In my advanced seminar on Philosophy and Theory of Design I ask all participants to bring a text that they think relate to the course and our discussions. Today my colleague Elizabeth Boling presented an article "Between eclecticism and orthodoxy in instructional design" by Stephen Yanchar and Bruce Gabbitas. It is an excellent article! The authors make the case that design (an particularly instructional design) is dominated by two broad approaches, theoretical orthodoxy and eclectic practice.
The authors make the case that both these approaches rest on something more fundamental, something they label a conceptual design sense.
"To the extent that conceptual design sense influences the way theoretical principles are used, it might be said to operate as a cryptotheory—that is, as a kind of hidden framework that, to some significant degree, guides important aspects of the design process."
"...we contend, that eclecticism leads surreptitiously to the same problem that attends theoretical orthodoxy, namely, operating under a single (albeit implicit) perspective
and, ipso facto, lacking genuine openness to itself and alternatives in the design process."
I read this paper as a great argument for philosophy of design. It resonates with other scholars who advocate for a reflective stance and for attempts to explicate and externalize what are fundamental assumptions, values, beliefs, and ideas about design. Great article!!
If you go to Youtube and look for "design thinking" you will find a large number of videos with TED talks and other talks all expl...
One of the major changes we are experiencing today in the field of HCI might be called the " material turn ". This turn has been p...
In the midst of today's glorifying of design as an approach that can achieve anything, there is an unflattering stroke of hubris. Of cou...
What is interaction and how can we describe it? In our recent book " Things That Keep Us Busy--the elements of interaction " we ta...