Reference: Walker, T. C. (2010). The perils of paradigm mentalities: Revisiting Kuhn, Lakatos, and Popper. Perspectives on Politics, 8(02), 433-451.
Abstract: A common theme in the Centennial Issue of the American Political Science Review was how subfields have grown more specialized and insulated from one another. In this essay I argue that this trend has been hastened by the inappropriate incorporation of paradigm mentalities, first presented by Thomas Kuhn and later developed by Imre Lakatos. I show how paradigm mentalities help justify rigid opposition to theoretical alternatives and limit critical insight. While paradigm mentalities may be fitting for disciplines that demonstrate Kuhn's concrete scientific achievements, they constrain the study of political science and international relations in particular. I begin with a primer that compares Kuhn and Lakatos to Karl Popper. Next, I point to harmful consequences resulting from applying paradigm mentalities to the study of international relations. Among these is the tendency to act as if realism has earned the status of a paradigm and then invoke criteria of incommensurability and “subsumption” to deflect criticism. I conclude by discussing how Popper's model of science provides a better platform for the study of politics by encouraging theoretical and methodological pluralism.
Notes: Analysis of uncritical use of "paradigm" in political science, very relevant to design and creativity research. Authors argues against wanting to develop and subscribe to a single framework, I would probably argue that his concerns apply more to disciplinary vs. cross-disciplinary research. Some elements I'd say do need to be agreed upon as to enable dialogue. Great paper, well articulated and useful views. It also helps to annotate the use of "paradigms" in daily life and the risks of doing that. I remember Kuhn did publish a chapter called "Second thoughts" where he addresses some of the points made by Walker here, including his view that social sciences can and do have several valid "paradigms" simultaneously. I do find interesting how 'catchy' the word is and how widespread it has become (and alas lost all meaning). Why does that happen to certain concepts and not others?
24 February 2015
20 February 2015
Design research methods
Reference: John R. Dixon (1987). On research methodology towards a scientic theory of engineering design. Articial Intelligence for Engineering, Design, Analysis and Manufacturing, 1, pp 145-157 doi:10.1017/S0890060400000251
Abstract: The goal of this paper is to raise awareness and generate discussion about research methodology in engineering design. Design researchers are viewed as a single communicating community searching for scientific theories of engineering design; that is, theories that can be tested by formal methods of hypothesis testing. In the paper, the scientific method for validating theories is reviewed, and the need for operational definitions and for experiments to identify variables and meaningful abstractions is stressed. The development of a design problem taxonomy is advocated. Generating theories is viewed as guided search. Three types of design theories are described: prescriptive, cognitive descriptive, and computational. It is argued that to seek prescriptions is premature and that, unless the human and institutional variables are reduced to knowledge and control, cognitive descriptive theories will be impossibly complex. A case is made for a computational approach, though it also shown that computational and cognitive research approaches can be mutually supportive.
Abstract: The goal of this paper is to raise awareness and generate discussion about research methodology in engineering design. Design researchers are viewed as a single communicating community searching for scientific theories of engineering design; that is, theories that can be tested by formal methods of hypothesis testing. In the paper, the scientific method for validating theories is reviewed, and the need for operational definitions and for experiments to identify variables and meaningful abstractions is stressed. The development of a design problem taxonomy is advocated. Generating theories is viewed as guided search. Three types of design theories are described: prescriptive, cognitive descriptive, and computational. It is argued that to seek prescriptions is premature and that, unless the human and institutional variables are reduced to knowledge and control, cognitive descriptive theories will be impossibly complex. A case is made for a computational approach, though it also shown that computational and cognitive research approaches can be mutually supportive.
Notes: an early position paper on research, knowledge, theory and methods viewed from an engineering design angle. With a strong positivist lens, these ideas are now 30 years old and some of them are still interesting. A must-read for any design researcher if anything to understand one of the sources of this field.
17 February 2015
Student assessment in design
Reference: Morgan, C 2011, 'In the eye of the beholder? An investigation of student assessment in the creative arts in universities', PhD thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW.
Abstract: This thesis addresses the question of how university academics in the creative arts might assess students’ creative works fairly and appropriately. Specifically, it considers how these academics conceptualise and approach the task of student assessment, what tensions and dilemmas are experienced in student assessment, and how student assessment practices in the creative arts might be made more transparent and robust. The complexities of student assessment in the creative arts, and the uncertainties and vulnerabilities that beleaguer academics when making judgements about the quality of their students’ creative works are widely recognised, but not well understood. This investigation employed Naturalistic Inquiry to illuminate the assessment experiences in creative arts of 30 academics from across three countries. It documents how these academics conceptualised creativity in their own disciplines, how they conveyed their understandings to students, how they provided feedback on students’ creative development, how they prepared students for assessment, and how they made judgements about students’ creative works. Four interlinked dilemmas of student assessment practice in the creative arts were thus identified. The first is the lack of a shared understanding of creativity and of its manifestations in particular disciplinary settings. The second is the difficulty of explaining creativity to students. The third is the challenge of providing transparency for students about how their creative works are to be judged. The fourth is the decision about what role subjectivity should play in judgements about creativity in student works. The findings from this investigation challenge accepted wisdom about student assessment that is based largely on positivist paradigms. Outcomes-based education, for example, does not readily allow for the unexpected or unanticipated – yet these are highly prized qualities for academics assessing students’ creative works. Based on the insights obtained, a seven-phased, cyclical model of student assessment in the creative arts is proposed. This model identifies the purposes of each phase of the student assessment cycle, addresses the dilemmas of student assessment that have been identified by academics in the creative arts, and provides indicators of sound practice. The model is designed to support assessors to navigate through a complex terrain, to reflect on current practice, and to harness their activities consistently towards the central purpose of fostering creativity while at the same time assessing student work with demonstrable fairness and appropriateness.
Abstract: This thesis addresses the question of how university academics in the creative arts might assess students’ creative works fairly and appropriately. Specifically, it considers how these academics conceptualise and approach the task of student assessment, what tensions and dilemmas are experienced in student assessment, and how student assessment practices in the creative arts might be made more transparent and robust. The complexities of student assessment in the creative arts, and the uncertainties and vulnerabilities that beleaguer academics when making judgements about the quality of their students’ creative works are widely recognised, but not well understood. This investigation employed Naturalistic Inquiry to illuminate the assessment experiences in creative arts of 30 academics from across three countries. It documents how these academics conceptualised creativity in their own disciplines, how they conveyed their understandings to students, how they provided feedback on students’ creative development, how they prepared students for assessment, and how they made judgements about students’ creative works. Four interlinked dilemmas of student assessment practice in the creative arts were thus identified. The first is the lack of a shared understanding of creativity and of its manifestations in particular disciplinary settings. The second is the difficulty of explaining creativity to students. The third is the challenge of providing transparency for students about how their creative works are to be judged. The fourth is the decision about what role subjectivity should play in judgements about creativity in student works. The findings from this investigation challenge accepted wisdom about student assessment that is based largely on positivist paradigms. Outcomes-based education, for example, does not readily allow for the unexpected or unanticipated – yet these are highly prized qualities for academics assessing students’ creative works. Based on the insights obtained, a seven-phased, cyclical model of student assessment in the creative arts is proposed. This model identifies the purposes of each phase of the student assessment cycle, addresses the dilemmas of student assessment that have been identified by academics in the creative arts, and provides indicators of sound practice. The model is designed to support assessors to navigate through a complex terrain, to reflect on current practice, and to harness their activities consistently towards the central purpose of fostering creativity while at the same time assessing student work with demonstrable fairness and appropriateness.
16 February 2015
The Art of City-making
Title: The Art of City-making
Author: Charles Landry
Abstract: City-making is an art, not a formula. The skills required to re-enchant the city are far wider than the conventional ones like architecture, engineering and land-use planning. There is no simplistic, ten-point plan, but strong principles can help send good city-making on its way. The vision for 21st century cities must be to be the most imaginative cities for the world rather than in the world. This one change of word - from 'in' to 'for' - gives city-making an ethical foundation and value base. It helps cities become places of solidarity where the relations between the individual, the group, outsiders to the city and the planet are in better alignment. Following the widespread success of The Creative City, this new book, aided by international case studies, explains how to reassess urban potential so that cities can strengthen their identity and adapt to the changing global terms of trade and mass migration. It explores the deeper fault-lines, paradoxes and strategic dilemmas that make creating the 'good city' so difficult.
Author: Charles Landry
Abstract: City-making is an art, not a formula. The skills required to re-enchant the city are far wider than the conventional ones like architecture, engineering and land-use planning. There is no simplistic, ten-point plan, but strong principles can help send good city-making on its way. The vision for 21st century cities must be to be the most imaginative cities for the world rather than in the world. This one change of word - from 'in' to 'for' - gives city-making an ethical foundation and value base. It helps cities become places of solidarity where the relations between the individual, the group, outsiders to the city and the planet are in better alignment. Following the widespread success of The Creative City, this new book, aided by international case studies, explains how to reassess urban potential so that cities can strengthen their identity and adapt to the changing global terms of trade and mass migration. It explores the deeper fault-lines, paradoxes and strategic dilemmas that make creating the 'good city' so difficult.
12 February 2015
A Framework for Cross-Disciplinary Team Learning and Performance
Title: A Framework for Cross-Disciplinary Team Learning and Performance
Authors: Schaffer, Scott P;Lei, Kimfong;Paulino, Lisette Reyes
Reference: Schaffer, Scott P;Lei, Kimfong;Paulino, Lisette Reyes (2008) A Framework for Cross-Disciplinary Team Learning and Performance, Performance Improvement Quarterly; 21, 3
Abstract: The construct of teamwork has been of considerable interest to researchers and practitioners across domains. The literature on teams includes many studies related to team composition, processes, and roles, but it pays much less attention to how teams learn and innovate. Studies examining how cross-disciplinary teams interact during projects are even less common. The study examined here was conceived to fill the need for a theoretical framework to describe how individuals from different disciplines evolve into a team that creates new forms of knowledge and innovative solutions or products. The framework, which was validated in a university service-learning program with over 25 teams, is a comprehensive theory merging two existing team models within a sociocultural system framework emphasizing the mediating aspects of the collective team and context. The theoretical foundations, the definitions, and dimensions of the framework are presented in this article.
Authors: Schaffer, Scott P;Lei, Kimfong;Paulino, Lisette Reyes
Reference: Schaffer, Scott P;Lei, Kimfong;Paulino, Lisette Reyes (2008) A Framework for Cross-Disciplinary Team Learning and Performance, Performance Improvement Quarterly; 21, 3
Abstract: The construct of teamwork has been of considerable interest to researchers and practitioners across domains. The literature on teams includes many studies related to team composition, processes, and roles, but it pays much less attention to how teams learn and innovate. Studies examining how cross-disciplinary teams interact during projects are even less common. The study examined here was conceived to fill the need for a theoretical framework to describe how individuals from different disciplines evolve into a team that creates new forms of knowledge and innovative solutions or products. The framework, which was validated in a university service-learning program with over 25 teams, is a comprehensive theory merging two existing team models within a sociocultural system framework emphasizing the mediating aspects of the collective team and context. The theoretical foundations, the definitions, and dimensions of the framework are presented in this article.
Notes: Scanning the literature on creative teamwork, most papers seem to be about developing hypothetical models, and reinforcing some commonsensical and general ideas. The modified CDTL proposed here is interesting, well presented, yet fails to contribute anything new as the conclusions are that "cross-disciplinary team learning is more likely to be found when:
- Members shift from self-efficacy to collective efficacy
- They shift from individual process orientation to team goal orientation
- Shift from knowledge acquisition to creation
- Become aware of others' "functional discipline knowledge shifts"
10 February 2015
Shikakeology
Title: Shikakeology: From framework to implementation
Authors: Naohiro Matsumura and Renate Fruchter
Reference: Matsumura, N., & Fruchter, R. (2014). Special issue: Shikakeology: From framework to implementation. AI & SOCIETY, 1-3.
Abstract: Shikake is a Japanese word with a wide range of meanings regarding triggers for behavior change, and using shikakes to change behaviors could be a promising and feasible approach for making the world better. However, the methodology for developing a new shikake is not well studied. To define such a methodology, Dr. Naohiro Matsumura, one of the editors of this special issue, coined the term ‘‘Shikakeology’’ in 2011 as a new academic field where the mechanism underlying a shikake as an artifact, a theory, a system, and a practice designed to change behavior can be discussed and understood.
Notes: The concept of 'shikake' seems very very similar to 'nudges' introduced by Thaler and Sunstein in their 2008 book by the same name. This is a special journal of AI&Society worth reading. Is this another case of reinventing the wheel, or using different terms to refer to the same concept -not sure.
9 February 2015
Social simulation and cognitive models
Title: When does social simulation need cognitive models?
Author: Nigel Gilbert
Reference: Gilbert, N. (2006). When does social simulation need cognitive models.Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction, 428.
Abstract: Contributors to this volume have explored the ways in which cognitive models or architectures may be helpful or even essential for building simulations. In this epilogue, I shall be considering whether cognitive model are always necessary – is a social simulation necessarily inadequate if it has no or only a very simple model of cognition? If not, is it possible to specify classes of simulations for which cognitive models are necessary or unnecessary?
Notes: Brief editorial with some clear ideas on multi-level agent simulations (but can't seem to be able to find this book online)...
Author: Nigel Gilbert
Reference: Gilbert, N. (2006). When does social simulation need cognitive models.Cognition and Multi-Agent Interaction, 428.
Abstract: Contributors to this volume have explored the ways in which cognitive models or architectures may be helpful or even essential for building simulations. In this epilogue, I shall be considering whether cognitive model are always necessary – is a social simulation necessarily inadequate if it has no or only a very simple model of cognition? If not, is it possible to specify classes of simulations for which cognitive models are necessary or unnecessary?
Notes: Brief editorial with some clear ideas on multi-level agent simulations (but can't seem to be able to find this book online)...
3 February 2015
How future CAD systems looked in 1983
Title: "Future CAD systems"
Author: K. Preiss
Journal: Computer-Aided Design, 15(4), 223-227
This paper presents a rather informal view of what the author considered to be the "changes which are clearly coming". Not surprisingly, the future as portrayed here is rather conservative, merely projecting what was being developed at the moment. The paper is worth reading for a number of reasons, including the common flaws in forecasting the future. How will CAD systems look in 30 years?
Author: K. Preiss
Journal: Computer-Aided Design, 15(4), 223-227
This paper presents a rather informal view of what the author considered to be the "changes which are clearly coming". Not surprisingly, the future as portrayed here is rather conservative, merely projecting what was being developed at the moment. The paper is worth reading for a number of reasons, including the common flaws in forecasting the future. How will CAD systems look in 30 years?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)