KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3

Different goals, different criteria: Perspectives of jury members in industrial design competitions in Turkey

İrem DİLEK
PINAR KAYGAN
Sayfa
13–27
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Based on the findings obtained from the fieldwork, the study shows that the relationship between jury members are patterned by their different, in some situations even conflicting, perspectives on both the goals to be achieved with these competitions, and the priorities that shape their evaluation criteria.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In the last decade, popularity of industrial design competitions organized in Turkey has increased significantly.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The increase in their number, and the educa- tional scholarships offered to the winner design students and young designers as a prize, led industrial design competitions to become prominent among design promotion activities in Turkey.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Based on the findings obtained from the fieldwork, the study shows that the relationship between jury members are patterned by their different, in some situations even conflicting, perspectives on both the goals to be achieved with these competitions, and the priorities that shape their evaluation criteria.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

In the last decade, popularity of industrial design competitions organized in Turkey has increased significantly. The increase in their number, and the educa- tional scholarships offered to the winner design students and young designers as a prize, led industrial design competitions to become prominent among design promotion activities in Turkey. Industrial design competitions also carry impor- tance in terms of bringing professionals from different fields of expertise togeth- er in their evaluation juries. Considering the increased importance of industrial design competitions, this article explores the perspectives of jury members from various fields of expertise in jury evaluations of industrial design competitions in Turkey. The fieldwork consists of observations in the evaluation juries of five design competitions and interviews with 15 jury members from different fields of expertise. Based on the findings obtained from the fieldwork, the study shows that the relationship between jury members are patterned by their different, in some situations even conflicting, perspectives on both the goals to be achieved with these competitions, and the priorities that shape their evaluation criteria.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DİLEK, İ., KAYGAN, P. (2018). Different goals, different criteria: Perspectives of jury members in industrial design competitions in Turkey. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3, 13–27. https://ajindex.com/articles/144201

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (10)

  1. Busseri, M. A., & Palmer, J. M. (2000). Improving teamwork: The effect of self-assessment on construction design teams. Design Studies, 21(3), 223–238. Design Competitions [Tasarım Yarışmaları]. (2016). Endüstriyel Tasarım. Retrieved from: http://www.tasarimyarismalari.com/ category/endustriyeltasarim/ Düzakın Yolsever, E. (2000). Son Yirmi Yılda Türk Endüstrisinde Türk Tasarımcıları (Endüstri Tasarımı Eğitiminin Beraberinde Endüstrinin Tasarımcıları İstihdam Etme Biçimleri) [Turkish Designers in Turkish Industry During the Last Twenty Years] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Marmara University, İstanbul.
  2. Dykes, T. H., Rodgers, P.A., & Smyth, M. (2009). Towards a new disciplinary framework for contemporary creative design practice. CoDesign, 5(2), 99- 116. Eder, D., & Fingerson, L. (2001). In- terviewing children and adolescents. In J. A. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of Interview Research: Con- text and Method (pp. 181-202).
  3. Sage Publications. Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2001). Participant Observation and Fieldnotes. In P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.), Handbook of Ethnogh- raphy (pp.352-369).
  4. Sage Publications. Eppinger, S., & Kressy, M. (2002). Interdisciplinary product development education at MIT and RISD. Design Management Journal, 13(3), 58–61.
  5. Erhan, I. (2015). Yarışma ihra- cata ivme kazandırıyor. In İMMİB Endüstriyel Tasarım Yarışmaları 2005- 2015. (pp.114-115). İstanbul:
  6. Küçük Mucizeler Yayıncılık. Erlhoff, M., & Marshall, T. (2008). Design dictionary: Perspectives on design terminology. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhauser. ETMK [Industrial Designers Soci- ety of Turkey]. (2016). Hakkımızda. Retrieved from http://etmk.org.tr/tr/ hakkimizda/ Feast, L. (2012). Professional per- spectives on collaborative design work. CoDesign, 8(4), 215-230.
  7. Fixson, S. K. (2009). Teaching inno- vation through interdisciplinary cours- es and programmes in product de- sign and development: An analysis at 16 US schools. Creativity and Innova- tion Management, 18(3), 199–208.
  8. Flyvbjerg, B. (2004). Five Misunder- standings About Case-Study Research, Qualitative Research Practice, eds. C. Seale, G. Gobo, J.F. Gubrium, D. Silver- man, Sage, London, 420-34.
  9. Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming Quali- tative Researchers an Introduction (4 th ed., pp. 63-182).
  10. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. Hasdoğan, G. (2016, April). Endüstri ürünleri tasarımı mesleği açısından Türkiye’nin son 27 yılı. Arredamento Mimarlık, (300), 109-1