.07.2018

Abstract

This study aims to determine the basic elements relating to a tool to be used in Design Studio courses; one of which intertwined with daily life technologies through the usage of patterns and habits of a Design Brief. In order to address the main purpose of the study in a holistic approach, a mixed method research was used combining qualitative and quantitative methods. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews and online survey forms from Design Studio course instructors working in industrial design departments in Turkey. The study presents there is a need to reconstruct some components of the Design Brief in such a way to accompany the dynamic structure of the project process, there are problems related to the current medium, and the attitudes of the new generation students must be taken into consideration when designing a new medium for the Design Brief as a new learning tool.

References

  • Afacan, Y. (2014). Blended learning for non-studio courses: Interior architecture student experiences. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1599–1603. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.441
  • Bender, D. M., & Vredevoogd, J. D. (2006). Using online education technologies to support studio instruction. Educational Technology and Society, 9(4), 114–122.
  • Black, A. (2009). Gen Y: Who they are and how they learn? Educational Horizons, 88, 10. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ872487.pdf
  • Cameron, D. (2005). The net generation goes to university? Online submission. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED496135
  • Chen, W., & You, M. (2010). Student response to an internet-mediated industrial design studio course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(2), 151–174. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-008-9068-2
  • Creswell, J. W. (2016). Araştırma deseni nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları. [Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches], S. B. Demir (Trans.Ed.), (4th ed.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.,
  • Ciravoğlu, A. (2014). Notes on architectural education: An experimental approach to design studio. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 152, 7-12. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.146
  • Crowther, P. (2013). Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement. Journal of Learning Design, 6(3), 18–28. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/jld.v6i3.155
  • Demirhan, C., & Demirel, Ö. (2003). Program geliştirmede proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımı [Project based learning approach for program development]. AİBÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(5), 48–61.
  • Dutton, T. A. (1987). Design and studio pedagogy. Journal of Architectural Education, 41(1), 16–25. http://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1987.10758461
  • Erdem, M. (2002). Proje tabanlı öğrenme [Project based learning]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(22). http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/87910
  • Gan, B., Menkhoff, T., & Smith, R. (2015). Enhancing students’ learning process through interactive digital media: New opportunities for collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 652–663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.048
  • Definition of Industrial Design. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2017, from http://wdo.org/about/definition/
  • Jones, W. M., & Askland, H. H. (2012). Design briefs: Is there a standard? Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering & Product Design Education, 115-121. Antwerp, Belgium: Artesis University College.
  • Kapkın, E. (2010). Endüstriyel Tasarım eğitiminde proje tanımı belgesinin önemi ve içerik özelliklerinin belirlenmesi: Türkiye örneği [Content determination of the design brief and its importance in industrial design education: Case of Turkey]. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Anadolu University.
  • Larry, J., & Christensen, B. (2014). Eğitim araştırmaları nicel, nitel ve karma yaklaşımlar [Educatıonal Research; Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches ]. S. B. Demir (Trans.Ed.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
  • Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Architectural Press. Retrieved from https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/7774
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2016). Genişletilmiş bir kaynak kitap: nitel veri analizi [Qualatative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook]. S. Akbaba Altun & A. Ersoy (Trans. Eds.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Pedró, F. (2006). The new millennium learners: Challenging our views on ICT and learning. OECD-CERI, May, 1–17. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
  • Pektas, S. T. (2012). The blended design studio: An appraisal of new delivery modes in design education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 692–697. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.226
  • Pektaş, Ş. T. (2015). The virtual design studio on the cloud: A blended and distributed approach for technology-mediated design education. Architectural Science Review, (May), 1–11. http://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2015.1034085
  • Prensky, M. (2001). Why education and training have not changed. Digital game-based learning, 1–21. New York: McGraw-Hill
  • Phillips, P. L. (2004). Creating the perfect design brief. Canada: Allwort Press.
  • Ryd, N. (2004). The design brief as carrier of client information during the construction process. Design Studies, 25(3), 231–249. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.003
  • Sachs, A. (1999). Stuckness in the design studio. Design Studies, 20(2), 195–209. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00034-9
  • Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Van Dooren, E., Boshuizen, E., Van Merriënboer, J., Asselbergs, T., & Van Dorst, M. (2014). Making explicit in design education: Generic elements in the design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(1), 53–71. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9246-8
  • Vatansever Bayraktar, H. (2015). Proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımı. The Journal of International Social Research, 8(37), 709–718.
  • Wormald, P. W. (2011). Positioning industrial design students to operate at the “Fuzzy Front End”: Investigating a new arena of university design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(4), 425–447. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9133-5
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (Genişletilmiş ve gözden geçirilmiş10. baskı.). Ankara: Seçkin.

Tasarım Tanım Belgesinin Tasarım Stüdyosunda Kullanımı Üzerine Bir Araştırma: Beklenti ve Gereksinimlerin Belirlenmesi

Year 2018, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 42 - 58, 31.07.2018

Abstract

Bu çalışma günlük yaşam teknolojileri ile iç içe geçmiş olan Tasarım Stüdyosu derslerinde kullanılacak bir araçla ilgili temel unsurları, Tasarım Tanım Belgesi kullanım pratikleri ve alışkanlıkları ile ilişkili olarak belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmanın ana amacını bütüncül bir yaklaşımla ele alabilmek için nitel ve nicel yöntemlerin bir arada kullanıldığı karma bir araştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Çalışmada veriler, Türkiye'de Endüstri Ürünleri Tasarımı bölümlerinde çalışan Tasarım Stüdyosu ders yürütücüleriyle yüz yüze görüşmeler ve çevrimiçi anket formlarıyla elde edilmiştir. Çalışma, Tasarım Tanım Belgesinin bazı bileşenlerinin tasarım sürecinin dinamik yapısına eşlik edecek şekilde yeniden yapılandırılması ve bulunduğu mevcut ortamla ilgili sorunlar yaşandığını belirlenlenmiştir. Tasarım Tanım Belgesinin yeni bir öğrenme aracı olarak ele alınmasında kullanılacak yeni bir ortama yönelik yeni nesil öğrencilerin görüşlerinin alınması gerektiğini önerilmektedir.

References

  • Afacan, Y. (2014). Blended learning for non-studio courses: Interior architecture student experiences. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1599–1603. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.441
  • Bender, D. M., & Vredevoogd, J. D. (2006). Using online education technologies to support studio instruction. Educational Technology and Society, 9(4), 114–122.
  • Black, A. (2009). Gen Y: Who they are and how they learn? Educational Horizons, 88, 10. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ872487.pdf
  • Cameron, D. (2005). The net generation goes to university? Online submission. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED496135
  • Chen, W., & You, M. (2010). Student response to an internet-mediated industrial design studio course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(2), 151–174. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-008-9068-2
  • Creswell, J. W. (2016). Araştırma deseni nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları. [Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches], S. B. Demir (Trans.Ed.), (4th ed.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.,
  • Ciravoğlu, A. (2014). Notes on architectural education: An experimental approach to design studio. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Sciences, 152, 7-12. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.146
  • Crowther, P. (2013). Understanding the signature pedagogy of the design studio and the opportunities for its technological enhancement. Journal of Learning Design, 6(3), 18–28. http://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.5204/jld.v6i3.155
  • Demirhan, C., & Demirel, Ö. (2003). Program geliştirmede proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımı [Project based learning approach for program development]. AİBÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(5), 48–61.
  • Dutton, T. A. (1987). Design and studio pedagogy. Journal of Architectural Education, 41(1), 16–25. http://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.1987.10758461
  • Erdem, M. (2002). Proje tabanlı öğrenme [Project based learning]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(22). http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/87910
  • Gan, B., Menkhoff, T., & Smith, R. (2015). Enhancing students’ learning process through interactive digital media: New opportunities for collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 652–663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.048
  • Definition of Industrial Design. (n.d.). Retrieved November 5, 2017, from http://wdo.org/about/definition/
  • Jones, W. M., & Askland, H. H. (2012). Design briefs: Is there a standard? Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering & Product Design Education, 115-121. Antwerp, Belgium: Artesis University College.
  • Kapkın, E. (2010). Endüstriyel Tasarım eğitiminde proje tanımı belgesinin önemi ve içerik özelliklerinin belirlenmesi: Türkiye örneği [Content determination of the design brief and its importance in industrial design education: Case of Turkey]. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Anadolu University.
  • Larry, J., & Christensen, B. (2014). Eğitim araştırmaları nicel, nitel ve karma yaklaşımlar [Educatıonal Research; Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches ]. S. B. Demir (Trans.Ed.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
  • Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Architectural Press. Retrieved from https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/handle/10453/7774
  • Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2016). Genişletilmiş bir kaynak kitap: nitel veri analizi [Qualatative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook]. S. Akbaba Altun & A. Ersoy (Trans. Eds.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  • Pedró, F. (2006). The new millennium learners: Challenging our views on ICT and learning. OECD-CERI, May, 1–17. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
  • Pektas, S. T. (2012). The blended design studio: An appraisal of new delivery modes in design education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 692–697. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.226
  • Pektaş, Ş. T. (2015). The virtual design studio on the cloud: A blended and distributed approach for technology-mediated design education. Architectural Science Review, (May), 1–11. http://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2015.1034085
  • Prensky, M. (2001). Why education and training have not changed. Digital game-based learning, 1–21. New York: McGraw-Hill
  • Phillips, P. L. (2004). Creating the perfect design brief. Canada: Allwort Press.
  • Ryd, N. (2004). The design brief as carrier of client information during the construction process. Design Studies, 25(3), 231–249. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.003
  • Sachs, A. (1999). Stuckness in the design studio. Design Studies, 20(2), 195–209. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00034-9
  • Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Van Dooren, E., Boshuizen, E., Van Merriënboer, J., Asselbergs, T., & Van Dorst, M. (2014). Making explicit in design education: Generic elements in the design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(1), 53–71. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9246-8
  • Vatansever Bayraktar, H. (2015). Proje tabanlı öğrenme yaklaşımı. The Journal of International Social Research, 8(37), 709–718.
  • Wormald, P. W. (2011). Positioning industrial design students to operate at the “Fuzzy Front End”: Investigating a new arena of university design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(4), 425–447. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9133-5
  • Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (Genişletilmiş ve gözden geçirilmiş10. baskı.). Ankara: Seçkin.
There are 30 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Duysal Demirbaş This is me

Şebnem Timur Öğüt 0000-0003-2919-7364

Publication Date July 31, 2018
Published in Issue Year 2018 Volume: 6 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Demirbaş, D., & Timur Öğüt, Ş. (2018). Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(2), 42-58.
AMA Demirbaş D, Timur Öğüt Ş. Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements. Derginin Amacı ve Kapsamı. July 2018;6(2):42-58.
Chicago Demirbaş, Duysal, and Şebnem Timur Öğüt. “Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements”. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi 6, no. 2 (July 2018): 42-58.
EndNote Demirbaş D, Timur Öğüt Ş (July 1, 2018) Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi 6 2 42–58.
IEEE D. Demirbaş and Ş. Timur Öğüt, “Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements”, Derginin Amacı ve Kapsamı, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 42–58, 2018.
ISNAD Demirbaş, Duysal - Timur Öğüt, Şebnem. “Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements”. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi 6/2 (July 2018), 42-58.
JAMA Demirbaş D, Timur Öğüt Ş. Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements. Derginin Amacı ve Kapsamı. 2018;6:42–58.
MLA Demirbaş, Duysal and Şebnem Timur Öğüt. “Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements”. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, vol. 6, no. 2, 2018, pp. 42-58.
Vancouver Demirbaş D, Timur Öğüt Ş. Design Briefs for Industrial Design Studio Courses: Determination of Expectations and Requirements. Derginin Amacı ve Kapsamı. 2018;6(2):42-58.