Flexible Thinking

Context as Burden and Opportunity: Flexible Thinking and the Design Process

Maria V Miller
The Ohio State University
2019 National Conference for the Beginning Design Student

Abstract

A consideration for context in the design process has rightfully become an unassailable mandate within the dominion of design literature. Upon considering the benefits and burdens of context to design process resolution, this paper discusses context as it relates to functional fixedness, the mere-exposure effect and the familiarity principle and how each of these inform student outcome; often serving to impede flexible thinking in the design process. This paper will examine the importance of flexible thinking to the beginning design student and its complex relationship to context as both burden

and opportunity. It will finish by exploring methods to promote flexible thinking in design studio education. The objectives of these methods are designed to encourage beginning design students to not become attached to their first idea, to cultivate an awareness of functional fixedness and mere-exposure effect, so that they become more willing to change their perspective, and to generate alternative design solutions. Students will cultivate a more innovative, divergent thinking approach to problem solving, while continuing to encourage a veneration for the sanctity of context as of central importance to the design process.

Empathy and Design

Design without Empathy: Leveraging the Past to Appreciate the Value of Human Centered Design

Maria V Miller
The Ohio State University
2018 National Conference for the Beginning Design Student

Abstract

This paper will examine the powerful influence of the design precedent in American education as a resource for teaching empathy in design. It will explore cultural shifts that demonstrate patterns of Egoism, Altruism, Individualism and Collectivism influence in design. Three design precedents will be carefully reconsidered from the user’s point of view, so that we might better understand the dangers of an insular, self-focused design process. Through this analysis we will come to better understand the value of Human Centered Design and the benefits of working in collaborative, inclusive, multi-disciplinary teams that welcome stakeholder input throughout the design process.

Empathy and Design

A strong design process requires students to cultivate empathy, creativity and rationality. Empathy is particularly important at the beginning of the design process when ethnographic, market and precedent research takes place. A predisposition for empathy helps designers better sense user need. Designers must have the ability to “read between the lines”; using sensory information to intuit problems that users may not be consciously aware of. Empathy allows designers to identify, anticipate, articulate and define complex design opportunities in need of good solutions. A good design solution cannot occur without the clear, articulate identification of a problem. Historically, there is much agreement that understanding a problem takes greater ability and effort than solving for it. (Garson, 2014) Most of what we buy is unconsciously driven and the empathetic designer will have the ability to understand and respond to both conscious and unconscious user needs.

ELECTRIC ASSISTED KICK-SCOOTER DESIGN

AN INTERNATIONAL DESIGN PROJECT WITH FIVE UNIVERSITIES

ISBN: 9781388721923

Layout and Editing: Verena Paepcke-Hjeltness, Assistant Professor Industrial Design Iowa State University and Aziza Cyamani, Graduate Program Industrial Design Iowa State University

Co-Editor: Maria V. Miller, Visiting Assistant Professor, The Ohio State University

Project Introduction: Reinhart Butter, Professor Emeritus, The Ohio State University

RATIONALE AND OVERVIEW

The desire to speed up walking with a simple device that can be instantly and safely operated by just about anybody and without any training led to the challenge of upgrading the basic kick-scooter with power assist - somewhat similar to the electric e-bike and its enormous popularity.

If small enough and minimal in every respect, such a scooter could go where bicycles are impractical or prohibited, becoming especially useful for the so-called ‘first and last mile’ of urban or rural commutes. By folding down (as simply as an umbrella), it could be carried along instead of needing to be parked and once compacted, would take practically no space in the trunk of a car.

Being a ‘scooter’ this device would be propelled by kicking, thus providing physical exercise. Yet combined with the convenience of electric assist (e.g. in uphill terrain), its use would be simplified and greatly broadened. Overcoming the stigma of such product -that it is a child’s toy- is one of the biggest problems of the project since adults don’t want to look childish, even though backpacks carried over business attire or sneakers worn with suits and dresses prove that cultural norms can be successfully challenged.

While many others have thought about how such a product might gain popularity, and many comparable designs have lately emerged on the market, the idea of creating an ideal answer to this challenge has been explored for nearly a decade at a range of universities around the globe. They led to test-runs -first in the context of short workshops at Shih-Chien University in Taipei, and subsequently at Drexel University in Philadelphia- concluding that the concept of an electrified kick- scooter still seems quite original and worthy of further exploration.

PARTICIPATING UNIVERSITIES

Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA
Shih-Chien University, Taipei, Taiwan
Moholy-Nagy University, Budapest, Hungary
Hochschule für Technik & Wirtschaft, Berlin, Germany
University of Applied Science, Darmstadt, Germany

Design Thinking

Understanding the Value of the Empathic Dimension in Design

Maria V Miller
Iowa State University
2016 Harvey Mudd Design Thinking Workshop

Summary

As we continue to face the challenge of increasingly diverse multidisciplinary working groups, there is an urgent need to cultivate a better awareness of our differences, not just in terms of ethnicity, gender, nor cultural background, but in terms of differing cognitive profiles. Such an understanding would go a long way toward engendering mutual respect and appreciation for the value that different thinking styles bring to the design process. Understanding difference in terms of cognitive profiles also has the potential to encourage a culture of tolerance and appreciation of others, inspiring a greater willingness to cooperate. As design educators, this increased awareness could also serve to better engage and retain students in the design disciplines. Empathizing-systemizing theory has the potential to open the door to an important and necessary conversation in design thinking. Design thinking as a formal method of creative problem solving has been traditionally defined by our understanding of analysis versus synthesis and convergent versus divergent thinking. My research however, seeks to explore systemizing- empathizing theory as a more wholistic framework for better understanding and defining design thinking and implementing better design-thinking practices in studio and subsequently in practice.

I will hence critically examine Baron-Cohen’s theory and methods, as the leading thinker on Empathizing (EQ)-Systemizing (SQ) theory and situate this knowledge within the context of theory concerned with the contemporary design process and its traditional lack of diversity, both in terms of diverse background, but also in terms of diversity in design thinking and cognitive styles. My intention is to determine through a series of studies of design studio, the existence of modes of thinking and designing that have value to the profession but are currently unrecognized and under supported by educators and professional practice. The importance of this sort of study to the profession is without measure: we have a deeply gendered and non-representational profession even now in the C21st and yet we also misunderstand gender. This research goes beyond notions of gender difference, to question much deeper ideas of difference at the level of our relationship to the material world and to others.

Introduction

Empathizing–systemizing theory can be best understood as a spectrum along which people may be classified on the basis of their scores for strength of interest in empathy and systems. Here, empathizing is defined as the drive to identify others’ mental states in order to predict their behavior and respond with an appropriate emotion, while systemizing is defined as the drive to analyze a system in terms of the rules that govern the system, in order to predict its behavior.i Developed by Simon Baron-Cohen, Empathizing-Systemizing theory has been proven to be an excellent predictor of students who choose STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) and the

Humanities. Findings suggest that individuals in the sciences possess a cognitive style that is more systemizing-driven than empathizing-driven, whereas individuals in humanities possess a cognitive style that is much more empathizing-driven than systemizing-driven.ii

Men and women have also been found to differ in their empathizing-systemizing cognitive style. Men have consistently been shown to be stronger in systemizing and women are stronger in empathizing.iii Recent findings of a longitudinal study suggest that the sex differences in empathizing and systemizing are biological. Fetal testosterone (FT) has been determined to be a candidate biological factor influencing empathizing and systemizing.iv Electroencephalography (EEG) investigations in human subjects verify a different hemispheric organization in men and women during the creative thinking process. Men tend to use smaller, more focused areas of the brain, while women’s brain activity is more topographically expanded, suggesting that women may have a more natural affinity for divergent thinking. Design thinking is currently defined as a formal method that combines empathy, creativity and rationality. Historically, the traditionally female domain of empathizing and its associated

occupations have always been undervalued. In the world of making however, empathy is the first dictate of design thinking methodology and the necessary antecedent for all design innovation. The design process requires a predisposition for empathy to listen for and fully understand user need, so that one may identify, anticipate, articulate and define complex design opportunities in need of a good solution. There are clear parallels between Baron-Cohen’s empathizing dichotomy and the empathy in design thinking methodology. Evidence would also seem to suggest a connection between a preference for empathizing and divergent thinking.

Rationality is the final of the three design thinking methodologies and is defined as the act of analyzing and fitting various solutions to a problem context.vi Creative thinking rationality shares parallels with our understanding of convergent thinking and offers many similarities to the Baron-Cohen definition of systemizing as an opposing dimension to empathizing.

Creativity falls in the middle of the design thinking three-step methodology. It is characterized as a phase where the clear understanding of a design problem can be now be responded to with a messy iterative process of back and forth prototyping; with multiple failures generating further insight and solution. This phase requires a mental fluidity between both empathizing and systemizing styles of thinking and outlines the importance of inspiring awareness for the importance of cultivating a more holistic thinking in young design students.

Outcomes

The results of this study have implications for the design and engineering disciplines, as well for the fields of cognitive psychology and gender studies. In design and engineering education, this knowledge could lead to the development of new approaches. Professionally, this knowledge could serve to engender appreciation and help quantify the value that different cognitive styles bring to the design process. This knowledge would potentially contribute to the cultivation of a more wholistic creative process for both the individual and multidisciplinary working teams. It could also lead to an

increased appreciation for the empathizing cognitive style as essential to innovation and the design process, potentially supporting a case for greater parity of economic remuneration for design skill specializations shown to fall within this realm.

Methods

Methods adopted will be both quantitative and qualitative to address the broad depth and wealth of information that can be gleaned from the day-to-day activities in the design process. The initial phase of this research will compare the results of EQ (Empathizing) and SQ (Systemizing) scores with preferences for the different skills inherent to the design process, such as working with color, form, materials, details, connections, writing, diagraming, gathering research, programming, etc. This research survey will collect data to map design skill preferences along the Empathizing (EQ) and Systemizing (SQ) spectrums and be compared with demographic information. There is no direct benefit to research survey participants. This survey will take between 15-20 minutes to complete. Participation is entirely voluntary and participants may withdraw at any time. These results will serve as a foundation for further exploring empathy as economically vital to the design process as well as uncovering data in which the value of empathy can be potentially better quantified.

Impact of the Study

Systemizing is the last phase of the creative thinking process and its closely related occupations (STEM) are much more directly linked to the output of tangible products. Because the fruit of systemizing thinking is more tangible and quantifiable, it readily lends itself to an assignment of greater economic value. Inherent in this phenomenon is the possibility that long ingrained gender discrimination may factor into our culture’s tendency to value systemizing thinking over empathizing thinking. A better appreciation and understanding of empathizing-systemizing theory might lead to a reevaluation of the economic inequities associated with the skills that fall within each of these realms and foster a greater appreciation for the role of empathy in the process of making. Plotting design skill preferences along the Empathizing-Systemizing spectrum would be the first step toward better understanding and quantifying the value of empathy in the making process, potentially leading to greater economic equity.

Responsible Risk Taking in Design

Design without Empathy: Leveraging the Past to Appreciate the Value of Human Centered Design

Maria V Miller
Iowa State University
Association of Architectural Educators 2, UK

Abstract

In addition to disciplinary and social responsibility, traditional studio pedagogy typically focuses on learning outcomes that concern communication, history/theory/criticism, technology, materials, and practice. The iterative process in design wrestles with all of these challenges and yet, what do we understand about learning behaviours and studio education? As comprehensive as these learning outcomes appear, the dispositions needed for success are rarely taught as deliberate learning objectives in studio.

Education researchers Art Costa and Bena Kallick are the co-founders of the Habits of Mind Institute, which focuses on sixteen dispositions that empower creative and critical thinking. 1 Educators and administrators are increasingly looking to the Habits of Mind to better refine learning outcomes in higher education. As the design disciplines become increasingly interdisciplinary, the need to teach effective behavioural strategies has become urgent. The Habits of Mind can provide a foundation to help design students better work the iterative process. These habits not only cultivate an empowering awareness, but also provide a valuable a tool for navigating the chasm between disciplines in the field.

Teaching Time Management

The Bogeyman in the Studio: Teaching Time Management

Maria V Miller
Iowa State University
2013 National Conference for the Beginning Design Student

Abstract

This Toothpaste For Dinner quip, found favor with students this Fall. The image was quickly adopted and saw a high volume of shares on social networking sites. That this cartoon was so readily embraced is no surprise, it demonstrates sympathy for the young design student’s struggle and offers false validation. Inherent in the subtext of this theme, is the familiar and clichéd portrait of the creative genius as unwieldy renegade. It also adheres to a late modernist narrative of the design superstar as temperamental artist, beholden to no one. Where architecture is concerned, this model of truth is both factitious and dangerous.

The importance of managing time is often difficult to impress upon the eager beginning design student, many of whom still entertain romantic notions of what it means to be a designer. Because the beginning design studio is a student’s entrée into the world of design education, instructors have the power to teach an important skill that will not only influence a struggling student’s outcome in studio, but when carefully nurtured into habit, can also change

the course of their life. Through awareness and the employment of practical techniques backed by several scientific studies, we will discover how studio can serve as a tool for teaching the skill of time-management.

Social Problems and Design

Why Wait? Integrating Social Problems into the Beginning Design Project

Maria V Miller
Iowa State University
2011 National Conference for the Beginning Design Student

Abstract

Many educators argue that beginning architecture students are already too overwhelmed by the rigorous demands of first and second year design curricula to successfully integrate an awareness of complex social problems into the learning agenda. In the beginning design studio, there remains a strong predilection toward short, abstract design projects. These quick projects have a powerful history and are heavily steeped in 20th century Western design education tradition. Unfortunately, these sorts of projects often leave little opportunity to integrate humanitarian concerns into the learning outcome.

This paper will be organized into two parts. The first part will explore how a shifting student demographic clearly demonstrates a readiness for more sophisticated and challenging design problems early in the student’s education. The

second part shares the challenges and successes of an experimental second year design studio in which architecture students, with only one previous semester of architecture studio under their belt, were asked to design a women’s shelter in inner city Chicago.