Entangled Co-Design with a Trickster: Speculative Framing and Reframing

Vanessa Svihla, Megan Jacobs, Tim Castillo, Mary Tsiongas, Leah Buechley, Megan Tucker, Amy Traylor, Drew Trujillo, Reuben Fresquez, Jaziel Cervantes-Carreon, Sydney Nesbit
{"title":"Entangled Co-Design with a Trickster: Speculative Framing and Reframing","authors":"Vanessa Svihla, Megan Jacobs, Tim Castillo, Mary Tsiongas, Leah Buechley, Megan Tucker, Amy Traylor, Drew Trujillo, Reuben Fresquez, Jaziel Cervantes-Carreon, Sydney Nesbit","doi":"10.14434/ijdl.v15i1.33820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Speculative design, as a diverse set of methods that aim to offer critique, can be challenging to engage productively. In this design case, we share how a prior, stalled design project—an ambitious vision of interdisciplinary design education partnered with business and housing development projects in Santa Fe, New Mexico—provided compelling precedent as we sought to reframe during the COVID-19 pandemic. We recognized that solution-focused ways of working in the prior project left the design problem undefined. As we began the design work detailed in this case, we leveraged the perspectives and design knowledge of our interdisciplinary team of faculty and students. While design cases often emphasize the designed training or program, we focus on our reframing process, sharing vignettes as we prepared to and participated in activities at a design workshop, and then used our own design practices to engage in problem framing workshops. In sharing these accounts, we characterize the pandemic as a trickster and speculative co-designer, who revealed much about how our efforts were entangled with institutional structures. Across these punctuated vignettes of design work, we highlight how an initial broad problem frame invited this trickster to participate and how the application of problem framing tools wrested framing agency from the trickster. Collectively, this anchored our attention to systemic inequities in ways that troubled notions of sustainability.","PeriodicalId":91509,"journal":{"name":"International journal of designs for learning","volume":"109 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of designs for learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14434/ijdl.v15i1.33820","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Speculative design, as a diverse set of methods that aim to offer critique, can be challenging to engage productively. In this design case, we share how a prior, stalled design project—an ambitious vision of interdisciplinary design education partnered with business and housing development projects in Santa Fe, New Mexico—provided compelling precedent as we sought to reframe during the COVID-19 pandemic. We recognized that solution-focused ways of working in the prior project left the design problem undefined. As we began the design work detailed in this case, we leveraged the perspectives and design knowledge of our interdisciplinary team of faculty and students. While design cases often emphasize the designed training or program, we focus on our reframing process, sharing vignettes as we prepared to and participated in activities at a design workshop, and then used our own design practices to engage in problem framing workshops. In sharing these accounts, we characterize the pandemic as a trickster and speculative co-designer, who revealed much about how our efforts were entangled with institutional structures. Across these punctuated vignettes of design work, we highlight how an initial broad problem frame invited this trickster to participate and how the application of problem framing tools wrested framing agency from the trickster. Collectively, this anchored our attention to systemic inequities in ways that troubled notions of sustainability.
与捣蛋鬼纠缠在一起的共同设计:推测性构思与重新构思
投机性设计是一系列旨在提供批判的多样化方法,要想富有成效地参与其中可能具有挑战性。在这个设计案例中,我们分享了一个之前停滞不前的设计项目--一个雄心勃勃的跨学科设计教育愿景,与新墨西哥州圣达菲的商业和住房开发项目合作--是如何为我们在 COVID-19 大流行期间寻求重构提供令人信服的先例的。我们认识到,在之前的项目中,以解决方案为中心的工作方式使得设计问题没有得到界定。当我们开始本案例中详述的设计工作时,我们充分利用了由教师和学生组成的跨学科团队的观点和设计知识。设计案例通常强调所设计的培训或项目,而我们则侧重于我们的重新构思过程,分享我们准备和参与设计工作坊活动的小故事,然后利用我们自己的设计实践参与问题构思工作坊。在分享这些故事的过程中,我们将大流行病描述为一个诡计多端、投机取巧的共同设计者,他揭示了我们的努力是如何与制度结构纠缠在一起的。在这些设计工作的小插曲中,我们强调了最初的宽泛问题框架是如何邀请这个捣蛋鬼参与进来的,以及问题框架工具的应用是如何从捣蛋鬼手中夺回框架代理权的。总之,这让我们关注到了系统性的不平等,从而对可持续发展的理念造成了困扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
27 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信