Pushing Against an Open Door Ambient technology and the learning experience Jack Ingram

Birmingham Institute of Art & Design, University of Central England, Birmingham, UK.

Jack Ingram is Head of School of Product Design at the University of Central England. He works with companies in the management of new product development, and is Project Director for the Centre for High Value-Added Products, a £1.5m project to develop the role of design in SMEs in the West Midlands, part funded by the European Regional Development Fund. His research and consultancy are in the fields of design methods, product evolution and the management of continuous new product development for clients including Post Office Engineering Research, Cabot Software limited and Hills Industries limited. Following a Masters in Applied Psychology, he was an ergonomist in industry, before a design education career which has included forays into design journalism and publishing. He is a Council member of the Design Research Society and a founder member of the European Academy of Design. He is co-founder of The Design Journal, an international journal for all aspects of design, published by Ashgate. Email: [email protected]

Marie Jefsioutine

Birmingham Institute of Art & Design, University of Central England,

Birmingham, UK. Marie Jefsioutine is Senior Research Fellow at Birmingham Institute of Art and Design, University of Central England where she is involved in digital media design and usability research. Marie has worked in multimedia design for over ten years, previously at the BBC Open University and at Goldsmith’s College. Her first degree was in Experimental Psychology at Sussex, followed by an MSc in Computing, Cognition and Psychology at Warwick. Marie is a member of the Design Research Society, the BCS HCI group and the Museums Computer Group and regularly contributes to conferences in the field of design, e-learning and museums. Email: [email protected]

This paper describes an experiment in course delivery that, through careful management of the physical, pedagogic and social environment, has facilitated the creative exploitation by students of the ambient technology and ambient knowledge. The transfer from staff to students of the responsibility for teaching digital media topics has allowed the re-discovery of aspects of a central design curriculum that have been demoted in recent years. The paper makes the case for a 21st century design curriculum that acknowledges the benefits of a learning rather than learner-centred approach in which “both the learner and teacher are part of the larger process of learning.” The paper describes the evolution of a Product Design MA in which the enthusiasms, knowledge and skills that students bring with them are encouraged through the availability of carefully specified educational technology. Course design has been based on the assumption that, at this postgraduate level, every student owns a computer of some sort, and that the associated variety of specification, configuration, operating system and software, together with widely varying skill levels, rather than being a problem, are a rich learning resource. The course requires the use of digital media in presenting design concepts, the results of product analysis and research, and the detailed conclusions of personal projects. The development of ICT experience is fostered by matching skilled and less-skilled students in teams, allowing informal learning through ‘buddying’. The adoption of ICT in group work is encouraging students to attend university rather than work at home, which runs contrary to one of the basic assumptions that drives the institutional policy for ICT development, that students increasingly will work independently in isolation and at a distance. Instead, the course gains from student experience, recognises the role of the designer as a team member and encourages accidental learning. Keywords: creative exploitation, specified industrial technology, student experience

173

National Institute of Design Ahmedabad, India

Biographies? Keywords? Pushing Against an Open Door - Ambient Technology and the Learning Experience ‘There was a regular education to be had from eavesdropping. So much of what was learned was accidentally overheard, just half a sentence when walking through the door.’ – Ann Patchatt, Bel Canto 2001, Fourth Estate (Harper Collins), London.

Introduction This paper addresses the theme of the changing nature of ambient technology, and the lessons for course design. In doing so, it attempts to unpick several intertwined narratives that are based in the contrast between alternative approaches (proactive/reactive teaching presence, formal instruction/ informal peer learning), emphases (delivery/content, analysis/synthesis) and context (undergraduate/ postgraduate, multi-cultural/national issues). The principal components of these narratives are introduced as essential context for the specific case that is presented: a central argument is that technology issues (in this case communication technologies for teaching and learning) are inextricably linked in a symbiotic relationship with both learning and teaching styles, and product design course content.

Tradition and Modernity in Product Design Education. In the UK, the subject of product design is well established, and to some extent, standardised. Some of the standard features are a result of its location normally being in faculties of art and design (philosophical stances, tacit assumptions about the role of the artist/designer, learning and teaching styles). Others stem from the demands of professional design practice (syllabus topics such as drawing and modelling, materials and manufacturing processes). Against this background of stability and standardisation, there have been developments over the past 10-15 years that have great significance for the future of the subject, although they have yet to be fully reflected in course development. First there is the expansion of academic research in the design sector. In the UK this was accelerated by the inclusion, in 1992, of Art and Design in the periodic Research Assessment Exercise that for the first time made available substantial public funding for research. The Taught Masters programme is on the boundary between the practice driven undergraduate experience and doctoral research. Increasingly, successful completion of a Taught Masters programme is becoming a requirement for entry into a doctoral programme, with the effect that topics developed at Masters level are influencing the choice of doctoral research topics. Secondly, there is the changing relationship between universities and manufacturing industries. Traditionally, the relationship has been mediated by professional practice: practitioners working within industry became visiting tutors to design courses, providing a bridge between academic and commercial worlds. More recently, the development of practice-based academic research and the associated notion of design knowledge in a form that is both explicit (challenging the former reliance on tacit knowledge) and in a form that is useful to an industry keen to learn (cf Burns et al, 2001, 2003, 2004), challenges the traditional hierarchical relationship between education and professional practice. Increasingly, the first port of call of a manufacturer seeking advice on design is one of the many advisory services in universities across the UK. These advances in research and aspects of practice – the involvement of academics as ‘knowledge partners’ in collaborations with industry – have outpaced changes in the design curriculum. We have the situation where the best of design education has a healthy linkage to design theory (through research activities) and design practice (through linkage to industry). There is now an opportunity to reflect these positive attributes in course structures by undertaking a critical review of course content and delivery.

174

International Conference on D esign E ducation: T radition and M odernity 2005

Critical Reflection In his keynote speech at the Design Research Society’s ‘Quantum Leap’ conference in 1998, its then president, Bruce Archer, reflected on the early development of the society, and its origins in the design methods movement. He recalled how Karl Popper’s ‘conjectures and refutations’ (Popper, 1963) had provided a useful academic respectability for a design process that rarely was based on formal theory, or that tested formal hypotheses by experimentation. Popper’s arguments could be seen to support design process that generates concepts through a variety of methods (including the mysterious ‘flash of inspiration’) and then evaluates them against criteria that are appropriate to the context of the project. Traditionally, Popper’s case for challenging traditional scientific method has been adopted by design academics principally to justify the mysterious apparition of ‘conjectures’ that are subject to critical evaluation. However, for product design there is a case for developing an emphasis on the ‘refutation’ in Popper’s proposal.

The Specificity Of Product Design In the particular case of product design in a commercial context, the design process is continuous, in that the evolution of products through competition in the marketplace is continuous. The nature of competition in the marketplace ensures that successive new products are almost always heavily influenced by those they replace. The dynamics of the marketplace combine with new technological possibilities through the mediation of design to create a constantly evolving stream of products. This phenomenon is well recognised in commercial design practice, where in-house practitioners continuously move from the design of one product model to its successor, and even work on successive generations of a product simultaneously. Students design things once, then move on to a different product: there are advantages in this educational model (offering the possibility of structured experience of different design issues), but it denies the importance of product evolution. Competitor analysis is sometimes taught, but rarely given the importance it enjoys in the commercial world. Modifying Popper’s model for the product design case of continuous iteration of a product theme, it can be seen that the starting point of any product design process is the finishing point of some previous process – an existing product. In starting with a critical analysis of existing products, seeing in which ways they fail to meet our newly stated criteria, we are starting with refutations. The post-Popperian concept of ‘refutation and conjecture’ has become a central theme within the course described here.

The Medium / Message Relationship The theme of ‘refutation and conjecture’ has led to a reappraisal of the conventional wisdom that determines the ‘what’ of course design. The delivery methods described here are the natural outcomes of changes in content, in turn prompted by re-evaluation of the conventional syllabus. Re-evaluation was triggered by the adoption of an explicit philosophical stance. Here is a summary of the reasoning, and the resulting topics that might be considered dominant in the postgraduate product design syllabus:

•

Models of design process were originally formulated to describe projects in architecture and engineering that lack the essential product design feature of competition in a marketplace, with the attendant need to create differentiating features within conservative parameters. [Iterative models of design process.]

•

In the commercial world of product design, products evolve through frequent incremental changes, rather than through designers’ creativity acting upon a blank sheet of paper. There may be patterns to this evolution. [Predictive models of product evolution.]

•

The most powerful justification of design process is the philosophy of Popper, summarised as, ‘it is acceptable for conjectures to come from anywhere, as long as they are subjected to genuine attempts to refute them.’ In other words, the critical analysis of design proposals is central to good design practice. For product design, design process starts with refutation – challenging the assumption of existing products. [Methods for critical analysis.]

175

National Institute of Design Ahmedabad, India

(Almost) New Technology The adoption of new technologies by design courses has been part of the debate about the future of design education for many years. The steady adoption of computer-based activities by the design professions has been the stimulus for (in some design areas a sometimes hesitant) inclusion of digital technologies into the curriculum. However, the debate has tended to centralise around the detail of tuition, rather than the general principle of adoption (or not) of new technologies. Undergraduate courses in product design have been faced with a difficult set of choices, as competing software options have fought for dominance in professional practice, and student demand for CAD tuition has taken up increasing curriculum time. The rapid pace of software development and the corresponding demands on platforms has made it difficult for courses to produce graduates with the skills and experience that match the range of expectations of potential employers. For postgraduate courses the issues are different, and the graduating cohort of the Master of Arts in Product Design at Birmingham Institute of Art and Design in 2004 provides an example. Twenty six students, from nine countries (representing seven native languages) were drawn from undergraduate courses that include industrial design, engineering, interior design, photography, packaging design, applied arts and design management. The range of knowledge and skills was varied: some students were experts in the application of new technologies (web authoring, image manipulation, CAD, animation, etc.), others were familiar only with the rudiments of word processing and email). The course has the common UK structure of one academic year of twelve months, split into three trimesters of 15 weeks, with short vacations between. Within this structure, and given the diversity of skills and experience that students bring to the course, attempting to bring students to a common level of competence is unrealistic, but there is the opportunity for building on this wide skill base by setting educational objectives that avoid duplication of those at undergraduate level, and that spread among their peers the knowledge students bring to the course. In this paradigm, the approach to new technology differs markedly from that at undergraduate level. For example, in product design, students often engage with new technology as a component of new product opportunities. The acquisition of skills in the application of existing technologies (by definition, representing the technological possibilities of the recent past) can inhibit an understanding of future possibilities based on yet-to-be-proved technology developments. Dunne (1999) has suggested that when we use electronic products, we often do so by exploring (and mapping out the extreme limits of) the functions of which they are capable, rather than using them to achieve some preconceived aim. Product design students typify users who ‘play’ with technological possibilities. It seems strange, therefore, to instruct students in ‘correct’ procedures for the use of prescribed software installed on a particular hardware platform. Instead, if it is assumed that the use of information technology in design is normal, unremarkable and ubiquitous, and that students are skilful owners of digital technology products, design debate is left free to focus on issues that are at the centre of the subject, rather than being diverted into the peripheral and passing concerns of utilising whatever happen to be the current technologies that are available.

Learning And The Learner Anderson and Garrison (2003) argue for a learning centred rather than a learner centred approach to education. “The focus is on learning, but not just whatever the learner capriciously decides. An educational experience is intended to focus on learning outcomes that have value for society as well as the learner” (p64). In the particular case of design education, this principle is generally accepted and reflected in the common practice of requiring students to justify their projects in the wider moral, ethical and cultural context. However, they further say “A learner-centred approach risks marginalizing the teacher and the essential value of the transaction in creating a critical community of inquiry. In an educational experience, both the learner and teacher are part of the larger process of learning” (p64). “Teaching presence is

176

International Conference on D esign E ducation: T radition and M odernity 2005

charged with shaping the right transactional balance and, along with the learners, managing and monitoring the achievement of worthwhile learning outcomes in a timely manner” (p65). This development of their theme challenges some of the orthodoxies of design education. We are used to the opposite case: that the individual student should pursue a personally chosen project, and students operating independently. Students interfacing with teachers in one-to-one tutorials do not make for ‘a critical community of inquiry,’ and one of the primary aims of postgraduate education should be to create such a community. We are used to teachers ‘shaping the right transactional balance’ and ‘monitoring the achievement of worthwhile learning outcomes in a timely manner’ – the challenge is to transfer the good practice that occurs with individuals to whole groups of learners, and to engender a communal sense of being ‘part of the larger process of learning.’ The notion of ‘teaching presence’ needs to be put into context. Garrison et al (2000), in addressing the needs of an online education community, identify three components: cognitive presence, social presence and teaching presence. These components can be seen to be essential for any education community. In the example that follows, the identification (by Garrison et al) of these three requirements for an online community (and tacitly present in the best examples of studio culture) is useful in the conscious development of an institutionally based critical community of inquiry.

Postgraduate Learning In the space between an undergraduate experience characterised by practical skills acquisition and doctoral research characterised either by the pursuit of new knowledge or, increasingly, reflective practice, there is an educational gulf. The skills gap is in the areas of research methodologies and critical analysis: few undergraduate experiences prepare students for doctoral research, as evidenced by the explosion of postgraduate course components in research methodologies. The knowledge gap can be seen as due to the need for a shift in emphasis from addressing one kind of knowledge to another. Cross (2000) identifies three forms in which design knowledge exists. Design epistemology encompasses formal systems of knowledge (although design ‘epistemics’, ‘the construction of formal models of the processes – perceptual, intellectual and linguistic – by which knowledge and understanding are achieved and communicated’ (Bullock and Trombley, 1999), might be more appropriate to design than a formal philosophical theory). Design research can be seen as the activity that concerns itself principally with this form of knowledge. In contrast, design praxiology is the knowledge (often tacit) embedded in practice: developed by practitioners, this is commonly the emphasis in undergraduate experience. Cross suggests a third form, design phenomenology, the knowledge embedded in designed artefacts. In the following example of postgraduate course content, the critical analysis of designed artefacts is used to develop the ‘critical community of inquiry’ described by Anderson and Garrison, as part of the transition from an undergraduate culture into one in which teachers and learners join in the learning process as an explicit endeavour to develop subject knowledge.

The Example of Product Analysis The ‘design phenomenology’ of Cross (ibid) is more than what is sometimes called ‘reverse engineering’: there are elements of precedent analysis, drawing on historical perspectives, product semantics, history of technology, commercial and cultural contexts, theories of consumption. Each detail, each design decision, in a product can be seen as an embodiment of a balance between aesthetic, technical and interaction factors, the balance influenced by commercial and cultural contexts at the time of the decision. This complex ‘lash up’ of diverse factors is well articulated by Molotch (2002), a sociologist whose perspectives on contemporary society complement the more traditional perspectives of design historians. Central to a course philosophy that sets out to challenge conventional wisdom by championing the concept of product evolution facilitated by teams of collaborators over product creation by individuals,

177

National Institute of Design Ahmedabad, India

is the notion that much can be learned from the study of existing products. Product Analysis is taught formally in two modules (30 out of a total of 180 course credits). Lectures introduce central concepts (models of product evolution drawing on engineering, anthropology, biology; product semantics; design knowledge; critical analysis), case studies (examples that in turn emphasise technology, interaction, aesthetic and commercial decisions). Group exercises require students to bring together competing examples of a particular product: the gathered examples are then compared using a structured ‘game’ which involves all members of the group. Additionally, there are assignments: working in small groups, students compare similar details across competing products, speculating about the relative influences of the major sets of contributory factors that may have influenced detail design decisions. It matters not that in many cases it will not be possible to confirm the speculation. The importance of the exercise is to make explicit the issues that would have been debated when the design decisions were made, and by so doing generate a culture of critical inquiry. The inquiry is informed by a parallel series of case studies presented by teachers who have detailed personal knowledge of the design decisions for the products studied. The mechanics of a typical product analysis assignment are as follows: 1

Teams are selected by the teacher to create a mixture of previous educational experiences, skills and knowledge.

2

Product details for investigation are assigned to team randomly from a list that has been generated through staff/student seminar discussion (typically details of products that are readily available to be photographed – street furniture, automobiles, bicycles, luggage).

3

Photographs of details to be compared are taken by members of a small team, working either singly or as a group, at the discretion of the team members.

4

Members of the team compare the photographic record to select images of exemplar products

5

Each team constructs a presentation of the chosen images, with a commentary that shows

6

Each team presentation is in the form of a seminar to the whole course.

that illustrate design issues within the assigned details. students’ understanding of the concepts introduced in the lecture series.

There is an additional requirement for individual students to undertake a detailed analysis of one particular example from the team presentation, but the team tasks described above have seen the greatest effects of changes in digital imaging technologies. The effects of these changes have been tracked in a project within the University of Central England’s Learning and Teaching Strategy Programme supported by the Higher Education Funding Council (England).

Educational Aims The first formal stage of the Digital Imaging and Learning Styles project (DIALS I) was launched in 1998, building on an informal pilot study that commenced in 1996. Its aim was to encourage students to make more effective use of the technologies that were becoming available, in order to develop their ability to learn from existing products. The academic rationale for developing the role of formal Product Analysis within the design curriculum has been summarised above. For a subject in which praxiology normally dominates, and formal staff teaching is subservient to student creativity, phenomenology, as formal analysis of existing products, offers a route to product design knowledge that is compatible with the atelier ethos. In the same way that a teacher typically works with a student to develop the details of a product proposal, product analysis encourages close examination and discussion of details of existing products. Speculation about the factors that influenced design decisions evident in the product introduces and contextualises both the importance of those factors and the ways in which conflicting requirements are accommodated.

178

International Conference on D esign E ducation: T radition and M odernity 2005

Digital imaging offers facilities that facilitate the product analysis process: i

Close up detail is more easily captured, as digital cameras have good macro capability, compared with conventional film cameras (fig 1).

ii

Digital image manipulation, annotation and animation allows students with weak verbal skills, yet strong pictorial and spatial reasoning, to show their understanding of underlying principles that have determined detail product decisions (fig 2)

iii

Digital projection presents large scale images for class discussion: the facility for large groups simultaneously to view small details of objects that can be captured and displayed in real time enables engagement with issues as they arise in discussion. Previous technologies required teachers to anticipate issues in advance, preparing imagery that was often dependent on third parties for its processing.

Fig 1: Product detail (including manufacturing faults) using macro facility on inexpensive digital camera

Fig 2: Mechanical detail, bottle cap, showing over-centre principle (one of a sequence)

Technology, Politics and Practicality A small project funded under the university’s Learning and Teaching initiative was successful in encouraging postgraduate design students to utilise ‘image capture stations’ as additions to their own computing facilities. When the project was initiated in 1998, most students owned computing facilities of some kind, although some overseas students did not. Surveys showed that specifications varied widely, as did the ownership of peripherals such as scanners and cameras, and software for image manipulation. Computing skills varied from basic word processing to professional standard computer aided design. This early project aimed to minimise the effects of the inequitable ownership of computing facilities, by providing ‘image capture stations’ that were specified to be compatible with the variety of technology owned by students. They offered Internet connection, cameras, scanners and a variety of portable storage media, plus basic image manipulation software. Product design students have a natural interest in new products, and particularly those based on new technologies: there is a tendency to allow fascination for the technology override other design issues. In order to avoid an undue emphasis on the technology, and instead to concentrate on what it was to be used for, the decision was made to specify what was characterised as ‘two year old technology’ – technology that had become established and ubiquitous and was therefore lacking in gratuitous novelty. The intention was that students would continue to work at home as much as they wished, using the shared facilities to supplement their own just as much as was needed to provide an equality of opportunity for the presentation of work in a digital form. The emphasis was on a standardisation of the presentation medium rather than of the source material: original sketches, photographic prints and transparencies and photocopies were equally acceptable, but the default presentation format

179

National Institute of Design Ahmedabad, India

required was a Microsoft PowerPoint slide show. The benefits of this format for the presentation and publication of complex issues in product design research have been described by Rust (2001); in particular the benefits for establishing a structure for handling information that is contained as much in images as in text.

From Proactive to Reactive Teaching The introduction of the analytical approach described above, with its specific requirements generated an enthusiasm for a more general adoption of analysis, team-working and digital presentation in student-led seminars. Teachers found that a ‘critical community of inquiry’ placed demands on them to modify standard course elements in order to satisfy the demands of students. The pace of change and degree of student enthusiasm created a momentum that required teachers to react quickly in order not to lose the potential of the situation. The combined effects of providing shared facilities that minimise the differences of students’ personal ownership of digital image technology, tasks of analysis that illuminate models of product evolution, team-working and group seminar presentations can be summarised in several ways: Subject Development The academic rationale that initiated the work was based in the belief that some of the assumptions that underpinned the learning and teaching methods for the subject had been limiting its ability to keep up with commercial design practice. In the case of Product Design, an emphasis on individual student effort and an approach to creativity that requires every project to start with a ‘blank sheet of paper’ fails to gain the full value of learning from existing products, and the role of the designer as a team member. Digital imaging facilitates the development of formal procedures for product analysis (Ingram, 1997; Ingram & Jefsioutine, 1999), but the spillage into other areas through student initiative has shown that changes in learning styles and students’ work patterns are equally significant. Learning Styles and Work Patterns The intended shift of emphasis from a simplistic view of creativity to an appreciation of the value of product analysis was achieved. This required a close scrutiny of product details that might otherwise be overlooked. The choice of everyday products as the object of students’ attention led to a realisation in design students that they can learn from everyday experience. The adoption of a formal analytical model helped students structure their thoughts. The use of digital presentations through packages such as PowerPoint facilitated group working by providing a common template that accepted content from a variety of original media (and encouraged the adoption of bullet points + images - a great advantage for students whose first language is not English). Careful choice of team membership mixed students of varying skills, allowing informal learning through ‘buddying’. When team-working, students met up to share contributions to the team effort. In this latter respect, the adoption of ICT is encouraging students to attend university rather than work at home, which runs contrary to one of the basic assumptions that drives much institutional policy for ICT development. Top-down and Bottom-up Conflicts A major benefit of the project described, as perceived by the students and staff involved, is learning to work as part of a team. An extension of the team dynamic has been a positive effect on student social lives (the students on this international course currently are drawn from 10 countries around the world). Ironically, many educators assume that students increasingly will work in isolation and at a distance.

Conclusions Experience of the developments described here suggest that the eager adoption by students of readily available ambient technology largely has been due to what Anderson et al have identified as

180

International Conference on D esign E ducation: T radition and M odernity 2005

the ‘social presence’ component of an educational community. A key mechanism for the speedy development of skills and knowledge has been the ‘buddying’ that results from teamwork that is structured with some of the ethos of ‘play’. Frequent changes in team membership, and the use of chance (in determining membership, order of presentations and leaders of discussions) helps establish a creatively playful ethos. Digital presentations that fit a standard template (eg Microsoft PowerPoint slide shows) are readily edited and re-formed to make teaching material for successive cohorts of students. Presentation of previous cohorts’ outcomes, as part of project briefing, establishes benchmarks in a graphic form. Language differences, skill and knowledge levels are minimised by the characteristics of the chosen template, giving encouragement to weaker students. The development of the social presence has led to wide-ranging educational benefits, and in the specific case of the uptake of digital technologies, it has all but eliminated the need for formal instruction. The frequent student-led seminars that follow from the habits instilled at the beginning of the course provide the vehicle for feedback and exemplars of good practice that rarely needs additional staff inputs. Typically, whole day programmes of seminars occur on a weekly basis for 20 weeks of the year, and the combination of both team and individual presentations total more than 200 shared experiences in a normal year. This combined programme represents a powerful teaching tool that has far outstripped its modest original objectives. The challenge now is to spread aspects of this experience into undergraduate programmes, and to raise the expectations of teaching staff who increasing will find themselves trailing their students in the use of ambient technology. By focussing on the development of the social presence, there is a natural shift from learner centred education to learning centred education, and the resulting shared contribution to the larger process of learning will lead to changes in teacher roles that challenge some of the tacit assumptions of design education. For the subject of product design, where challenging (refuting) the status quo at the outset is argued to be good practice, these changes are to be welcomed.

References Anderson, T.D. and Garrison, D.R. E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice. London: Routledge Falmer, 2003. Anderson T.D., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R. and Archer, W., (2001). “Assessing teacher prescence in a computer conferencing context.” Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). Available online http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/ v5n2_anderson.asp (cited in Anderson & Garrison 2003:66) Bullock and Trombley (eds). The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought. London: HarperCollins, 2001. Burns, K, Newport, R and Ingram, J. “The design information needs of small and medium-sized enterprises.” In: R Cooper and V Branco eds d3 desire designum design, 4th European Academy of Design Conference Proceedings, University of Aveiro, 10-12 April 2001, 208-213. Burns, K, Jefsioutine, M, and Knight, J. “Promoting Design in SMEs through user-centred methods.” 5th European Academy of Design Proceedings, Barcelona, April 2003. Burns, K and Ingram, J. “Creating a design knowledge network.” In the proceedings of Future Ground - Design Research Society Conference, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia, November 2004. Cross, N. “Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science.” Proceedings of Design + Research. Politecnico di Milano, May 18-20, 2000. Eds; S Pizzocaro, A Arruda, D De Moreas, Milano 2000. Dunne, A. Hertzian Tales. Computer Related Design Studio, Royal College of Art, 1999. Ingram J. “Product Systematics - towards a predictive model of product evolution.” Paper presented at 2nd European Academy of Design conference, ‘Design in Contexts’, Stockholm, Sweden, 1997. Ingram J & Jefsioutine M. “Digital Imaging and Product Analysis.” Presentation at Association for Learning Technology annual conference, Bristol University, UK, 1999. Molotch, H. Where Stuff Comes From: How toasters, toilets, cars, computers and many other things come to be as they are. New York: Routledge, 2002. Popper, K. Conjectures and Refutations. London & New York: Routeledge, 1963. Rust, C. “A visual thesis? Techniques for reporting practice-led research.” In: R Cooper and V Branco (eds) d 3 desire designum design, 4th European Academy of Design Conference Proceedings, University of Aveiro 10-12 April 2001.

181

National Institute of Design Ahmedabad, India