Designing Design Exercises — From Theory to Creativity and Real-world Use

  • Paula Kotzé
  • Peter Purgathofer
Part of the IFIP – International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 289)

This paper discusses a framework for design exercises for interaction design and HCI based on two theoretical frameworks and a set of knowledge transformers. The model scope design exercises on a continuum ranging from creativity to real-world use based on the argument that students must experience design to enable them to learn effectively.


Design Element Procedural Knowledge Interaction Design Interactive Experience Declarative Knowledge 
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.


  1. 1.
    R. Reimann, So you want to be an interaction designer, Cooper Interaction Design Newsletter,June 2001(2001).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    K. Baumann, P. Kotzé, L. Oestreicher, L. Bannon, A. Varey, D. Van Greunen, G. Van der Veer, H. Petrie, I. Jounila, I. Mavrommati, N. Garay-Vitoria, O. Ozcan, P. Purgathofer, and P.A. Silva, EISH — Exercises in Studying HCI, in:Creativity3: Expereincing to Educate and Design — Proceedings of HCI Educators 2007, edited by P. Alexandra Silva, A. Dix, and J. Jorge, (Designeed, Aveiro, 2007), pp. 134 – 137.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    CONVIVIO, Design for HCI, Proceedings CONVIVIO Faculty Forum: Teaching Design for HCI, (cited 2007-01-05); (CONVIVIO, Graz, Austria, 2006).
  4. 4.
    N. Shedroff, Information interaction design: A unified field theory of design, in:Information Design, edited by R. Jacobson, (MIT Press, 1999), pp. 267 – 292.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    5.J. Preece, Y. Rogers, and H. Sharp,Interaction Design: Beyond Human-computer Interaction(John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2002).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Hill, Architecture and Interaction Design, via Adaptation and Hackability, (cited 2006-12-22);Http://
  7. 7.
    D. Saffer,Designing for Interaction: Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices(New Riders, 2006).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D.H. Malouf, Elements of Interaction Design, (cited 2006-12-22); (Synaptic Burn, 2006).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, (1979).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    10D. Norman,The Design of Everyday Things(MIT Press, London, 1998).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Dourish,Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction(MIT Press, 2001).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. Laseau,Graphic Thinking for Architects & Designers(Wiley, 2000).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Kotzé, K. Renaud, and J. Van Biljon, Don't do this — Pitfalls in using anti-patterns in teaching human-computer interaction principles,Computers & Education, DOI: doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.003, (2006).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. Buxton, What sketches (and prototypes) are and are not, in CHI'06 Workshop, City, 2006), pp.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    15.D. Schön,The Reflective Practitioner(MITPress, Cambridge, MA, 1983).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    16.J.E. Holt, Practising Practice by Design, International Journal of Engineering Education,18(3), 256 – 263 (2002).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    17.R.H. McKim,Experiences in Visual Thinking(Brookes/Cole, Monterey, CA, 1972).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    18.M. Polanyi,Personal Knowledge — Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy(Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1958).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    19. A. Reber,Implicit learning and tacit knowledge(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    20. M.W. Kirkhart, The nature of declarative and nondeclarative knowledge for implicit and explicit learning, The Journal of General Psychology,128(4), 447 – 461 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    N.A. Taatgen, Learning without limits: from problem solving towards a unified theory of learning, (cited 2005-06-05); (Universal Press, 1999).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    22. D.C. Berry,How Implicit is Implicit Learning?(Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    23. M.E. Gorman, Types of knowledge and their roles in technology transfer, Journal of Technology Transfer,27(3), 219 – 231 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    24. G.E. Miller, The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance, Acad Med,65, 563 –567 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    C. Lebiere, D. Wallach, and N.A. Taatgen, Implicit and explicit learning in ACT-R, in:Proceedings of the Second Conference on Cognitive Modelling (ECCM 98), edited by F. Ritter and R. Young, 1998), pp. 183 – 189.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    26.J.R. Anderson,Rules of the Mind(Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1993).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    K.S. Sim and H.B. Duffy, Knowledge transformers — a link between learning and creativity, Learning and Creativity Workshop — 2002, (cited 2006-12-22);, UK, 2002).

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Design and Assessment of Technologies InstituteUniversity of Technology ViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations