Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T09:39:12.323Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Can design be called research?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2008

David Yeomans
Affiliation:
School of ArchitectureManchester UniversityOxford RoadManchester M13 9PLUnited Kingdom

Abstract

As funding for research in British universities is now dependent upon an assessment of research productivity (made every four years), departments of architecture are finding that design, which used to be considered as the equivalent of research for architectural teachers, may not be regarded as such for the purposes of this assessment. The arguments both for and against considering design as a research activity are discussed, as is the need for a recognised way of grading the quality of work. Suggestions are made for the direction in which design as research in schools of architecture might take.

Type
Issues
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cole, R & Cooper, I. (1988). British Architects: accommodating science and technical information, Journal of Architecture and Planning Research, vol 5, no. 2, pp.110128.Google Scholar
Crinson, Mark & Lubbock, Jules (1994). Architecture: art or profession? Manchester University Press, Manchester.Google Scholar
Kernohan, D, Gray, J, & Daish, J. (1992). User Participation in Building Design and Management, Butterworth-Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
Layton, Elizabeth (1961). Building by Local Authorities, Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Stiny, George (1994). Lionel March – three sketches, Environment and Planning B, Planning and Design, vol.21, S6.Google Scholar