-Critique and evaluate the interrelationship of design and technology. -Conduct ... prepared for class, synthesize cours
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 1 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF MEDIA, CULTURE, AND COMMUNICATION The Cultural Analysis of Design Graduate Seminar
Professor Erica Robles East Building, Room 725
[email protected]
E58.2XXX Classroom location Class meeting times
COURSE DESCRIPTION This class introduces design as an intersection of practice, philosophy, aesthetics, politics, and material culture. In the course of bringing students into the contemporary conversation that organizes design discourse increasingly in terms of “interaction” this class prepares students to conduct original project work on the history, culture, and aesthetics of contemporary material and visual culture at the scale of computers, media, architecture, and product.
LEARNER OBJECTIVES Upon completion of this course students should be able to: -Define key features of the meanings and applications of design throughout history -Outline key theoretical frameworks in the understanding of design -Analyze the politics of design across a range of social contexts -Critique and evaluate the interrelationship of design and technology -Conduct original research on a topic related to the social, cultural and political meanings of design
EVALUATION Participation (20%) Research Proposal (20%) Final Project (60%) Evaluation Rubric A= Excellent This work is comprehensive and detailed, integrating themes and concepts from discussions, lectures and readings. Writing is clear, analytical and organized. Arguments offer specific examples and concisely evaluate evidence. Students who earn this grade are prepared for class, synthesize course materials and contribute insightfully.
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 2 B=Good This work is complete and accurate, offering insights at general level of understanding. Writing is clear, uses examples properly and tends toward broad analysis. Classroom participation is consistent and thoughtful. C=Average This work is correct but is largely descriptive, lacking analysis. Writing is vague and at times tangential. Arguments are unorganized, without specific examples or analysis. Classroom participation is inarticulate. D= Unsatisfactory This work is incomplete, and evidences little understanding of the readings or discussions. Arguments demonstrate inattention to detail, misunderstand course material and overlook significant themes. Classroom participation is spotty, unprepared and off topic. F=Failed This grade indicates a failure to participate and/or incomplete assignments Expectations and Assessment (1) Readings are to be completed before class. Class meetings center on in-depth discussion of concepts from the texts. Weekly meetings are our opportunity to work through texts as a community and the prerequisite for high-quality discussion is that everyone reads material ahead of time. Come to class prepared for discussion. (2) Engaged participation. I will be looking for knowledge-building contributions that show not only that you are trying to understand the readings but also that help contribute to your peers’ understandings. A pre-requisite for active and intelligent participation in discussions is prompt and regular attendance to all classes. Notify me in advance if you are going to miss a class. (3) Assignments. You will be asked to complete a class project as part of this course on a self-chosen topic. Project proposals should reflect scholarly work drawn from themes discussed in readings and in class and should extend these themes through an original case study of a design. Once approved, projects should then be prepared as a 20 page paper and accompanying in –class presentation. Final project presentations should enable future scholarly publication or research.
REQUIRED TEXT All readings (listed below) will be posted on blackboard.
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 3
CLASS POLICIES Absences and Lateness More than two unexcused absences will automatically result in a lower grade. Chronic lateness will also be reflected in your evaluation of participation. Regardless of the reason for your absence you will be responsible for any missed work. Travel arrangements do not constitute a valid excuse for rescheduling exams. There are no extra credit assignments for this class. General Decorum Slipping in late or leaving early, sleeping, text messaging, surfing the Internet, doing homework in class, eating, etc. are distracting and disrespectful to all participants in the course. Academic Dishonesty and Plagiarism “Academic integrity is the guiding principle for all that you do…you violate the principle when you: cheat on an exam; submit the same work for two different courses without prior permission from your professors; receive help on a take-home courses without prior permission from your professors; receive help on a take-home that calls for independent work; or plagiarize. Plagiarism, whether intended or not, is academic fraud. You plagiarize when, without proper attribution, you do any of the following: copy verbatim from a book, article, or other media; download documents from the Internet; purchase documents; paraphrase or restate someone else’s facts, analysis, and/or conclusions…” (see Steinhardt School Bulletin 2008-2010 p. 177-8)
STUDENT RESOURCES • Henry and Lucy Moses Center for students with disabilities • Writing Center: 269 Mercer Street, Room 233. Schedule an appointment online at www.rich15.com/nyu/ or just walk-in. •
INTRODUCTION: MOTIVATING DESIGN RESEARCH Class 1 -- Introduction: What we talk about when we talk about “design” • Layton, Edwin. (1974). Technology as knowledge.Technology and culture, 15(1), 31 – 41. • Latour, Bruno (2008). A cautious Prometheus? A few steps toward a philosophy of design (with special attention to Peer Slotterdijk). Keynote lecture, for Networks of Design, meeting of the Design Histrical Society, Flalmouth, Cornwall, September 3rd, 2008.
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 4 • Dourish, Paul (2006). Implications for design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems, 541 – 550. Class 2 – Why Design? • Norman, Donald (1989). The psychopathology of everyday things, In The design of everyday things. • Neutra, Richard (1969). Survival through design. Oxford: Oxford University Press. • Nelson, Harold, & Stolterman, Erik. (2003). The guarantor of design (g.o.d.), In The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable world – foundations and fundamentals in design competence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc., 239 – 256. DESIGN AS NATIONALISM Class 3 – Design Strategies for Nationalism • Davis, John. (2007). The Great Exhibition and Modernization. In J. Buzard, J. Childers, and E. Gilooly (Eds.), Victorian prism: Refractions of the Crystal Palace. Charlottesville and London: University of Virginia Press. • Colomina, Beatriz. (2001). Enclosed by images: The Eameses’ multimedia architecture. Grey Room 2, 5 – 29. • Sparke, Penny. (1986). Designing identities, representing the nation. In An Introduction to design and culture: 1900 to the present. London: Routledge. • Durkheim, Emile. Elementary forms of religious life Class 4 – The Best Laid Plans – Disastrous Designs and Modernism • Scott, James (1998). Compulsory villagization in Tanzania: Aesthetics and miniaturization. Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed., New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 223 – 261. • Bowker, Geoffrey, & Star, Susan Leigh. (2000). The case of race classification and reclassification under Apartheid., In Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 195 – 226. • Rittel, Horst, & Webber, Melvin (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155 – 169. DESIGN AS MICRO-POLITICS Class 5 -- The Politics of Artifacts • Winner, Langdon. (1986). Building the better mousetrap, In The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in the age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. • Appadurai, Arjun. (1986). Commodities and the politics of value. In A. Appadurai (Ed.). The social life of things, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3 – 63.
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 5 • Cowan, Ruth Schwarz (1987). The consumption junction: A proposal for research strategies in the sociology of technology. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes, & T. Pinch (eds.), The socical construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 261 – 280. Class 6 – The Politics of Innovation • Brand, Stewart. (1988). The media lab: Inventing the future at MIT. New York, Penguin Books. • Becker, Howard (1982). Integrated professionals, mavericks, fold artists, and naïve artists, In Art worlds, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 226 – 271. • Turner, Fred. (2008). Romantic automatism: Art, technology, and collaborative labor in Cold War America. Journal of Visual Culture, 7, 5 – 26. • Gallison, Peter (1999). Trading zone: Coordinating action and belief. In M. Biagioli (Ed.) The science studies reader. New York and London: Routledge, 137 – 160. Class 7 – Participatory Design: How Users Matter • Kline, Ronald (2000). (Re)inventing the telephone. In Consumers in the country: Technology and social change in rural America. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 23 – 54. • Friedman, Batya, & Nissenbaum, Helen. (1996). Bias in computer systems. ACM transactions on Information Systems, 14(3), 330 – 347. • Wyatt, Sally (2003). Non-user also matter: The construction of users and nonusers of the Internet. In N. Oudshoorn & T. Pinch (Eds.) How users matter: The co-construction of users and technologies. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. • Gillespie, Tarleton (2007). Effective frustration. Wired shut: Copyright and the shape of digital culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 223 – 246. Class 8 – Make: Pre-Raphaelites, DIY-ers, and Craft to Design • Sennet, Richard (2008). Material consciousness. The Craftsman. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 119 – 148. • Crawford, Alan. (1997). Ideas and objects: The Arts and Crafts Movement in Britain. Design Issues, 13(1), Designing the Modern experence, 1885 – 1945, pp. 15 – 26. • Andrews, Edward & Faith (1953). Religion in Wood: A Book of Shaker Furniture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. • Turner, Fred. (2009). Burning Man at Google: A cultural infrastructure for new media production. New Media & Society, 11 , 73 – 94. COMPUTING AS A SITE FOR DESIGN
PROJECT PROPOSAL DUE
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 6 Class 9 – Pattern: Information as Language • Alexander, Christopher (1964). Goodness of fit. In Notes on the synthesis of form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 15 – 27. • Tufte, Edward (2001). Chartjunk: Vibrations, Grids, and Ducks. The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CN: Graphics Press, 107 – 122. • Kepes, György. (1944). Language of vision. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. Class 10 – Information Systems: Cybernetics and Human-Machine Interaction • Bush, Vannevar (1945, July). As we may think. The Atlantic Monthly. • Licklider, J.C.R. (1960). Man-computer symbiosis. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, 1, 4 – 11. • Wiener, Norbert. The human use of human beings. • Allan Kay, User Interace, a Personal iew, Multimedia from Wagner to Virtual Reality Class 11 – Feedback: From Information to Ecology • Bateson, Gregory (1972). From Versailles to cybernetics. In Steps to an ecology of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 477 – 485. • Hutchins, Edwin. (1995). Navigation as computation. In Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 49 – 116 • Medina, Eden (2006). Designing freedom, regulating a nation; Socialist cybernetics in Allende’s Chile. Journal of Latin American Studies, 38(3), pp.. 571 – 606. Class 12 – The Interaction Turn: From Artificial Intelligence to Intelligent “Design” • Douglas Engelbart, Augmenting Human Intellect: A Conceptual Framework, SRI Report AF (63-8) – 1024. • Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1987). Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design • Suchman, Lucy (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of humanmachine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Class 13 – Extraordinary Machines: Conversations with Things We Think With • Reeves, Byron, and Nass, Clifford. Introduction. The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Stanford, CA: CSLI, 3 – 18. • Turing, Alan. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 54(236). • Turkle, Sherry. (2007). What makes an object evocative? In Evocative objects: Things we think with. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 307 – 327. • N Katherine Hayles, “Narrating Bits: Encounters between Humans and Intelligent Machines” Comparative Critical Studies 2.2 (2005) 165 - 90 Class 14 – Off the Desk and Into the world: Ubiquitous computing
Robles 2010 ‐‐‐ Sample Syllabus, 7 • Weiser, M. (1991, September). The Computer for the 21st century, Scientific American Special Issue on Communications, Computers, and Networks. • Galloway, Anne. (2004). Intimations of everyday life: Ubiquitous computing and the city. Cultural Studies, 18(2/3), pp. 384-408. • Ishii, Hiroshi, & Ullmer, Brygg. (1997). Tangible bits: Towards sseamless interfaces between people, bits, and atoms. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. • Fallman, D. (2003) In Romance with the Materials of Mobile Interaction: A Phenomenological Approach to the Design of Mobile Information Technology, Doctoral Thesis, Umea University, Sweden: Larsson & Co:s Tryckeri. Class 15 – FINAL PROJECT PRESENTATIONS
