Contribution towards a reflection about methodological strategies in design education and the function of drawing in design

This work presents a reflection on Design education and specifically on the role of Drawing in this area. As a subject, Design has expanded its field of action expanding into new areas such as Experience Design or Service Design. It became necessary for the designer to have more than an education based on technological knowledge or know-how. Many authors like Meredith Davis, Don Norman or Jamie Hobson point out the urgency to review the curricula of Design courses because nowadays “… design is more than appearance, design is about interaction, about strategy and about services. Designers change social behavior” (Norman 2011). When shifting from a product-centered design to a person-centered design (in a structure, a service or in a relationship) what should the function of drawing in a design course be? What should its curriculum be? Our work methodology will be to confront today’s perspectives on design theory and practice in an attempt to add to the discussion on the methodological strategies in design teaching in the contemporary context.

Contribution towards a reflection about methodological strategies in Design Education and the function of Drawing in Design

This work presents a reflection on Design education and specifically on the role of Drawing in this area. As a subject, Design has expanded its field of action expanding into new areas such as Experience Design or Service Design. It became necessary for the designer to have more than an education based on technological knowledge or know-how. Many authors like Meredith Davis, Don Norman or Jamie Hobson point out the urgency to review the curricula of Design courses because nowadays “ … design is more than appearance, design is about interaction, about strategy and about services. Designers change social behavior” (Norman, 2011) When shifting from a product-centered design to a person-centered design (in a structure, a service or in a relationship) what should the function of drawing in a design course be? What should its curriculum be? Our work methodology will be to confront today’s perspectives on design theory and practice in an attempt to add to the discussion on the methodological strategies in design teaching in the contemporary context.

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.

Domain-Specific Language for Coordination patterns

The integration and composition of software systems requires a good architectural design phase to speed up communications between (remote) components. However, during implementation phase, the code to coordinate such components often ends up mixed in the main business code. This leads to maintenance problems, raising the need for, on the one hand, separating the coordination code from the business code, and on the other hand, providing mechanisms for analysis and comprehension of the architectural decisions once made. In this context our aim is at developing a domain-specific language, CoordL, to describe typical coordination patterns. From our point of view, coordination patterns are abstractions, in a graph form, over the composition of coordination statements from the system code. These patterns would allow us to identify, by means of pattern-based graph search strategies, the code responsible for the coordination of the several components in a system. The recovering and separation of the architectural decisions for a better comprehension of the software is the main purpose of this pattern language