Producing a rigorous design case, and producing a case that holds utility for designers are not always one and the same act. The differences between rigor and utility in design cases are discussed in this article, as well as the position of the design case in the broader realm of naturalistic research. Drawing from naturalistic and action research, possible standards of rigor for cases emerge. These are presented and related to the representation of design knowledge. The article then presents issues observed among authors of traditional research in producing design cases of rigor.Kennon M. Smith, Ph.D., serves on the faculty of Interior Design in the College of Arts and Sciences at Indiana University and studies design education and acquisition of design expertise.

Endoxylanases classified into glycoside hydrolase family 30 subfamily 8 (GH30-8) are known to hydrolyze the hemicellulosic polysaccharide glucuronoxylan (GX) but not arabinoxylan or neutral xylooligosaccharides. This is owing to the specificity of these enzymes for the α-1,2-linked glucuronate (GA) appendage of GX. Limit hydrolysis of this substrate produces a series of aldouronates each containing a single GA substituted on the xylose penultimate to the reducing terminus. In this work, the structural and biochemical characterization of xylanase 30A from Clostridium papyrosolvens (CpXyn30A) is presented. This xylanase possesses a high degree of amino-acid identity to the canonical GH30-8 enzymes, but lacks the hallmark β8-α8 loop region which in part defines the function of this GH30 subfamily and its role in GA recognition. CpXyn30A is shown to have a similarly low activity on all xylan substrates, while hydrolysis of xylohexaose revealed a competing transglycosylation reaction. These findings are directly compared with the model GH30-8 enzyme from Bacillus subtilis, XynC. Despite its high sequence identity to the GH30-8 enzymes, CpXyn30A does not have any apparent specificity for the GA appendage. These findings confirm that the typically conserved β8-α8 loop region of these enzymes influences xylan substrate specificity but not necessarily β-1,4-xylanase function.

No abstract

student goes on a journey; stranger rides into the classroom: narratives and the instructor in the design studio abstract Enthusiasm is growing in non-traditional environments for teaching design by adapting knowledge and approaches from studio pedagogy, described as a 'signature pedagogy' by Lee S. Shulman in 2005. Meanwhile, those in fields where some variation of studio pedagogy have been used for decades are engaged in addressing some of its experienced shortcomings. Within this landscape of change, the authors have been engaged in study of their own studio-based courses, (interior design, instructional design, and interaction/experience design), reflecting on how this form of pedagogy is contributing to students' development as designers. In this study we consider the role of the instructor in the studio using a lens informed by narrative aesthetics and transformative education. The narrative that an instructor encourages students to experience with regard to themselves, to the instructor, or to both, has a profound impact in the studio environment. This article will explore that impact within the

No abstract

This article reports on a portion of a larger qualitative study focused on a group of interior design students' perceptions of their educational experiences. Twelve interior design students enrolled in their final studio course participated in interviews intended to elicit their perceptions of key barriers encountered during their undergraduate design school experience. Among students' perceived barriers to learning, studio project grades figured so prominently that they are the focus of this article. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed using a constant comparative approach. Themes were developed to describe the students' conceptions of meanings and sources of grades. Interactions among main themes are examined and implications for future research are addressed.

No abstract

Students striving to gain design expertise are likely to face significant barriers, some of which may be specific to a given individual, while others are likely shared among many novices in a discipline. Identifying recurrent patterns of such barriers may inform design pedagogy and indicate larger threshold concepts functioning as portals to disciplinary expertise. In this paper, 38 interior design students in their final required studio, representing three different cohort groups, participated in interviews regarding their design school experiences. From these student accounts, themes pertaining to difficulties which may have functioned as barriers in design expertise development were identified. This paper explores two central themes that are the focus of this inquiry: difficulty in seeking out standards to judge the quality of design work and difficulty in time management. Interview excerpts are used to illustrate how these issues were presented by participating students and the interaction of these factors is examined.