Reflecting on Design for Social Need

Abstract

Designing for social need requires defining what constitutes ‘social need’. The question becomes whose need, when, where and why? These issues are complicated when need is a contested category (Fry 1992, p.42), resources are finite and the sustainability of solutions open to question. Defining ‘need’ requires knowledge. However, as Friedman observes: ‘it is not experience, but our interpretation and understanding of experience that leads to knowledge (Friedman 2000, p.19).’ The questions for design are perhaps, firstly, how do we interpret and understand experience and secondly, how do we select the experiences on which we construct the knowledge used to define need? This paper proposes developing reflective practice may enhance the quality of decision making by raising awareness of the experience of knowledge acquisition as it changes our perceptions within the design process. This increased level of awareness aims to make explicit the ambiguity within the design process and the multitude of influential factors. Not least amongst these factors are the limitations of individual knowledge. Most noticeable, perhaps, when designing for areas beyond the immediate range of the designers personal experience, for example, design for people with disabilities and ageing populations. If left unexposed and unchallenged, such limitations may be compounded by an unconscious reliance on negative stereotypical images and social prejudice. With 6.8 million disabled people of working age within the United Kingdom and 19 million people, nearly half of the electorate, aged over fifty years there is an enormous potential market for socially inclusive design. With the introduction of the Disability Discrimination Act (1995) and its anticipated extension to include ageing in 2006, European legislative initiatives are providing the legal framework for action. Reflective practice offers a method to expose the extent and range of what is ‘known’ and ‘unknown’ within the design process, and a structure with which to interrogate the validity of implicit assumptions within any definitions of social need. Drawing on theories from education (Eraut 1994, Kolb 1984), reflective practice (Schon 1983; Moon 2003) and design (Archer 1963; Cross 1984; Lawson 1990; Jones 1992) this paper proposes a synthesised model of reflective design to contribute to the search for ‘solid and well-grounded knowledge’. References: Archer, B. (1963). “Systematic Method for Designers, Part One: Aesthetics and Logic.” Design Vol. 172 (April): p. 46 - 49. Cross, N., Ed. (1984). Developments in Design Methodology. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, The Open University. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence, Taylor & Francis. Friedman, K. (2000). Creating Design Knowledge: from research into practice. Research into Practice IDATER 2000, Loughborough University. Fry, T. (1992). “Against an Essential Theory of "Need": Some Considerations for Design Theory.” Design Issues Vol.VIII (No. 2): p.41 - 53. Jones, J. C. (1992). Design Methods. New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning Development, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall. Lawson, B. (1990). How Designers Think, The Design Process Demystified. Oxford, Butterworth Archtecture. Moon, J. (2003). Using Learning Journals for Art and Design in Higher Education. Centre for Learning and Teaching in Art and Design, The London Institute. Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practioner, How Professionals Think in Action. Aldershot, Ashgate Arena.