Advertisement

Interdisciplinary: challenges and opportunities for design education

  • James A. Self
  • Mark Evans
  • Thomas Jun
  • Darren Southee
Article
  • 154 Downloads

Abstract

We explore the potential drivers for and barriers to interdisciplinary education in design from the student learning perspective. To achieve this, a series of in-depth student interview studies were conducted at two interdisciplinary design schools in the Republic of Korea and the UK. Results indicated both awareness and synthesis of interdisciplinary perspectives across the two schools. However, these abilities appeared more heavily dependent upon individual student attitudes and interests, compared to the programmes of study themselves. Instructor bias and potential integration issues at school and institutional levels were further cited as challenges to interdisciplinarity. However, results also indicated application as a key driver for the acquisition and synthesis of disciplinary perspectives. Students, within the applied discipline of design, responded well to interdisciplinarity when accompanied by opportunities to integrate disciplinary knowledge through application within their own project works. Implications for interdisciplinary approaches to design education are finally discussed together with suggested avenues for future investigation.

Keywords

Design education Interdisciplinary Pedagogy Learning experience Industrial design Product design 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to extend our thanks to all those students at the DHE, UNIST and LDS, Loughborough University that took part in our interview studies. This work was supported by the UNIST Creative Project Fund 1.150129.01.

References

  1. Adams, R. S., Turns, J., & Atman, C. J. (2003). Educating effective engineering designers: The role of reflective practice. Design Studies, 24(3), 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bingham, G. A., Southee, D. J., & Page, T. (2015). Meeting the expectation of industry: An integrated approach for the teaching of mechanics and electronics to design students. European Journal of Engineering Education, 40(4), 410–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carulli, M., Bordegoni, M., & Cugini, U. (2013). An intergrated framework to support design & engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(2), 291–303.Google Scholar
  4. Goel, V. (2001). Dissociation of design knowledge. In C. Eastman, M. McCracken, & W. Newstetter (Eds.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (pp. 221–240). London: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jaeger, A., Mayrhofer, W., Kuhlang, P., & Matyas, K. (2013). Total immersion: Hands and heads-on training in a learning factory for comprehensive industrial engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(1), 23–32.Google Scholar
  6. Kang, N. (2008). Activation plan for the convergence study of scientific technology & humanities and social sciences. Sejong City: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology.Google Scholar
  7. Kaygan, P. (2014). ‘Arty’ versus ‘real’ work: Gendered relations between industrial designers and engineers in interdisciplinary work settings. The Design Journal, 17(1), 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim, K., Kim, N., Jung, S., Kim, D. Y., Kwak, Y., & Kyung, G. (2012). A radically assembled design-engineering education program with a selection and combination of multiple disciplines. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(4), 904–919.Google Scholar
  9. Klein, J. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Klein, J., & Newell, W. (1998). Advancing interdisciplinary studies. In W. Newell (Ed.), Interdisciplinarity: Essays from the literature. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.Google Scholar
  11. Kolb, D. (Ed.). (2014). The structure of knowledge. In Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed., pp. 153–192). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
  12. Lattuca, L. R. (2001). Creating interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lattuca, L. R., & Knight, D. B. (2010). In the eye of the beholder: Defining and studying interdisciplinarity in engineering education. In Proceedings of the 117th annual conference of the American Society of Engineering Education. Louisville, KY: American Society for Engineering Education.Google Scholar
  14. Lattuca, L. R., Voight Lois, J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Theoretical support and researchable questions. Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 23-C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lattuca, L., Knight, D., & Bergom, I. (2013). Developing a measure of interdisciplinary competence. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(3), 726–739.Google Scholar
  16. Lee, J. (2014). The integrated design process from the facilitator’s perspective. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 33(1), 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mansilla, V., & Duraising, E. (2007). Targeted assessment of students’ interdisciplinary work: An empirically grounded framework proposed. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(2), 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mansilla, V., & Gardner, H. (2003). Assessing interdisciplinary work at the frontier: An empirical exploration of “symptoms of quality”. In G. Origgi & C. Heintz (Eds.), Rethinking interdisciplinarity. Harvard: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  19. Mok, Y. H. (2009). Korea education in the age of knowledge convergence. Paper presented at the autumn conference of Korean Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  20. Newell, W. (2001). A theory of interdisciplinary studies. Issues in Integrative Studies, 19, 1–25.Google Scholar
  21. Norman, D. (2010). Why design education must change. Core77.Google Scholar
  22. Norman, D., & Klemmer, S. (2014). State of design: How design education must change. Linkedin. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140325102438-12181762-state-of-design-how-design-education-must-change. Accessed 3 Jan 2018.
  23. Oehlberg, L., Leighton, I., & Agogino, A. (2012). Teaching human-centred design innovation across engineering, humanities and social sciences. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), 484–491.Google Scholar
  24. Repko, A. (2012). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory (2nd ed.). New York: SAGE Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  25. Saldana, J. (2013). In vivo coding, the coding manual for qualitative research, 91-96. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  26. Self, J. A., & Baek, J. S. (2017). Interdisciplinarity in design education: Understanding the undergraduate student experience. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(3), 459–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Strong, D. (2012). An approach for improving design and innovation skills in engineering education: The multidisciplinary design stream. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), 339–348.Google Scholar
  28. Thompson, M. (2009). Increasing the rigor of freshman design education. In Proceedings of iasdr09, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
  29. Tolbert, D., & Daly, S. R. (2013). First-year engineering student perceptions of creative opportunities in design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 29(4), 879–890.Google Scholar
  30. Yim, H. L. K., Brezing, A., Lower, M., & Feldhusen, J. (2011). Learning from an interdisciplinary and intercultural project-based design course. In Proceedings of the international conference on engineering and product design education, City University, London, UK.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • James A. Self
    • 1
  • Mark Evans
    • 2
  • Thomas Jun
    • 2
  • Darren Southee
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Design and Human EngineeringUNISTUlsanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Loughborough Design SchoolLoughborough UniversityLoughboroughUK

Personalised recommendations