Responding to the Indeterminacy of Doctoral Research in Design

The Future of Design Education working group on doctoral education included doctoral supervisors from nine programs around the world and addressed the indeterminacy of standards for the PhD in Design. Internationally, “contributions to knowledge” under the PhD degree title range from evidence-based investigations documented in a dissertation to personal reflections on making artifacts. In some programs, quantitative and qualitative research methods are taught; in others, there is no instruction in methods. The working group suggested that reflection on one’s own creative production is the role of the professional master’s degree and recommended standards for two doctoral programs—the PhD and the Doctor of Design (DDes). The group defined the PhD as addressing unresolved problems with the goal of generalizable knowledge or theory for the field. It described the DDes as a professional practice degree in which research is done in a practice setting to frame a specific opportunity space, guide in-process design decisions, or evaluate outcomes. DDes findings do not claim generalizability and result in “cases.” The working group discussed methods, sampling, standards of evidence and claims, ethics, research writing, and program management. •Many professions have both advanced research and practice degrees with different purposes and well-understood standards.•A lack of international consensus on doctoral purposes and standards conflates reflection on one’s own making with new generalizable knowledge and theory.•Research under the DDes professional doctorate is situated in a specific practice setting and contributes to design decisions.•Research under the PhD in Design seeks generalizable knowledge and theory.•Scholars challenge the definition of artifacts as knowledge.•The field can support two doctoral degree types—DDes and PhD in Design—without hierarchical distinction but with different purposes and standards.