Advertisement

Transdisciplinarity and New Paradigm Research

  • Michael Biggs
  • Daniela Büchler
Chapter
Part of the Urban and Landscape Perspectives book series (URBANLAND, volume 11)

Abstract

This chapter considers architecture as a discipline, the role of practice in its academic research, and its potentially transdisciplinary character. Developing an earlier study of theses, we differentiate the plane of traditional academic research from an additional dimension offered by practice. However, we note that generic forms of practice occur in all disciplines and so we further differentiate creative practice as a characteristic of architectural research. We identify a number of strategies adopted by architectural researchers through which they attempt to maintain a link between this novel creative practice and the underlying values of traditional academic research. These form bridging strategies, comparable with Haberli’s definition of interdisciplinary research in which the traditional boundaries persist. But we find in Gibbon’s definition of transdisciplinarity, a glimpse of what we have previously claimed to be a new paradigm in which there is no boundary between the concepts and the practices, and therefore no boundaries between traditional and non-traditional cultures of knowledge.

Keywords

Academic Research Research Model Professional Practice Compensatory Strategy Academic Community 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of the Swedish Institute (SE) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (UK) for funding the research.

Bibliography

  1. Biggs, M. A. R. & Büchler, D. (2007). Rigour and practice-based research. Design Issues, 23(3), 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Biggs, M., & Büchler, D. (2008a). Architectural practice and academic research. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 20(1), 83–94.Google Scholar
  3. Biggs, M., & Büchler, D. (2008b). Eight criteria for practice-based research in the creative and cultural industries. Art, Design and Communication in Higher Education, 7(1), 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biggs, M., & Büchler, D. (2009). Supervision in an alternative paradigm [Special Issue]. TEXT: Journal of Writing and Writing Courses, 6, 1–14. http://www.textjournal.com.au/speciss/index.htm Google Scholar
  5. Biggs, M., & Büchler, D. (2010). Communities, values, conventions and actions. In M. Biggs, & H. Karlsson (Eds.), The routledge companion to research in the arts. (pp. 82–98) London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1992). The logic of practice. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Büchler, D., Biggs, M. A. R., & Ståhl, L.-H. (2009). Areas of design practice as an alternative research paradigm. Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal, 3(2), 327–338. http://ijg.cgpublisher.com/product/pub.154/prod.196
  8. Engeström, Y., Miettinen R., & Punamäki, R. L. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Guba, E. & Lincoln, Y. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 191–215). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Häberli, R., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., & Klein, J. T. (2001). Summary. In J. T. Klein, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, R. Häberli, A. Bill, R. W. Scholtz & M. Welti (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology, and society. Basel: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
  12. OECD (2002). Frascati manual: Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  13. Schön, D. A. (1991). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Arena.Google Scholar
  14. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Creative Arts, University of HertfordshireHatfieldUK

Personalised recommendations