CRIT faculty members Shaowen Bardzell and Jeffrey Bardzell will be co-presenting two full papers at ACM DIS’2012 in Newcastle this month.
First is “Crafting Quality in Design: Integrity, Creativity, and Public Sensibility,” co-authored by CRIT researchers Shaowen Bardzell and Jeffrey Bardzell working in collaboration with Daniela Rosner of University of California–Berkeley. The abstract is as follows:
This paper aims to enrich the design research community’s notions of quality by turning to the techniques and values of master craftspeople. We describe and analyze interviews conducted with elite craft practitioners in the US and Taiwan to consider how they perceive and produce quality. The crafters articulate a consensus view of interaction with integrity. American participants tend to frame their understanding of quality in terms of self-expression through a creative interaction with materials, while participants from Taiwan emphasize the role of communities in establishing—and benefitting from—craft quality. As HCI continues to turn to design approaches on account of their strengths producing works of socio-cultural relevance and value, our study sheds light on the qualities of interacting with integrity, the pleasures of self-expression through creative interaction with materials, and the practical benefits of positioning creative work in relation to the material resources, aesthetic tastes, and socio-economic needs of a public.
Second is “Critical Design and Critical Theory: The Challenge of Designing for Provocation,” co-authored by CRIT researchers Shaowen Bardzell and Jeffrey Bardzell working in collaboration with Jodi Forlizzi, John Zimmerman, and John Antanitis of Carnegie Mellon University. Its abstract is as follows:
Constructive design research is a form of research where design activity is a central research activity. One type of constructive design research is critical design, which seeks to disrupt or transgress social and cultural norms. Critical design’s advocates have turned to critical theory as an intellectual resource to support their approach. Interestingly, critical design processes remain under-articulated in the growing design research literature. In this paper, we first explain why critical design is so hard to describe as a design practice or process. We then describe two critical design case studies we undertook and the effects we observed them having when place in the field. After sharing our breakdowns and breakthroughs along the way, we offer reflections on designing for provocativeness, the value of deep relationships between researchers and research participants, and the need to plan for and go with a fluid and emergent research plan — with the goal of helping clarify critical design as an approach.
The papers will be available in the ACM Digital Library after the conference ends in mid-June.