The dramatization of practice in design education: (Un)learning by doing through participant observation

References

1. Abeysiriwardhane, A.,, Lutzhoft, M. H., and Ghosh, S.. ( 2021;), ‘ Learning and learning-to-learn by doing: An experiential learning approach for integrating human factors into maritime design education. ’, Maritime Technology and Research, 3:1, pp. 31–48.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Art Courses in Italy ( n.d.;), ‘ Art Courses in Italy partners: The (Nuova Accademia delle Belle Arti). ’, http://www.art-courses-italy.com/Naba-academic-art-design.html. Accessed 19 February 2022.
3. Austin, J.. ( 1962), How to Do Things with Words, Cambridge, MA:: Harvard University Press;.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bloor, D.. ( 2001;), ‘ Wittgenstein and the priority of practice. ’, in T. Schatzki,, K. Knorr-Cetina, and E. Von Savigny. (eds), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 95–106.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bourdieu, P.. ( 1977), Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Candea, M.. ( 2017;), ‘ We have never been pluralist: On lateral and frontal comparisons in the ontological turn. ’, in P. Charbonnier,, G. Salmon, and P. Skafish. (eds), Comparative Metaphysics: Ontology after Anthropology, London:: Rowman & Littlefield;, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a29adb8edaed89b9ea4a13b/t/5b8bb0104fa51ae122948866/1535881233136/Candea_2016_We+Have+Never+Been+Pluralist.pdf. Accessed 19 February 2022.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Clarke, A.. (ed.) ( 2018), Design Anthropology: Object Cultures in Transition, Wien:: Springer;.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Collins, H. M.. ( 2001;), ‘ What is tacit knowledge?. ’, in T. Schatzki,, K. Knorr Cetina, and E. Von Savigny. (eds), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 107–19.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Descola, P.. ( 2013), Beyond Nature and Culture, Chicago, IL:: University of Chicago Press;.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Dewey, J., and MacMurray, C. A.. ( [1904] 2018), The Relation of Theory to Practice in the Education of Teachers, National Society for the Scientific Study of Education , Chicago, IL:: University of Chicago Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Dunne, A., and Raby, F.. ( 2013), Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction and Social Dreaming, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Estalella, A., and Criado, T. S.. (eds) ( 2018), Experimental Collaborations: Ethnography through Fieldwork Devices, New York and Oxford:: Berghahn;.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Ferreira, P.. ( 2010;), ‘ Design conceptual na era pós-industrial: “A forma segue o conceito”. ’, master’s dissertation, Lisbon:: Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Lisbon;.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Garfinkel, H.. ( [1967] 1984), Studies in Ethnomethodology, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:: Pearson Education and Prentice-Hall;.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Gaspar, A.. ( 2021;), ‘ From ethnography to arto-ethnography. ’, in L. Schouwenberg, and M. Keathler. (eds), The Auto-ethnographic Turn in Design, Amsterdam:: Valiz;, pp. 70–79.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Gell, A.. ( 1998), Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Gieser, T.. ( 2008;), ‘ Embodiment, emotion and empathy: A phenomenological approach to apprenticeship learning. ’, Anthropological Theory, 8:3, pp. 299–318.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Goffman, E.. ( 1957), Interaction Ritual, New York:: Pantheon;.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Goffman, E.. ( 1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Garden City, NY:: Doubleday;.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Gowlland, G.. ( 2019;), ‘ The sociality of enskilment. ’, Ethnos, Journal of Anthropology, 84:3, pp. 508–24.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Grasseni, C.. ( 2004;), ‘ Skilled vision: An apprenticeship in breeding aesthetics. ’, Social Anthropology, 12:1, pp. 41–55.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Grasseni, C.. (ed.) ( 2009), Skilled Visions: Between Apprenticeship and Standards, New York and Oxford:: Berghahn Books;.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Grushka, K.. ( 2010;), ‘ Conceptualizing visual learning as an embodied and performative pedagogy for all classrooms. ’, Encounters in Theory and History of Education, 11, pp. 13–23, https://doi.org/10.24908/eoe-ese-rse.v11i0.3167. Accessed 20 January 2022.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Gunn, W.. ( 2004;), ‘ Learning as understanding in practice: Exploring interrelations between perception, creativity and skill. ’, Sensuous Knowledge: Creating a Tradition, Solstrand, Norway, 26–28 October.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Gunn, W.. ( 2009;), ‘ Learning within the workplaces of artists, anthropologists and architects: Making stories for drawings and writings. ’, in C. Grasseni. (ed.), Skilled Visions: Between Apprenticeship and Standards, Oxford:: Berghahn Books;, pp. 106–24.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Gunn, W.,, Otto, T., and Smith, R. C.. ( 2013), Design Anthropology: Theory and Practice, London:: Bloomsbury;.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Henare, A.,, Holbraad, M., and Wastell, S.. (eds) ( 2006), Thinking through Things: Theorising Artefacts Ethnographically, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Hocks, M., and Kendrick, M.. ( 2003), Eloquent Images: Word and Image in the Age of New Media, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Howlett, P., and Morgan, M. S.. (eds) ( 2011a), How Well Do Facts Travel? The Dissemination of Reliable Knowledge, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Howlett, P., and Morgan, M. S.. ( 2011b;), ‘ Tacit knowledge: Making it explicit. ’, working paper on the project ‘A tool kit for travelling “facts”’, LSE, Economic History , https://www.lse.ac.uk/Economic-History/Assets/Documents/Research/FACTS/reports/tacit.pdf. Accessed 19 February 2022.
31. Hutchins, E.. ( 1995), Cognition in the Wild, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Ingold, T.. ( 2000), The Perceptions of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Ingold, T.. ( 2007), Lines: A Brief History, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Ingold, T.. ( 2017), Anthropology and/as Education, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Knorr Cetina, K.. ( 2001;), ‘ Objectual practice. ’, in T. Schatzki,, K. Knorr Cetina, and E. Von Savigny. (eds), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, New York:: Routledge;, pp. 175–88.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Latour, B.. ( 2005), Reassembling the Social, Oxford:: Oxford University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Lave, J., and Wenger, E.. ( 1991), Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Leach, J.. ( 2011;), ‘ The self of the scientist, material for the artist: Emergent distinctions in an interdisciplinary collaboration. ’, Social Analysis, 55:3, pp. 143–63.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Leder, D.. ( 1990), The Absent Body, Chicago, IL:: University of Chicago Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Merleau-Ponty, M.. ( 1964;), ‘ Eye and mind. ’, in J. E. Edie, and C. Dallery. (eds), The Primacy of Perception, Evanston, IL:: Northwestern University Press;, pp. 159–90.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Michael, M.. ( 2016;), ‘ Speculative design and digital materialities: Idiocy, threat and com-promise. ’, in E. Ardevol,, S. Pink, and D. Lanzeni. (eds), Digital Materialities: Design and Anthropology, London:: Bloomsbury;, pp. 99–113.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Mirti, O.. ( 2009;), e-mail to A. . Gaspar:, 14 June.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Mohan, U., and Douny, L.. ( 2020), The Material Subject: Rethinking Bodies and Objects in Motion, London:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Munro, A. J.. ( 2011;), ‘ Autoethnography as a research method in design research at universities. ’, DEFSA: Design Educator's Forum of South Africa: Sixth International Design Education Conference, University of Johannesburg, Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture and Visual Identities in Art and Design Research Centre, 7–8 September, pp. 156–63.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Murphy, K.. ( 2020;), ‘ Imagination, improvisation and letting go. ’, in D. Boyer, and G. Marcus. (eds), Collaborative Anthropology Today: A Collection of Exceptions, Ithaca, NY:: Cornell University Press;, pp. 40–53.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Murphy, K., and Wilf, E.. (eds) ( 2021), Designs and Anthropologies: Frictions and Affinities, Albuquerque, NM:: University of New Mexico Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Naylor, M., and Ball, R.. ( 2005), Form Follows Idea: An Introduction to Design Poetics, London:: Black Dog Publishing Limited;.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Neumann, C.. ( 1999), Design Directory: Italy, London:: Pavilion Books Limited;.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Pálsson, G.. ( 1994;), ‘ Enskillment at sea. ’, Man, New Series, 29:4, pp. 901–27.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Pálsson, G.. ( 1998;), ‘ Schooling and skipperhood: The development of dexterity. ’, American Anthropologist, New Series, 100:4, pp. 908–23.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Papanek, V.. ( 1971), Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change, London:: Thames & Hudson;.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Polanyi, M.. ( 1965;), ‘ The structure of consciousness. ’, Brain, LXXXVIII:4, pp. 799–810.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Polanyi, M.. ( 1969), Knowing and Being (ed. M. Grene.), Chicago, IL:: University of Chicago Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Rabinow, P.,, Marcus, G.,, Faubion, J., and Rees, T.. ( 2008), Designs for an Anthropology of the Contemporary, Durham and London:: Duke University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Reitan, J. B.. ( 2006;), ‘ Inuit vernacular design as a community of practice for learning. ’, CoDesign: International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts, 2:2, pp. 71–80.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Schatzki, T. R.,, Knorr Cetina, K., and Von Savigny, E.. (eds) ( 2001), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory, New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Schouwenberg, L., and Keathler, M.. (eds) ( 2021), The Auto-ethnographic Turn in Design, Amsterdam:: Valiz;.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Simon, H. A.. ( 1969), The Sciences of the Artificial, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
59. Simpson, B.. ( 1997;), ‘ Possession, dispossession and the social distribution of knowledge among Sri Lankan ritual specialists. ’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 3:1, pp. 43–59.
    [Google Scholar]
60. Smith, R. C.,, Vangkilde, K. T.,, Kjaersgaard, M. G.,, Otto, T.,, Halse, J., and Binder, T.. ( 2016), Design Anthropological Futures: Exploring Emergence, Intervention, and Formation, London:: Bloomsbury Academic;.
    [Google Scholar]
61. Suchman, L.. ( [1987] 1994), Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human–Machine Communication, Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
62. Gaspar, Andrea. ( 2022;), ‘ The dramatization of practice in design education: (Un)learning by doing through participant observation. ’, Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, 21:1, pp. 131–47, https://doi.org/10.1386/adch_00051_1
    [Google Scholar]