Doctoral education in design, the process of research degree study, and the trained researcher

Abstract

Whilst the 'contribution to knowledge' has long been understood as an outcome of doctoral research, in more recent times the spotlight has increasingly shifted to that other outcome of doctoral education: the trained researcher. The aim of this paper, similarly, is to set aside the epistemological and definitional issues that surround any notion of design knowledge and how one contributes to it, in favour of a focus on the process of studying for a research degree, the knowledge and skills one might reasonably expect research students to acquire, and the structuring of doctoral training programmes.Drawing on recent papers and policy documents in this area, as well as personal experience of developing a formal postgraduate research training programme, the paper identifies three key areas for consideration in the development of new doctoral training programmes for design. First, preparation for research degree studies. Second, the development of competence in research skills and procedures, including associated research career skills. Third, the promotion of methodological reflexivity. The paper expands on the implications of each for the structure and content of research training programmes in design. The intention is not to develop a definitive programme for doctoral education; rather it is to set out a framework for the discussion of a diversity of practices. IntroductionWhat does it mean to be a trained researcher in design? Whilst numerous papers over the last few years have sought to define the nature of research in design and art (Dilnot 1999), it is often less easy to see how this somewhat abstract debate has informed approaches to research education and training which are responsive to the practical needs of students. It is even possible to argue, as some have done in the social sciences (Seale 1999: ix), that an overemphasis on questions of methodology and epistemology is a distraction from the essentially practical business of doing research. Setting aside the epistemological and definitional issues that surround any notion of design knowledge and how one contributes to it, my aim in this paper is to focus on the process of studying for a research degree, the knowledge and skills needed by research students and which one might reasonably expect them to acquire, and the implications for the structure and content of doctoral training programmes. This approach is defensible on practical grounds as a response to the increasing number of research students in the field. Although historically the masters was seen as the terminal degree for students in fields of practical study such as design, this is no longer the case. A significant number of students in these fields now wish to engage in academic research at doctoral level. Statistics for the United Kingdom show an upward trend in doctoral qualifications awarded in the area of Creative Arts and Design particularly the number classified as part-time, which has risen steadily from 43

Rethinking PhD learning incorporating communities of practice

“…Newbury (2002) maintains that previous research on doctoral learning processes has shown that the student experiences learning as a solitary process. We offer the notion that students can avoid isolation and benefit from greater levels of external support by participating in collective doctoral research training programmes, which enable the facilitation of informal forms of interaction between research students and networks of support.…”

Art, media and design research and practice: views of educators in a ‘new’ Australian university

“…Newbury 2002). The emergence of alternative practice-based and professional doctorates in design has introduced the need for doctorates to be seen as advanced professional training, with coursework now included to cover the gaps in design skills for non-designers being recruited into such programmes and for designers with an evident lack of traditional academic skills needing such training.…”

An Enlarged Pragmatist Inquiry Paradigm for Methodological Pluralism in Academic Design Research

“…Friedman, 2003;Love, 2002). This is a somewhat expected move from practice fields attempting to legitimize their academic status in higher education, angst apparent in some recent discussions (Roth, 1999;Buchanan, 2001;Durling, 2002;Newbury, 2002). For design research, this has produced a proliferation of theory fashions and concepts each emphasizing particular concerns of the interior, industrial, graphic, and multimedia design process while simultaneously claiming universality.…”