Abstract
This paper explores the prospects of prototyping as an aid in understanding theory among students at a higher education. Drawing on research by Buur et.al. (2022) into Design Anthropological Theory Instruments, this research, brings the concept of theory instruments into a teaching setting among social work students. Using research through design (Zimmerman, Stolterman & Forlizzi, 2010), this research explores how working with tangible materials influence students’ understanding of theory. Prototyping theories can help bridge the gap between abstract concepts and concrete application. The research is concerned with the tangibility of abstract theory and explores both the process of making prototypes as well as the impact of more finished theory instruments. Introducing theory instruments or having the students physicalizing a theory does not automatically lead to a deeper or more thorough understanding of theory and does not prevent misconceptions or simplifications. However, the tangible nature of the process opens for a reflexive conversation. The physical models becomes drivers for the discussion about the theory and what is essential or important in the theory, and as such the prototypes can be perceived as “boundary objects” (Star & Griesemer, 1989) or “shared objects of thoughts” (Kirch, 2010). The research also finds that purely visual representations sometimes hinder fully grasping the complexity of a theory and when the theory is physicalized, it opens for further exploration and conversations about the complexity of a theory as it becomes tangible. By physicalizing theory, it becomes clearer to the students that a model has its limitations and cannot capture all aspects of a theory and thus strengthening the student’s metamodeling competencies (Schwartz & White, 2005).
Keywords
Physicalizing, Keyword 2; objects vs. things, Keyword 3: metamodeling, Keyword 4: theory-praxis
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/eksig2023.136
Citation
Schaldemose, S.(2023) Prototyping of theories, in Silvia Ferraris, Valentina Rognoli, Nithikul Nimkulrat (eds.), EKSIG 2023: From Abstractness to Concreteness – experiential knowledge and the role of prototypes in design research, 19–20 June 2023, Milan, Italy. https://doi.org/10.21606/eksig2023.136
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Prototyping of theories
This paper explores the prospects of prototyping as an aid in understanding theory among students at a higher education. Drawing on research by Buur et.al. (2022) into Design Anthropological Theory Instruments, this research, brings the concept of theory instruments into a teaching setting among social work students. Using research through design (Zimmerman, Stolterman & Forlizzi, 2010), this research explores how working with tangible materials influence students’ understanding of theory. Prototyping theories can help bridge the gap between abstract concepts and concrete application. The research is concerned with the tangibility of abstract theory and explores both the process of making prototypes as well as the impact of more finished theory instruments. Introducing theory instruments or having the students physicalizing a theory does not automatically lead to a deeper or more thorough understanding of theory and does not prevent misconceptions or simplifications. However, the tangible nature of the process opens for a reflexive conversation. The physical models becomes drivers for the discussion about the theory and what is essential or important in the theory, and as such the prototypes can be perceived as “boundary objects” (Star & Griesemer, 1989) or “shared objects of thoughts” (Kirch, 2010). The research also finds that purely visual representations sometimes hinder fully grasping the complexity of a theory and when the theory is physicalized, it opens for further exploration and conversations about the complexity of a theory as it becomes tangible. By physicalizing theory, it becomes clearer to the students that a model has its limitations and cannot capture all aspects of a theory and thus strengthening the student’s metamodeling competencies (Schwartz & White, 2005).