Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T22:15:07.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BRINGING SYSTEMIC DESIGN IN THE EDUCATIONAL PRACTICE: THE CASE OF GENDER EQUALITY IN AN ACADEMIC CONTEXT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Alexis JP Jacoby  and
Kristel Van Ael
Alexis JP Jacoby*
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp
Kristel Van Ael
Affiliation:
University of Antwerp
*
Jacoby, Alexis JP, University of Antwerp Product Development, Belgium, alexis.jacoby@uantwerpen.be

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The field of design practice and design education is reaching out to address problems that cannot be solved by introducing a single product or service. Complex societal problems such as gender inequality cannot be solved using a traditional problem-solving oriented design approach. The specific characteristics of these problems require new ways of dealing with the dynamics, scale and complexity of the problem.

Systemic design is a design approach integrating systems thinking in combination with more traditional design methodologies, addressing complex and systemic problems. This paper reports a systemic design approach in an educational context for the case of academic gender inequality. We show the way the problem was addressed and how design students were invited to take a systemic perspective, provide integrated interventions and take first steps in providing instruments for implementation. We conclude with the learnings from this case study, both on the process and the results.

Keywords

ComplexityConceptual designDesign education
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 581 - 590
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Buchanan, R. (1992) ‘Wicked Problems in Design Thinking’, Design Issues, 8(2), pp. 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, J., Diehl, J. C. and Snelders, D. (2019) ‘A framework for a systems design approach to complex societal problems’, Design Science, 5. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2018.16.Google Scholar
Dorst, K. (2011) ‘The core of “design thinking” and its application’, Design Studies, 32(6), pp. 521–532. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorst, K. and Hansen, C. T. (2011) ‘Modelling paradoxes in novice and expert design’, ICED11, 18th International Conference on Engineering Design, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08.2011, pp. pp. 142–150.Google Scholar
Geels, F. W. (2005) ‘Processes and patterns in transitions and system innovations: Refining the co-evolutionary multi-level perspective’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(6 SPEC. ISS.), pp. 681–696. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2004.08.014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, D. (2017), Updated Empathy Map canvas. Xplane. Available at: https://medium.com/the-xplane-collection/updated-empathy-map-canvas-46df22df3c8a (accessed 14/03/2021).Google Scholar
Jones, P. H. (2014) ‘Systemic Design Principles for Complex Social Systems’, in Metcalf, G. S. (ed.) Social Systems and Design. Tokyo: Springer, pp. 91–128. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54478-4_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, P. and Bowes, J. (2017) ‘Rendering Systems Visible for Design: Synthesis Maps as Constructivist Design Narratives’, She Ji. Elsevier, 3(3), pp. 229–248. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.12.001.Google Scholar
Kaufman, D.L. (1980), Systems one: an introduction to systems thinking, Pegasus Communications, Place of publication. DOI (if present). D. L.Google Scholar
Meadows, D. (1999) Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System, The Sustainability Institute. Hartland.Google Scholar
Norman, D. A. and Stappers, P. J. (2015) ‘DesignX: Complex Sociotechnical Systems’, She Ji, 1(2), pp. 83–106. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.002.Google Scholar
Pourdehnad, J., Wexler, E. R. and Wilson, D. V. (2011) ‘Systems & design thinking: A conceptual framework for their integration’, 55th Annual Meeting of the International Society for the Systems Sciences, (July 2011), pp. 807–821.Google Scholar
Ryan, A. (2014) ‘A Framework for Systemic Design’, FormAkademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 7(4). https://dx.doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedlacko, M. et al. (2014) ‘Participatory systems mapping for sustainable consumption: Discussion of a method promoting systemic insights’, Ecological Economics. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.07.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Universiteit Antwerp (2014) Duurzaam genderbeleid voor academisch personeel, Strategisch Actieplan Universiteit Antwerpen. Available at: https://www.uantwerpen.be/nl/overuantwerpen /organisatie/missie-en-visie/diversiteit/thema-s/gender/ (Accessed: 6 December 2020).Google Scholar
Van Ael, K. (2018), Systemic Design Toolkit, Brussels: Namahn.Google Scholar
Whitney, P. (2015). Design and the Economy of Choice. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Volume 1, Issue 1, Autumn 2015, Pages 58–80Google Scholar