Abstract
Five steps in the development of design studio culture are analysed based on a review of the literature: (i) Nikolai Ladovsky ́s “Psycho-Technical Research Laboratory”, 1921 to 1927, (ii) Gilbert Rohde ́s “Design Laboratory”, 1935 to 1937, (iii) Frederick Kiesler ́s “Laboratory for Design Correlation”, 1937 to 1941, (iv) John C. Jones ́ “Design Research Laboratory”, approx. 1963 to 1974, and (v) Neil Gershenfeld ́s “Fab Labs”, since 2003. Attention is drawn to the different ways in which art, science and technology are included in the curricula of these educational programmes. Contents and goals of teaching refer to features of laboratories and methods of work. An attempt is made to show how the metaphor of the laboratory was used to establish these programmes. The experimental character of the programmes and the changes from “pseudo-laboratory conditions” to “real-studio conditions” are discussed. The selected programmes can be characterised thematically, methodologically and metaphorically. The issue is to discuss design education not only as a technical but also as a social phenomenon.
Keywords
design history, design research, design education
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.272
Citation
Hasenhütl, G. (2018) The Design Laboratory. A Review of Five Design Education Programmes, in Storni, C., Leahy, K., McMahon, M., Lloyd, P. and Bohemia, E. (eds.), Design as a catalyst for change - DRS International Conference 2018, 25-28 June, Limerick, Ireland. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2018.272
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
The Design Laboratory. A Review of Five Design Education Programmes
Five steps in the development of design studio culture are analysed based on a review of the literature: (i) Nikolai Ladovsky ́s “Psycho-Technical Research Laboratory”, 1921 to 1927, (ii) Gilbert Rohde ́s “Design Laboratory”, 1935 to 1937, (iii) Frederick Kiesler ́s “Laboratory for Design Correlation”, 1937 to 1941, (iv) John C. Jones ́ “Design Research Laboratory”, approx. 1963 to 1974, and (v) Neil Gershenfeld ́s “Fab Labs”, since 2003. Attention is drawn to the different ways in which art, science and technology are included in the curricula of these educational programmes. Contents and goals of teaching refer to features of laboratories and methods of work. An attempt is made to show how the metaphor of the laboratory was used to establish these programmes. The experimental character of the programmes and the changes from “pseudo-laboratory conditions” to “real-studio conditions” are discussed. The selected programmes can be characterised thematically, methodologically and metaphorically. The issue is to discuss design education not only as a technical but also as a social phenomenon.