PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
|
View:
New views
10 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
 |
PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by Dr Mark Evans
::
Rate this Message:
Having spent my early career as a practitioner; employed practice in my own
PhD (industrial design); and now supervise/examine PhD's that include practice as a research method; I reflected on my experiences in the preparation of a paper for the 2009 International Conference of the DRS Special Interest Group on Experiential Knowledge (http://www.experientialknowledge.org/). When discussing the use of practice in research, I made the following comments in the abstract of my paper: "When considering the application of such methods, it is necessary to ask two key questions: can the process/outcomes supply robust data and does the researcher have the necessary capability as a practitioner to enable generalisations to be made. The latter issue brings into question the need for appropriate supervision, as judgements must be made on the capability of the researcher and quality/relevance of creative output i.e. do their supervisors need expertise in practice?". I have seen examples of poor practice that has contributed to PhD's in industrial/product design and have no problems articulating the deficiencies and impact this has on the research method. Unfortunately, their supervisors were unable to see this. I therefore have concerns that this may be a significant issue in the field of industrial/product design. It may also be an issue for other disciplines but have no evidence to substantiate this. I'd therefore like to offer up the potentially controversial position that PhD's that include practice as a research method should, preferably, be supervised by academics that have considerable experience as practitioners: plus a PhD of course! |
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by PR Hodge
::
Rate this Message:
Mark
...I'd therefore like to offer up the potentially controversial position that PhD's that include practice as a research method should, preferably, be supervised by academics that have considerable experience as practitioners: plus a PhD of course!... Are you saying that there are examples - in your experience - of non practitioners supervising? I find this quite incredible - theory is is what theory doesn't as me old Yorkshire mum used to say. I can understand supervision from someone without a PhD - but only in a secondary role. Robin PR Hodge MA, BA (Hons), PG Dip (Media), FAETC, MIDI Fellow of the Royal Society Faculty Head of Collaborative Courses Programme Director Master of Design and Communication TEL: ext 75572 Foyle Arts University of Ulster at Magee L/derry -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design on behalf of Dr Mark Evans Sent: Tue 10/11/2009 16:19 To: PHD-DESIGN@... Subject: PhD supervision of practice as a research method? Having spent my early career as a practitioner; employed practice in my own PhD (industrial design); and now supervise/examine PhD's that include practice as a research method; I reflected on my experiences in the preparation of a paper for the 2009 International Conference of the DRS Special Interest Group on Experiential Knowledge (http://www.experientialknowledge.org/). When discussing the use of practice in research, I made the following comments in the abstract of my paper: "When considering the application of such methods, it is necessary to ask two key questions: can the process/outcomes supply robust data and does the researcher have the necessary capability as a practitioner to enable generalisations to be made. The latter issue brings into question the need for appropriate supervision, as judgements must be made on the capability of the researcher and quality/relevance of creative output i.e. do their supervisors need expertise in practice?". I have seen examples of poor practice that has contributed to PhD's in industrial/product design and have no problems articulating the deficiencies and impact this has on the research method. Unfortunately, their supervisors were unable to see this. I therefore have concerns that this may be a significant issue in the field of industrial/product design. It may also be an issue for other disciplines but have no evidence to substantiate this. I'd therefore like to offer up the potentially controversial position that PhD's that include practice as a research method should, preferably, be supervised by academics that have considerable experience as practitioners: plus a PhD of course! |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by Robert Harland
::
Rate this Message:
Mark and Robin
Earlier this year I saw a presentation by a recently qualified PhD candidate with a background in Fine Art, who chose to use what I would best describe as the process of Graphic Design to produce a predominantly text based artifact to accompany their 15000 word thesis. As a piece of 'graphic design', in my view, it was very poor, and after questioning, it appeared the originator of the work had not incorporated in their method any accountable investigation into the conventions of practice in some core areas (typography, for example), beyond what they could achieve with access to decent page layout software. I have therefore seen what you describe below from another disciplinary perspective. But one thing strikes me. As these PhDs surface, good and bad, the opportunity will arise to compare and contrast different approaches, and build a better understanding of how we account for reasonable standards in 'design practice' as part of the research methodology, and to what extent someone should master the conventions of design practice if they choose a cross-disciplinary approach. In the case I mention above, it meant understanding the difference between an apostrophe and a prime (hatch) mark, amongst other things. I speak as a practitioner turned PhD candidate. Robert. Robert Harland Lecturer Loughborough University School of Art and Design +44 (0)1509 228980 r.g.harland@... www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ac/mainpages/Research/staffpages/harland/harland.htm On 10 Nov 2009, at 16:19, Dr Mark Evans wrote: > I have seen examples of poor practice that has contributed to PhD's in > industrial/product design and have no problems articulating the > deficiencies > and impact this has on the research method. Unfortunately, their > supervisors > were unable to see this. I therefore have concerns that this may be a > significant issue in the field of industrial/product design. It may > also be an > issue for other disciplines but have no evidence to substantiate this. |
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by Martyn Evans
::
Rate this Message:
Hi Mark
Your post brings to my mind a dilemma: Do good designers make good design lecturers (and supervisors)? In my opinion, the two are not mutually exclusive. With over 12 years experience in practice and academia, I can recount numerous examples of 'good' designers who do not make 'good' lecturers, and conversely 'good' design lecturers that cannot design for toffee!!! That said, they may enable students to create excellent design work and develop influential design careers (a long debate about what 'good' means no doubt will ensue...). You say ...I'd therefore like to offer up the potentially controversial position that PhD's that include practice as a research method should, preferably, be supervised by academics that have considerable experience as practitioners... The key issue here relates to the validity and nature of the experience as practitioners. Does considerable experience (length of service?) imply this experience will result in the ability to effectively supervise PhD's that include practice as a research? In principle I agree that PhD's that include practice as a research should be supervised by individuals that have experience as practitioners, but... there are some supervisors who will never be able to see 'examples of poor practice' irrespective of their level of experience as practitioners. Perhaps it comes down to nature of experience as practitioners. Thanks for an interesting post from a practitioner, lecturer, and (final stage) PhD candidate. M Martyn Evans Director - MA Design: Management and Policy Lancaster University T: +44 (0)1524 593435 W: www.imagination.lancaster.ac.uk/people/martyn_evans/ |
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by Alison Barnes
::
Rate this Message:
Hi Rob (and Robin and Mark)
Two things crossed my mind when reading your post... 1. 'their 15000 word thesis.' - 15,000 words - that sounds like an extended essay, not a thesis. 2. Cross-disciplinary practice - I am lucky enough to have a trio of supervisors - a graphic design theory professor, a graphic design practice professor and a professor of cultural geography - this mix fills me with confidence that my experience will be a rigorous and well supported one. I can't just pretend I know what I am talking about regarding the geographical equivalent of apostrophes and prime marks - it wouldn't wash! You weren't on the 8.14 this morning - were you having a lie in?! Alison * * * Alison Barnes AHRC funded research student School of Graphic Design, LCC University of the Arts, London http://geo-graphic.blogspot.com/ ________________________________________ From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf Of Robert Harland [R.G.Harland@...] Sent: 10 November 2009 20:54 To: PHD-DESIGN@... Subject: Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method? Mark and Robin Earlier this year I saw a presentation by a recently qualified PhD candidate with a background in Fine Art, who chose to use what I would best describe as the process of Graphic Design to produce a predominantly text based artifact to accompany their 15000 word thesis. As a piece of 'graphic design', in my view, it was very poor, and after questioning, it appeared the originator of the work had not incorporated in their method any accountable investigation into the conventions of practice in some core areas (typography, for example), beyond what they could achieve with access to decent page layout software. I have therefore seen what you describe below from another disciplinary perspective. But one thing strikes me. As these PhDs surface, good and bad, the opportunity will arise to compare and contrast different approaches, and build a better understanding of how we account for reasonable standards in 'design practice' as part of the research methodology, and to what extent someone should master the conventions of design practice if they choose a cross-disciplinary approach. In the case I mention above, it meant understanding the difference between an apostrophe and a prime (hatch) mark, amongst other things. I speak as a practitioner turned PhD candidate. Robert. Robert Harland Lecturer Loughborough University School of Art and Design +44 (0)1509 228980 r.g.harland@... www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ac/mainpages/Research/staffpages/harland/harland.htm On 10 Nov 2009, at 16:19, Dr Mark Evans wrote: > I have seen examples of poor practice that has contributed to PhD's in > industrial/product design and have no problems articulating the > deficiencies > and impact this has on the research method. Unfortunately, their > supervisors > were unable to see this. I therefore have concerns that this may be a > significant issue in the field of industrial/product design. It may > also be an > issue for other disciplines but have no evidence to substantiate this. |
|
|
|
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by teena clerke
::
Rate this Message:
Hi all,
in my (limited) experience of doing a doctorate (in progress), it is essential to have supervisors who are pedagogically sound in all the relevant practices of the doctorate (designing, teaching designing, supervising research and writing research) for students to produce relevant scholarly knowledge. It's up to the student and supervisor/s together to decide in which fields to locate the research, and this is no easy task for design which is in the process of negotiating disciplinary boundaries. However, there are pedagogic models of co-, joint and collaborative supervision that might provide students access to a number of people with skills in a range of these practices, other than having one supervisor skilled in all. In my doctorate about women and design scholarship (in process), I have a supervisor well regarded and widely published in the fields of Adult education, feminist research, doctoral pedagogies and research writing (she was a geography teacher at schools in a previous life), and a co-supervisor with a PhD in design education, and with many years of teaching under her belt (she was a well regarded professional designer in a previous life). Together (all three of us) work my thesis to produce a rigorous, relevant outcome that will speak to scholars in design and other professional practice fields. It is a text-based PhD, and I draw on my knowledge/skill as a graphic designer to lay out the text to rhetorically support my argument/s. So while the focus is not on designing, designing fundamentally informs my PhD. One of the reasons I chose the research topic and also the supervisors, is as Katherine says, there are few graphic design PhDs in Australia, and noone in my vicinity who could have supervised this project, so I have two supervisors who together provide what is required. I also suggest it's possible (and desirable) in the interim in Australia for students to seek supervisors in fields that are empathetic to design, who also offer experience in other practices, particularly those of doctoral pedagogies, so students can learn how to locate the work, structure an argument, and write in a convincing and appropriate way and at doctoral level. After all, in addition to the thesis/artefact itself, the outcome of a PhD is the production of a researcher with the capacity to conduct and disseminate independent and scholarly research. cheers, teena |
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by Jose Luis Casamayor
::
Rate this Message:
Hi Mark,
After reading the paper there are some issues that are not totally clear to me. I will try to summarize them below: 1 - The first issue is that the word 'practice' is very tricky and it can mean many things in different contexts. For example, to me practice refers to professional practice. In that sense, to me there is no practice-based/non-practice based research, but just research, which involves practice in order to be mastered like many other activities. 2 - The second issue is that some of the type of practice-based research you mentioned in your paper might be considered (as you mentioned) action research, which is not new to research in other fields, and which has been adopted by design-research, among other methodologies from other fields. 3 - The third issue is addition to knowledge. Some of the PhDs examples you mentioned contribute to the traditional view of addition to knowledge (according to the natural science research approach), however other might not be adding to knowledge (in the traditional sense) but represent addition to the state of the art. Now, if these tools, artefacts, etc embody addition to knowledge too, or they just represent advanced product development practice? i do not know the answer, i am inclined to think they do, and commercial research is an example of that, however we should be aware that academic research and commercial research are not the same thing. I hope this helps, Jose > Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:19:04 +0000 > From: M.A.Evans@... > Subject: PhD supervision of practice as a research method? > To: PHD-DESIGN@... > > Having spent my early career as a practitioner; employed practice in my own > PhD (industrial design); and now supervise/examine PhD's that include practice > as a research method; I reflected on my experiences in the preparation of a > paper for the 2009 International Conference of the DRS Special Interest Group > on Experiential Knowledge (http://www.experientialknowledge.org/). When > discussing the use of practice in research, I made the following comments in > the abstract of my paper: > > "When considering the application of such methods, it is necessary to ask two > key questions: can the process/outcomes supply robust data and does the > researcher have the necessary capability as a practitioner to enable > generalisations to be made. The latter issue brings into question the need for > appropriate supervision, as judgements must be made on the capability of the > researcher and quality/relevance of creative output i.e. do their supervisors > need expertise in practice?". > > I have seen examples of poor practice that has contributed to PhD's in > industrial/product design and have no problems articulating the deficiencies > and impact this has on the research method. Unfortunately, their supervisors > were unable to see this. I therefore have concerns that this may be a > significant issue in the field of industrial/product design. It may also be an > issue for other disciplines but have no evidence to substantiate this. > > I'd therefore like to offer up the potentially controversial position that PhD's > that include practice as a research method should, preferably, be supervised > by academics that have considerable experience as practitioners: plus a PhD > of course! _________________________________________________________________ Deja que Sietes te enseñe todo los secretos de Windows http://www.sietesunpueblodeexpertos.com/ |
|
|
Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method?
by Terence Love-2
::
Rate this Message:
Dear Mark and all,
There is an argument lurking in the discussion that is one of the classic fallacies (of the sort that PhD students should avoid!). Martyn draws attention to it. Avoiding fallacies in discussion and analysis is important because it is one of the core skills of PhD study and PhD supervision. Lurking in the discussion is fallacious reasoning that follows the following sequence, Design practitioners are good at design. Some design practitioners make good teachers. PhD supervision sometimes involves some teaching. Some design PhD students have practice as part of their PhD research. Therefore the required skills of a PhD supervisor are those of a Design practitioner" This combines three fallacies: 1. The fallacy of proof through association ("I saw him in the same city. Therefore it must have been him that did it") 2. The fallacy of partial proof (A shark can be a parent. Parents supervise children swimming. Therefore, sharks are good at supervising children swimming) 3. The fallacy of the excluded middle (A cat has four legs and a dog has four legs therefore a cat is a dog) Fundamentally the problem is of avoiding rhetorical reasoning that uses fallacies. The solution to use supervisors that help candidates avoid rhetorical fallacious reasoning in their PhDs. To identify suitable supervisors requires avoiding the same problems with rhetorical fallacies and being straightforward: e.g. make a complete list of the skills, competencies and experiences needed by the PhD supervisor and ensure that the supervisor has those skills. The only common training program for most of the necessary skills is a PhD followed by being mentored for a few years by more experienced persons with PhDs. As a side note, one of the weaknesses of Art and Design PhD study internationally is that for a decade or more we have had PhD candidates coming though with poor supervision in reasoning skills and avoiding rhetorical fallacies. This problem exists to the extent that a three or four years ago one text aimed at PhD students openly advocated Design PhD students committing research sins such as presenting biased evidence, giving false or contrived analyses and deceiving the reader - using any rhetorical trick to persuade the reader to the author's position. At the same time, the authors themselves (experienced and respected design educators) used fallacious arguments to persuade PhD students that this was normal and exemplary research and thesis writing behaviour. The book is still in print and some supervisors and PhD students are using it. The consequence will be that the same problems will propagate into the next generation of Design PhDs. It's important for PhD students to be aware of this problem in the field. Best wishes, Terry ____________________ Dr. Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI Director Design-focused Research Group, Design Out Crime Research Group Researcher, Digital Ecosystems and Business Intelligence Institute Associate, Planning and Transport Research Centre Curtin University, PO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia 6845 Mob: 0434 975 848, Fax +61(0)8 9305 7629, t.love@... Visiting Professor, Member of Scientific Council UNIDCOM/ IADE, Lisbon, Portugal Honorary Fellow, Institute of Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Development Management School, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK ____________________ -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:PHD-DESIGN@...] On Behalf Of Evans, Martyn Sent: Wednesday, 11 November 2009 5:29 AM To: PHD-DESIGN@... Subject: Re: PhD supervision of practice as a research method? Hi Mark Your post brings to my mind a dilemma: Do good designers make good design lecturers (and supervisors)? In my opinion, the two are not mutually exclusive. With over 12 years experience in practice and academia, I can recount numerous examples of 'good' designers who do not make 'good' lecturers, and conversely 'good' design lecturers that cannot design for toffee!!! That said, they may enable students to create excellent design work and develop influential design careers (a long debate about what 'good' means no doubt will ensue...). You say ...I'd therefore like to offer up the potentially controversial position that PhD's that include practice as a research method should, preferably, be supervised by academics that have considerable experience as practitioners... The key issue here relates to the validity and nature of the experience as practitioners. Does considerable experience (length of service?) imply this experience will result in the ability to effectively supervise PhD's that include practice as a research? |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
