No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF MIXED REALITY PROTOTYPING TO SUPPORT STUDIO DESIGN EDUCATION
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 June 2023
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.
Mixed Reality (MR) technologies are widely available and applied in a variety of design and engineering applications. MR prototypes capture the respective benefits of physical and digital prototypes by merging these domains saving the time and resources required to create them. This advantage is compelling in the context of design education where tight time and resource constraints exist. However, it is known that new digital prototyping tools can cause problems for students applying appropriate prototyping tools during practice-based studio design projects. Our paper contributes a systematic appraisal of MR prototyping's proposed dimensions value against constraints and issues in design studio education. This highlights MR Visualisation and Knowledge Management dimensions as most readily realised in education. Recommendations are then reflected on via an illustrative case study into the implementation of MR prototyping via these dimensions. Reflections corroborate the value proposition, but also highlight a need for further research exploring activities to scaffold MR prototyping to further support reflective design thinking.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Creative Commons
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), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Cox, C., Hicks, B. and Gopsill, J. (2022) 'Improving Mixed-Reality Prototyping through a Classification and Characterisation of Fidelity'. Proceedings of the Design Society, 2 353–362. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2022.37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crismond, D.P. and Adams, R.S. (2012) 'The informed design teaching and learning matrix'. Journal of Engineering Education, 101 (4), pp. 738–797,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N. (1982) 'Designerly ways of knowing'. Design studies, 3 (4), pp. 221–227. httpshttps://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694x(82)90040-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deininger, M., Daly, S.R., Sienko, K.H. and Lee, J.C. (2017) 'Novice designers' use of prototypes in engineering design'. Design Studies, 51 25–65. httpshttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2017.04.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frank, M., Lavy, I. and Elata, D. (2003) 'Implementing the project-based learning approach in an academic engineering course'. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13 (3), pp. 273–288. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026192113732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, G. (1991) 'The dialectics of sketching'. Creativity research journal, 4 (2), pp. 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419109534381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Häggman, A., Tsai, G., Elsen, C., Honda, T. and Yang, M.C. (2015) 'Connections between the design tool, design attributes, and user preferences in early stage design'. Journal of Mechanical Design, 137 (7), pp. 071408. httpshttps://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, L., Snider, C., Gopsill, J. and Hicks, B. (2021) 'Mixed reality in design prototyping: A systematic review'. Design Studies, 77 101046. httpshttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson, B. (2002) 'CAD and creativity: does the computer really help?'. Leonardo, 35 (3), pp. 327–331. https://doi.org/10.1162/002409402760105361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ranscombe, C. and Bissett-Johnson, K. (2017) 'Digital Sketch Modelling: Integrating digital sketching as a transition between sketching and CAD in Industrial Design Education'. Design and Technology Education, 22 (1), pp., https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/view/2194Google Scholar
Ranscombe, C., Bissett-Johnson, K., Mathias, D., Eisenbart, B. and Hicks, B. (2020) 'Designing with LEGO: exploring low fidelity visualization as a trigger for student behavior change toward idea fluency'. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30 (2), pp. 367–388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09502-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, B. and Radcliffe, D. (2009) 'Impact of CAD tools on creative problem solving in engineering design'. Computer-Aided Design, 41 (3), pp. 136–146. httpshttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2008.06.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schön, D.A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. United Kingdom: Basic books,Google Scholar
Starkey, E.M., Menold, J. and Miller, S.R. (2019) 'When are designers willing to take risks? How concept creativity and prototype fidelity influence perceived risk'. Journal of Mechanical Design, 141 (3), pp. 1–9. httpshttps://doi.org/10.1115/1.4042339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viswanathan, V., Atilola, O., Esposito, N. and Linsey, J. (2014) 'A study on the role of physical models in the mitigation of design fixation'. Journal of Engineering Design, 25 (1-3), pp. 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544828.2014.885934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
You have
Access
Open access