Teaching drawing: an interdisciplinary pedagogical experience in a graphic design course

Various authors have written about the importance of drawing in design methodology. Their general conclusion points drawing as an essential tool for design research, as it allows investigation of several alternative solutions in design process (Cross, 2007). The recent profound changes in design nature (Norman, 2011), justify a discussion on the purpose of drawing in design courses. As a consequence of this new reality, the educational institutions face the challenge of the definition of their curricular structures and teaching methodologies. Among others, concepts such as collaboration and multidisciplinary design approaches have been discussed as strategies for design education (Heller and Talarico, 2011, pp. 82-85). In this context, and using our teaching activity experience in Drawing and Design areas, the authors discuss:  how can drawing methods be included in the current design teaching?  can drawing be considered as an interdisciplinary approach?  what contributions can these methodologies provide to the educational/learning process? Based on these concerns, we developed an interdisciplinary project in the Graphic Design Course with two curricular units: Drawing 1 and Aesthetic and Design Theory 1. In this article the authors present the aims and process developed, and discuss the outcomes of this pedagogical experience.

Exploring the interdisciplinary process in design education

The work presented herein follows an ongoing research that aims to analyze methodological practices to be applied in Design Education. A reflection about methodological strategies in Design Education and the function of drawing in Design represents the beginning of this study. Then, we developed an interdisciplinary pedagogical experience with the Graphic Design 1st grade students from our institution (IPCA). In the current academic year, 2013/2014, we continue to evolve this project, introducing changes in the initial proposal. Major alterations focused on the aspects that could be strengthened in terms of interdisciplinarity. In this article, the authors describe those changes and discuss the outcomes of the novel proposal. As we have already reported, this investigation follows a reflection about working methods to be adopted in Design Education. This is in accordance with other previously published works that purpose the enlargement of Design into new knowledge fields such as Experience or Service Design, changing not only the role of the graphic designer, but also the skills required to be a professional designer (Alain Findelli, 2001), (Brian Lawson, 2006), (Ciampa-Brewer, 2010). Furthermore, concepts such as cooperation or multidisciplinary design, amongst others, have been frequently debated as design teaching strategies (Heller and Talarico, 2011, pp. 82-85). These educational approaches also have an impact on our research. The analysis of all these authors’ contributions together with a reflection on our teaching practice allowed us to propose an improved interdisciplinary intervention.

Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills Performance: 2D Versus 3D Vision and Classic Instrument Versus New Hand-Held Robotic Device for Laparoscopy

Introduction and Objectives. Laparoscopic surgery has undeniable advantages, such as reduced postoperative pain, smaller incisions, and faster recovery. However, to improve surgeons’ performance, ergonomic adaptations of the laparoscopic instruments and introduction of robotic technology are needed. The aim of this study was to ascertain the influence of a new hand-held robotic device for laparoscopy (HHRDL) and 3D vision on laparoscopic skills performance of 2 different groups, naïve and expert. Materials and Methods. Each participant performed 3 laparoscopic tasks—Peg transfer, Wire chaser, Knot—in 4 different ways. With random sequencing we assigned the execution order of the tasks based on the first type of visualization and laparoscopic instrument. Time to complete each laparoscopic task was recorded and analyzed with one-way analysis of variance. Results. Eleven experts and 15 naïve participants were included. Three-dimensional video helps the naïve group to get better performance in Peg transfer, Wire chaser 2 hands, and Knot; the new device improved the execution of all laparoscopic tasks (P < .05). For expert group, the 3D video system benefited them in Peg transfer and Wire chaser 1 hand, and the robotic device in Peg transfer, Wire chaser 1 hand, and Wire chaser 2 hands (P < .05). Conclusion. The HHRDL helps the execution of difficult laparoscopic tasks, such as Knot, in the naïve group. Three-dimensional vision makes the laparoscopic performance of the participants without laparoscopic experience easier, unlike those with experience in laparoscopic procedures.