While sketching has an established role in professional design, its benefits and role in design education are subjects that invite research and opinions. We investigated how undergraduates studying to become design educators and textile teachers used sketching to generate and develop design solutions in a collaborative setting. The students were given an authentic design assignment involving three detailed tasks, one of which was 2D visualisation by sketching. Adopting a micro-analytical approach, we analysed the video-recorded visualisation session to understand how teams used sketching to collaborate and to generate and develop design solutions. To that end, we set three research questions: (1) What ways of collaborative working are reflected in actions of sketching? (2) In what ways do sequences of collaborative sketching contribute to designing? (3) What kinds of collaborative sequences of sketching advance designing? Our analysis identified three collaborative ways of sketching (co-ordinated, collective and disclosed) and confirmed that sketching is an important facilitator of mutual appropriation, adaption and adoption. Next, we identified three ways of contributing to designing, as well as three functions and six capacities for advancing designing. Our analysis shows that sketching can lead to invaluable advances in designing, although each team had its own way of using and benefiting from sketching. We further consider that the teams’ diverse sketching processes and rich content owed, at least in part, to the task structure and imposed constraints. We continue to see sketching as an important design tool, one among many.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Ahmed, S., Wallace, K. M., & Blessing, L. T. M. (2003). Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design, 14, 1–11.
Bilda, Z., Gero, J., & Purcell, T. (2006). To sketch or not to sketch? That is the question. Design Studies, 27, 587–613.
Boucharenc, C. G. (2006). Research on basic design education: An international survey. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16, 1–30.
Bucciarelli, L. L. (1996). Designing engineers. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Cardella, M. E., Altman, C. J., & Adams, R. S. (2006). Mapping between design activities and external representations for engineering student designers. Design Studies, 27, 5–24.
Cross, N. (1982). Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, 3, 221–227.
de Saussure, F. (1960). Course in general linguistics. London: Peter Owen.
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). Oxford: Elsevier.
Eisentraut, R., & Günther, J. (1997). Individual styles of problem solving and their relation to representations in the design process. Design Studies, 18, 369–383.
Enfield, N. J. (2009). The anatomy of meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ferguson, E. S. (1992). Engineering and the mind’s eye. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Fish, J., & Scrivener, S. (1990). Sketching and the mind’s visual eye. Leonardo, 23(1), 117–126.
Garner, S. (2001). Comparing graphic actions between remote and proximal design teams. Design Studies, 22(4), 365–376.
Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Goel, V., & Pirolli, P. (1992). The structure of design problem spaces. Cognitive Science, 16, 395–429.
Goffman, E. (1964). The neglected situation. American Anthropologist, 66, 133–136.
Goldschmidt, G. (1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 123–143.
Hennessy, S., & Murphy, P. (1999). The potential for collaborative problem solving in design and technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 1–36.
Hope, G. (2005). The types of drawing that young children produce in response to design task. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 10, 43–53.
Hope, G. (2008). Thinking and learning through drawing in primary classrooms. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New frontiers. Educational Psychologist, 48, 25–39.
John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jonson, B. (2005). Design ideation. Design Studies, 26, 613–624.
Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis. The Journal of Modern Craft, 4, 39–103.
Kavakli, M., & Gero, J. S. (2001). Sketching as mental imagery processing. Design Studies, 22, 347–364.
Kavakli, M., Scrivener, S. A., & Ball, L. J. (1998). Structure in idea sketching behaviour. Design Studies, 19, 485–517.
Laamanen, T-K., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2008). Sources of inspiration and mental image in textile design process. Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 7, 105–119.
Laamanen, T-K., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2014). Constraining an open-ended design task by interpreting sources of inspiration. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, 13, 135–156.
Lahti, H., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Kangas, K., Härkki, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2016a). Textile teacher students’ collaborative design processes in a design studio setting. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, 16, 35–54.
Lahti, H., Kangas, K., Koponen, V., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2016b). Material mediation and embodied actions in collaborative design process. Techne Series A, 23, 15–29.
Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think. Oxford: Architectural Press.
MacDonald, D., Gustafson, B. J., & Gentilini, S. (2007). Enhancing children’s drawing in design technology planning and making. Research in Science and Technological Education, 25, 59–75.
Menezes, A., & Lawson, B. (2006). How designers perceive sketches. Design Studies, 27, 571–585.
Perry, M., & Sanderson, D. (1998). Coordinating joint design work. Design Studies, 19, 273–288.
Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Drawings and the design process. Design Studies, 19, 389–430.
Römer, A., Leinart, S., & Sachse, P. (2000). External support of problem analysis in design problem solving. Research in Engineering Design, 12, 144–151.
Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions. Review of Educational Research, 68, 35–59.
Rowell, P. (2002). Peer interaction in shared technological activity. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 12, 1–22.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 4, 696–735.
Sawyer, K. (2013). Zig zag. San Francisco: Wiley.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D. A., & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Creativity and Innovation Management, 1, 68–74.
Schott, G. D. (2011). Doodling and the default network of the brain. The Lancet, 378, 1133–1134.
Schwarz, C., Reiser, B., Davis, E., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., et al. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 632–654.
Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2001). Composition and construction in experts’ and novices’ weaving design. Design Studies, 22, 47–66.
Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1997). What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis. Design Studies, 18, 385–403.
Syrjäläinen, E., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2014). The quality of design in 9th grade pupils’ design-and-make assignments in craft education. Design and Technology Education: an international Journal, 19, 30–39.
Tang, J. C. (1991). Findings from observational studies of collaborative work. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34, 143–160.
Trojano, L., Grossi, D., & Flash, T. (2008). Cognitive neuroscience of drawing. Cortex, 45, 269–277.
Ullman, D. G., Wood, S., & Graig, D. (1990). The importance of in the mechanical design process. Computer and Graphics, 14, 263–274. Retrieved from http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~ullman/drwg.htm.
Valkenburg, R., & Dorst, K. (1998). The reflective practice of design teams. Design Studies, 19, 249–271.
van der Lugt, R. (2005). How sketching can affect the idea generation process in design group meetings. Design Studies, 26, 101–122.
Welch, M. (1998). Students’ use of three-dimensional modelling while designing and making a solution to a technological problem. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8, 241–260.
Yang, M. C. (2008). Observations on concept generation and sketching in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, 20, 1–11.
Yang, M. C., & Cham, J. G. (2007). An analysis of sketching skill and its role in early stage engineering design. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129, 476–482.
Zeisel, J. (1984). Inquiry by design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zhang, J., & Norman, D. A. (1994). Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science, 18, 87–122.
The present study has been supported by the Academy of Finland (under Project No. 265922). We would also like to thank the students for their participation in the study, as well as Henna Lahti and Kaiju Kangas for their efforts in co-designing the design assignment together with Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarainen and Tellervo Härkki. The final interviews were planned and conducted by Tellervo Härkki, who also developed the method of analysing the data. Tellervo Härkki and Pirita Seitamaa-Hakkarainen wrote the present article, together with Kai Hakkarainen. Furthermore, we wish to thank Henna Lahti and Tarja-Kaarina Laamanen for acting as cameramen, IBS video/Mikael Kivelä for the support regarding the video infrastructure, Otto Seitamaa for proofreading the transcripts, and Inka Laine for finalising the video captures for publishing.
This study was funded by Academy of Finland (Project No. 265922).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
About this article
Cite this article
Härkki, T., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. & Hakkarainen, K. Line by line, part by part: collaborative sketching for designing. Int J Technol Des Educ 28, 471–494 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9379-7
- Collaborative design
- Higher education
- Video analysis