Hostname: page-component-58bd8987f9-6zr8r Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-03T10:02:18.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integral design pedagogy: Representation and process in multidisciplinary master student projects based on workshops for professionals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2011

Wim Zeiler  and
Perica Savanović
Wim Zeiler*
Affiliation:
University of Technology Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
Perica Savanović
Affiliation:
University of Technology Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
*
Reprint requests to: Wim Zeiler, Vertigo 6.28, Den Dolech 2, P.O. Box 513, Eindhoven 5600 MB, The Netherlands. E-mail: w.zeiler@bwk.tue.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The development in (Dutch) building practice necessitates developments in other aspects, besides specialized and professional skills, a new integral approach in education and the introduction of such an approach into building design practice. In 2005, the Faculty of Architecture, Building, and Planning of the University of Technology Eindhoven commenced a multidisciplinary master project on integral design focused on a sustainable climatic design. Students of architecture, building technology, structural engineering, and building services participated in these multidisciplinary master projects. The students began with a 2-day learning-by-practice workshop that was implemented and tested in collaboration with experienced professionals from the Royal Institute of Dutch Architects and the Dutch Association of Consulting Engineers. These workshops have become part of the permanent educational and professional program of the Royal Institute of Dutch Architects. This is one of the few projects in which the practical experience is transferred into the educational academic program and vice versa; normally this process functions only in one of the two directions. The theoretical basis of the design method on which the education of students and professionals is based is discussed and results presented.

Keywords

Concept–Knowledge TheoryIntegral DesignMorphological OverviewsWorkshops
Type
Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , February 2012 , pp. 39 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Andreasen, M.M., & Hein, L. (1987). Integrated Product Development. Kempston: IFS Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Archer, L.B. (1965). Systematic Method for Designs. London: Council of Designers.Google Scholar
Asimov, M. (1964). Introduction to Design. New York: Prentice–Hall.Google Scholar
Badke-Schaub, P., & Stemple, J. (2002). Thinking in design teams—an analysis of team communication. Design Studies 23(5), 473–496.Google Scholar
Bayazit, N. (2004). Investigating design: a review of forty years of design research. Design Issues 20(1), 16–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beitz, W. (1985). Systematic Approach to the Design of Technical Systems and Products. VDI 2221 0 Entwurf. Düsseldorf: VDI.Google Scholar
Blessing, L.T.M. (1994). A process-based approach to computer supported engineering design. PhD Thesis. University of Twente.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (1989). Engineering Design Methods. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (1994). Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Design Issues 17(3), 49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Cross, N. (2007). Editorial forty years of design research. Design Studies 28(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boer, S.J. (1989). Decision methods and techniques in methodical engineering design. PhD Thesis. University of Twente.Google Scholar
Dorst, K., & Royakkers, L. (2006). The design analogy: a model for moral problem solving. Design Studies 28(5), 463–483.Google Scholar
Feilden, G.B.R. (1963). Engineering Design (Feilden Report). London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.Google Scholar
Finger, S., & Dixon, J.R. (1989 a). A review of research in mechanical engineering design: part 1. Descriptive, prescriptive, and computer-based models of design processes. Research in Engineering Design, 1, 51–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finger, S., & Dixon, J.R. (1989 b). A review of research in mechanical engineering design: part 2. Representations, analysis, and design for the life cycle. Engineering Design 1, 121–137.Google Scholar
French, M.J. (1971). Engineering Design: The Conceptual Stage. London: Heinemann Educational.Google Scholar
French, M.J. (1985). Conceptual Design for Engineers. London: Design Council.Google Scholar
Frey, D.D., & Dym, C.L. (2006). Validation of design methods: lessons from medicine. Research in Engineering Design 17, 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, S.A. (1966). The Design Method. London: Butterworths.Google Scholar
Hall, A.D. (1962). A Methodology for Systems Engineering. Princeton, NJ: Nostrand.Google Scholar
Hansen, F. (1968). Konstruktionssystematik. Berlin: VEB–Verlag.Google Scholar
Hatchuel, A. (2002). Towards design theory and expandable rationality: the unfinished program of Herbert Simon. Journal of Management and Governance 5(3–4), 260–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2007). Design as forcing: deepening the foundations of C-K theory. Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Engineering Design, Paris.Google Scholar
Hatchuel, A., & Weil, B. (2009). C-K design theory: an advanced formulation. Research in Engineering Design 19(4), 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horváth, I. (2004). A treatise on order in engineering design research. Research in Engineering Design 15, 155–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubka, V. (1980). Principles of Engineering Design. London: Butterworth Scientific.Google Scholar
Jones, J.C. (1970). Design Methods, Seeds of Human Futures. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Jones, J.C. (1992). Design Methods. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
Jones, J.C., & Thornley, D.G. (1963). Proc. Conf. Design Methods. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Koller, R. (1976). Konstruktionsmethode für den Machinen-, Geräte- und Apparatebau. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krick, E.V. (1969). An Introduction to Engineering and Engineering Design. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Macmillan, S., Steele, J., Austin, S., Spence, R., & Kirby, P. (1999). Mapping the early stages of the design process—a comparison between engineering and construction. Proc. ICED 99, Munich.Google Scholar
Matousek, R. (1962). Engineering in Design. London: Blacky and Son.Google Scholar
Pahl, G., & Beitz, W. (1984). Engineering Design. London: Design Council and Springer.Google Scholar
Pahl, G., Beitz, W., Feldhusen, J., & Grote, K.H. (2006). Engineering Design, a Systematic Approach (Wallace, K., & Blessing, L., Trans. & Eds.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Quanjel, E.M.C.J., & Zeiler, W. (2003). Eindrapportage Onderzoek Integraal Ontwerpen [Integral Design, Final Report]. Delft, The Netherlands: University of Technology Delft.Google Scholar
Roth, K., Franke, H.J., & Simonek, R. (1972). Die Allgemeine Funktionstruktur, ein wesentliches Hilfsmittel zum Konstruieren. Konstruktion 24(7).Google Scholar
Savanović, P., Trum, H.M.G.J., & Zeiler, W. (2006). Integral building design approach in multidisciplinary teams. Proc. 9th Int. Design Conf., Dubrovnik.Google Scholar
Savanović, P., & Zeiler, W. (2007 a). Using methodical design for culture change in Dutch building design practice: “learning by doing” workshops. Design Principles & Practices 1(2), 71–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savanović, P., & Zeiler, W. (2007 b). Integral building design workshops: a concept to structure communication. Proc. ASME 4th Symp. Int. Design and Design Education, Las Vegas, NV.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schön, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. London: Temle Smith.Google Scholar
Schön, D.A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Towards a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.Google Scholar
Seppänen, O., van Steenberghe, T., & Suur-Uski, T. (2007). Energy Efficiency in Focus—REHVA Workshops at Clima 2007, REHVA Report No. 2.Google Scholar
Shai, O., Reich, Y., Hatchuel, A., & Subrahmanian, E. (2009). Creativity theories and scientific discovery: a study of C-K theory and infused design. Proc. ICED'09, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar
Simon, H. (1969). Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
USP Marketing Consultancy. (2004). Vernieuwing in de Bouwsector, Wie Durft? [Innovation in Building Sector, Who Dares?]. Rotterdam: USP Bouwsignalen. Accessed at www.usp-mc.nlGoogle Scholar
USP Marketing Consultancy. (2008). Faalkosten in de Bouw Naar Hoogtepunt [Failure Costs in Building Sector Peak]. Rotterdam: USP Bouwsignalen. Available at www.usp-mc.nlGoogle Scholar
Van Aken, J.E. (2005). Valid knowledge for professional design of large and complex design processes. Design Studies 26(4), 379–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Kroonenberg, H.H. (1974). Methodisch ontwerpen [Methodical design]. De Ingenieur 47.Google Scholar
Van den Kroonenberg, H.H. (1978). Methodisch Ontwerpen (WB78/OC-s883). University of Twente.Google Scholar
Van den Kroonenberg, H.H. (1985). Design methodology as a condition for computer aided design. Voraussetzungen und Konsequenzen Erfolgreichen CAD/CAM-einsatzes, VDI Berichte 565. Tagung Hamburg, August 27–28.Google Scholar
Van den Kroonenberg, H.H. (1987). Stimulating creativity and innovations by methodical design. Report of the 1st European Conf. Creativity and Innovation, Delft, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Vermaas, P.E., & Dorst, K. (2007). On the conceptual framework of John Gero's FBS-model and the prescriptive aims of design methodology. Design Studies 28(2), 133–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wichers-Hoet, A.W., & Fleuren, K.G.A. (2001). De Bouw Moet Om: Op Weg Naar Feilloos Bouwen. [Construction Industry Has to Come Round: On the Road to Faultless Building]. Rotterdam: Stichting Bouwresearch.Google Scholar
Wynn, D., & Clarkson, J. (2005). Models of designing. In Designing Process Improvement (Clarkson, J., & Eckert, C., Eds.). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Zeiler, W. (2007). Integral design: the reflective morphological overview. Proc. 19th Int. Conf. Design Theory and Methodology, ASME DTM 2007, Las Vegas, NV.Google Scholar