Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Design Discourse of the Advanced Beginner

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Educational Technology Beyond Content

Abstract

This paper examines the language of design students during their processes of designing in studio sessions. We refer to the language that surrounds these acts of designing as design discourse and use a thematic content analysis of leaners’ discursive interactions to examine instances of design knowledge in action. Five studio sessions of approximately 1 hour long were transcribed into a corpus of learner discourse. An analysis of the corpus showed that 84% of the interactions contained design discourses identified in the literature on design, but almost half of those interactions revolved around tools. The discursive routines that emerged during these studio sessions inform our pedagogy and help educators of design to better recognize important design learning that might go otherwise unnoticed. Implications may include the creation of scaffolds to support the learning of instructional design and future research that looks at real instances of design discourse as guideposts to help us better create design instruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Boling, E. (2010). The need for design cases: Disseminating design knowledge. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1), 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boling, E., & Gray, C. M. (2018). Use of precedent as a narrative practice in design learning. In B. Hokanson, G. Clinton, & K. Kaminski (Eds.), Educational technology and narrative (pp. 259–270). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo, K. S. (2016). What is studio? In E. Boling, R. A. Schwier, C. M. Gray, K. M. Smith, & K. Campbell (Eds.), Studio teaching in higher education: Selected design cases (pp. 248–259). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence anything. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 42(2), 21–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (1982). Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, 3(4), 221–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dannels, D. P., & Martin, K. N. (2008). Critiquing critiques: A genre analysis of feedback across novice to expert design studios. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 22(2), 135–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by design. Cambridge, UK: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, K. C., & Neumann, I. B. (2016). Undertaking discourse analysis for social research. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2011). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. S., & Rogers, P. C. (2008). The architecture of instructional theory. In C. Reigeluth & A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models, volume III. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, C. M., & Howard, C. D. (2014). Designerly talk in non-pedagogical social spaces. Journal of Learning Design, 7(1), 40–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (1997). Survey of instructional development models (3rd ed.). Syracuse, NY: Eric Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, C. D. (2012). An instructional paradigm for the teaching of computer-mediated communications. Instructional Science, 40(3), 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-011-9187-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, C. D. (2013). The rhetoric of instructional design cases: Knowledge building via examples of process and product. In B. Hokanson & A. Gibbons (Eds.), Design in educational technology: Design thinking, design process, and the design studio (pp. 107–124). New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00927-6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, C. D., & Gray, C. M. (2015). Higher order thinking in design reviews. In R. S. Adams & J. A. Siddiqui (eds.), Proceedings of the Design Thinking Research Symposium. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, C. D., Staples, C., Dubreil, S., & Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2016). The app farm: Engaging design process as a means for French learning. The International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(3), 42–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasper, G., & Blum-Kulka, S. (Eds.). (1993). Interlanguage pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R. B. (1994). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 42(2), 7–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (2006). The semantic turn: A new foundation for design. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B. (2004). Schemata, gambits and precedent: Some factors in design expertise. Design Studies, 25(5), 443–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, D. (2013). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxman, R. E. (1994). Precedents in design: A computational model for the organization of precedent knowledge. Design Studies, 15(2), 141–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parrish, P. E. (2009). Aesthetic principles for instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57, 511–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1985). The design studio: An exploration of its traditions and potentials. London: RIBA Publications Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation analysis: An introduction. London: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatar, D. (2007). The design tensions framework. Human-Computer Interaction, 22(4), 413–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370020701638814

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tracey, M. W. (2016). How I gave up ADDIE for design thinking and so did my students. In E. Boling, R. A. Schwier, C. M. Gray, K. M. Smith, & K. Campbell (Eds.), Studio teaching in higher education: Selected design cases (pp. 195–205). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van MerriĂ«nboer, J. J. G., & Martens, R. (2002). Computer-based tools for instructional design: An introduction to the special issue. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(4), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA

    Katherine L. Bevins & Craig D. Howard

Authors
  1. Katherine L. Bevins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Craig D. Howard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katherine L. Bevins .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Design, Housing, and Apparel, University of Minnesota, College of Design, Saint Paul, MN, USA

    Brad Hokanson

  2. Career and Information Studies, University of Georgia Learning, Design, and Technology, Athens, GA, USA

    Gregory Clinton

  3. Instructional Design & Technology, University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA

    Andrew A. Tawfik

  4. Graduate Programs Office, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA

    Amy Grincewicz

  5. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA

    Matthew Schmidt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bevins, K.L., Howard, C.D. (2020). The Design Discourse of the Advanced Beginner. In: Hokanson, B., Clinton, G., Tawfik, A.A., Grincewicz, A., Schmidt, M. (eds) Educational Technology Beyond Content. Educational Communications and Technology: Issues and Innovations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37254-5_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37254-5_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37253-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37254-5

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation