- Email: [email protected]
Transforming Design Matters
Transforming Design Matters
The topic “Transforming Design Matters” emerged in 2016 from initial conversations among scholarly researchers and practitioners in the United States and Canada who share an interest in design as a force for intentional change. The group has a common interest in transforming and improving artificial systems by investigating material and symbolic interventions that shape future livelihoods. Unlike natural systems, artificial systems—including health care, urban mobility, food security, tourism, social media, automation, energy, sustainable development, social justice, and education—are human made, and are primarily responsible for shaping contemporary society. Design has been fundamental to shaping artifacts—such as products, services, and communication tools—and environments in all these systems. The new frontier in design is to explore artificial systems and multi-systems integration, with the goal of envisioning alternative futures and the infrastructures yet to be designed to support those futures. This theme issue aims to present original work that can help delineate the theoretical and practical boundaries of what might become design research and practice of artificial systems. Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders 1 proposes a discussion on new spaces emerging at the integration of research and design, and between education and practice. She argues from personal experience that while cultural differences impede the connection between these areas, there are significant benefits in connecting them. Most promising are the developments that explore new domains in design concerned with making sense of the future by shaping it. The author explores the “new design spaces” that can emerge if we fill the gaps between design research, education, and practice. It concludes by proposing how a new American organization of designers can explore and cultivate these new design spaces. Through a comprehensive literature review, Laura Forlano 2 presents the most relevant theories and discussions around the posthuman, and how they challenge the dominant human-centered and user-centered paradigms in design. She considers current discussions in philosophy and science and technology studies focused on digital technologies, algorithmic systems, and artificial intelligence, and suggests new approaches and frameworks of reference to design practices facing the challenge of designing complex socio-technical systems. Based on a decade of research and experimentation, John Zimmerman and Jodi Forlizzi 3 propose in their article an approach that involves a mindset and a methodology to get users to share their latent and unmet desires by providing participants with a small taste of many possible futures. The proposed approach, metaphorically named “Speed Dating,” is composed of two different types of research probes—“Storyboards” and “User Enactment.” In both cases, the goal is to
1 Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders, “Design Research at the Crossroads of Education and Practice,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 3–15, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.05.003. 2 Laura Forlano, “Posthumanism and Design,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 16–29, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.08.001. 3 John Zimmerman and Jodi Forlizzi, “Speed Dating: Providing a Menu of Possible Futures,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 30–50, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.08.003.
Copyright © 2017, Tongji University and Tongji University Press. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.09.001
Editorial
1
4 Katie Salen, “Designing a Place Called School: A Case Study of the Public School Quest to Learn,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 51–64, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.08.002. 5 Peter Hodges et al., “Four Criteria for Design Theories,” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 65–74, DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.02.003.
provide designers with the ability to reframe the opportunity space and identify which future is most promising and desirable. The Speed Dating method aims to support the design field with research methods that help frame insights unattainable through ethnographic fieldwork. Katie Salen 4 presents and discusses a case study of an experiment and related research into bringing the principles of game design and play to the public school system in New York City, USA. The article introduces an organizational and engagement model designed to bring game-like learning to the public school sector. Mission Lab, a design and curriculum studio, was embedded in a public school in New York City. Mission was staffed by game designers, curriculum designers, and learning specialists who worked in collaboration with teachers and students on the design of games and game-like curricula. The article concludes with reflections on lessons learned from the challenges, limitations, and opportunities of doing innovation within the context of the US Department of Education (DOE), and a set of design principles and practices illustrating what role design can play in transforming artificial systems. In this issue of She Ji, Peter Hodges, Stan Ruecker, Celso Scaletsky, Jaime Rivera, Roberto Faller, and Amanda Geppert 5 presents an analysis and reflection of discussions from the past 50 years on norms for studying and building theory in the design field. The authors argue that theory in design has specific characteristics. One example of this is using “if-then” language to explain and predict actual aspects of designing. Therefore, they argue that we need specific criteria for evaluating or creating theories in design. Establishing baseline criteria enables theories in design to be revisited, debated, strengthened, and expanded while setting the parameters for outlining new theories. When connected, these articles describe some of the foundational aspects of what might be considered “design research and practice of artificial systems.” This theme issue of She Ji outlines theories from philosophy and science and technology studies that challenge the user-centered paradigms in design, and replace it with a focus on infrastructures supported by digital technologies, algorithmic systems, and artificial intelligence. This perspective challenges designers to develop new frameworks and practices for designing the infrastructures that are shaping and conditioning artificial systems and contemporary human experiences. Moreover, it suggests the integration of design research, practice, and education to create “new design spaces,” which can be better framed and resourced to make sense of the future by shaping it. Methodologically, this issue introduces designers to a new mindset and approach to reframing the opportunity space and identifying promising and desirable futures through probes. The case study examining design in the education system presents a new organizational model that integrates design expertise in the envisioning and configuration of an artificial system. Last, but not least, this issue proposes criteria for theory building in design, which enables new research into artificial systems to build from and expand on established theories in design, consequently developing new knowledge on designing futures. Therefore, this theme issue is grounded on the collective belief of a group of design researchers and practitioners that transforming design matters, because design as a field of expertise is well positioned to embrace the challenge of being a force for intentional change in a world of many possible human-made futures.
Carlos Teixeira Guest Editor
2
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation
Volume 3, Number 1, Spring 2017
The topic “Transforming Design Matters” emerged in 2016 from initial conversations among scholarly researchers and practitioners in the United States and Canada who share an interest in design as a force for intentional change. The group has a common interest in transforming and improving artificial systems by investigating material and symbolic interventions that shape future livelihoods. Unlike natural systems, artificial systems—including health care, urban mobility, food security, tourism, social media, automation, energy, sustainable development, social justice, and education—are human made, and are primarily responsible for shaping contemporary society. Design has been fundamental to shaping artifacts—such as products, services, and communication tools—and environments in all these systems. The new frontier in design is to explore artificial systems and multi-systems integration, with the goal of envisioning alternative futures and the infrastructures yet to be designed to support those futures. This theme issue aims to present original work that can help delineate the theoretical and practical boundaries of what might become design research and practice of artificial systems. Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders 1 proposes a discussion on new spaces emerging at the integration of research and design, and between education and practice. She argues from personal experience that while cultural differences impede the connection between these areas, there are significant benefits in connecting them. Most promising are the developments that explore new domains in design concerned with making sense of the future by shaping it. The author explores the “new design spaces” that can emerge if we fill the gaps between design research, education, and practice. It concludes by proposing how a new American organization of designers can explore and cultivate these new design spaces. Through a comprehensive literature review, Laura Forlano 2 presents the most relevant theories and discussions around the posthuman, and how they challenge the dominant human-centered and user-centered paradigms in design. She considers current discussions in philosophy and science and technology studies focused on digital technologies, algorithmic systems, and artificial intelligence, and suggests new approaches and frameworks of reference to design practices facing the challenge of designing complex socio-technical systems. Based on a decade of research and experimentation, John Zimmerman and Jodi Forlizzi 3 propose in their article an approach that involves a mindset and a methodology to get users to share their latent and unmet desires by providing participants with a small taste of many possible futures. The proposed approach, metaphorically named “Speed Dating,” is composed of two different types of research probes—“Storyboards” and “User Enactment.” In both cases, the goal is to
1 Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders, “Design Research at the Crossroads of Education and Practice,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 3–15, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.05.003. 2 Laura Forlano, “Posthumanism and Design,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 16–29, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.08.001. 3 John Zimmerman and Jodi Forlizzi, “Speed Dating: Providing a Menu of Possible Futures,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 30–50, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.08.003.
Copyright © 2017, Tongji University and Tongji University Press. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.09.001
Editorial
1
4 Katie Salen, “Designing a Place Called School: A Case Study of the Public School Quest to Learn,” She Ji:The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 51–64, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. sheji.2017.08.002. 5 Peter Hodges et al., “Four Criteria for Design Theories,” She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economies, and Innovation 3, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 65–74, DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.02.003.
provide designers with the ability to reframe the opportunity space and identify which future is most promising and desirable. The Speed Dating method aims to support the design field with research methods that help frame insights unattainable through ethnographic fieldwork. Katie Salen 4 presents and discusses a case study of an experiment and related research into bringing the principles of game design and play to the public school system in New York City, USA. The article introduces an organizational and engagement model designed to bring game-like learning to the public school sector. Mission Lab, a design and curriculum studio, was embedded in a public school in New York City. Mission was staffed by game designers, curriculum designers, and learning specialists who worked in collaboration with teachers and students on the design of games and game-like curricula. The article concludes with reflections on lessons learned from the challenges, limitations, and opportunities of doing innovation within the context of the US Department of Education (DOE), and a set of design principles and practices illustrating what role design can play in transforming artificial systems. In this issue of She Ji, Peter Hodges, Stan Ruecker, Celso Scaletsky, Jaime Rivera, Roberto Faller, and Amanda Geppert 5 presents an analysis and reflection of discussions from the past 50 years on norms for studying and building theory in the design field. The authors argue that theory in design has specific characteristics. One example of this is using “if-then” language to explain and predict actual aspects of designing. Therefore, they argue that we need specific criteria for evaluating or creating theories in design. Establishing baseline criteria enables theories in design to be revisited, debated, strengthened, and expanded while setting the parameters for outlining new theories. When connected, these articles describe some of the foundational aspects of what might be considered “design research and practice of artificial systems.” This theme issue of She Ji outlines theories from philosophy and science and technology studies that challenge the user-centered paradigms in design, and replace it with a focus on infrastructures supported by digital technologies, algorithmic systems, and artificial intelligence. This perspective challenges designers to develop new frameworks and practices for designing the infrastructures that are shaping and conditioning artificial systems and contemporary human experiences. Moreover, it suggests the integration of design research, practice, and education to create “new design spaces,” which can be better framed and resourced to make sense of the future by shaping it. Methodologically, this issue introduces designers to a new mindset and approach to reframing the opportunity space and identifying promising and desirable futures through probes. The case study examining design in the education system presents a new organizational model that integrates design expertise in the envisioning and configuration of an artificial system. Last, but not least, this issue proposes criteria for theory building in design, which enables new research into artificial systems to build from and expand on established theories in design, consequently developing new knowledge on designing futures. Therefore, this theme issue is grounded on the collective belief of a group of design researchers and practitioners that transforming design matters, because design as a field of expertise is well positioned to embrace the challenge of being a force for intentional change in a world of many possible human-made futures.
Carlos Teixeira Guest Editor
2
she ji The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation
Volume 3, Number 1, Spring 2017