Evaluation of the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole

Transcription

1 Evaluation of the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole

2 Evaluation of the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole Contents: 1. Introduction and summary 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Summary of the Panel s assessments and recommendations 1.3 Introduktion og sammenfatning 2. Purpose and process of the evaluation 2.1 Background for and purpose of the evaluation 2.2 The Evaluation Panel 2.3 Method and process of the evaluation 2.4 The political and regulatory framework for the design research at the institution 2.5 The research strategy of the Ministry of Culture 2.6 Design research in an international perspective 2.7 Facts about Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) 3. The Panel s assessments and recommendations 3.1 The conditions and framework for the research 3.2 Planning and organisation of the research 3.3 Extent, quality and relevance of the research 3.4 The research environment and scientific collaboration with national and international research groups 3.5 Dissemination of knowledge from the research 3.6 Benefits for KA of DCDR and DCDR s services Annexes (are placed in a separate file) 1. Terms of reference for the evaluation 2. Specification of the evaluation topics sub-topics for assessment 3. Keywords for issues to address in the evaluation (Framework for the Panel s questioning at the visits/meetings, mailed to the evaluated institutions 22 February 2010) 4. Request for background material, mailed 13 January 2010 by the Ministry of Culture to the evaluated institution 5. Request and guidelines for self-evaluation, mailed 8 February 2010 by the Ministry of Culture to the evaluated institution 6. List of background documents for the evaluation (including list of the institution s scientific publications in the evaluation period and list of the publications read by the Panel) 7. Programme for the Panel s visit to the institution 8. Overall time and work plan for the evaluation 2

3 1. Introduction and summary 1.1 Introduction This report presents the outcome of an evaluation 2010 of the design research of The Royal Danish Academy of fine Arts School of Architecture (in this report Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole and the acronym KA). The evaluation of the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole is part of an evaluation of the design research under the Ministry of Culture, carried out in 2010 by a Nordic evaluation panel. The Panel has thus evaluated the design research of Designskolen Kolding, Danmarks Designskole and Arkitektskolen Aarhus, besides of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. For each of the four educational institutions the evaluation of the design research includes evaluation of the institution s share in Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR). The evaluation is included as an item in the Performance Contracts for the architect and design schools under the Ministry of Culture. The result of the evaluation is a separate evaluation report of the design research of each of the four schools, and an overall evaluation report on the design research under the Ministry. The assessments and recommendations, including the overall conclusions, of the Evaluation Panel as regards the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole are summarised in chapter 1 in the present report. Chapter 2 describes briefly the purpose and process of the evaluation and the evaluation panel. Furthermore the chapter briefly explains the political and regulatory framework for the design research at the institution, including the research strategy of the Ministry of Culture and the Panel s view on design research in an international perspective. Finally chapter 2 contains a factual description of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole and its design research. Chapter 3 presents the Panel s assessments and recommendations concerning the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. These are structured in compliance with the five evaluation topics indicated in the Terms of Reference for the evaluation. In accordance with the Terms of Reference, the Panel has assessed Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole s design research activity in the evaluation period and given recommendations for the future design research at the school, with a main focus on the latest years of the evaluation period. Eight annexes are attached to the report, including the Terms of Reference for the Evaluation, list of background documents and other annexes relevant for the evaluation. 1.2 Summary of the Panel s assessments and recommendations Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) has a rich and renowned past and is still today a major institution of architectural, professional education. As most similar institutions worldwide it has included research as part of its activities within the later years, in order to feed the professional education with research-based, new knowledge. This includes a strand of design research, which 3

4 KA deliberately aims at being architecture-related a sound and natural aim for the school being an architect school. However, the activities presented to the Panel as research are to a great deal what can be termed artistic development 1, not research they are neither meeting international criteria for the nature and quality of design research nor complying with the concept of research of the Ministry of Culture. We have noted that KA finds that its architecture-related design research is unique and cannot be compared with the design research of a traditional design school. This is not convincingly demonstrated, though. A large part of the activities presented to the Panel as research are sparsely authenticated in terms of scientific documentation and the used theories and methods are not sufficiently transparent or validated. With respect to the international scene of design research, the provided material, as well as the site visit, furthermore gives an impression of a somewhat isolated research environment. The achievements of KA, regarding design research, are thus not satisfactory in relation to the reported resources allocated for it. KA s Centre for IT and Architecture (CITA) is a notable exception to this, but it is unclear from the given background material whether CITA is defined as part of the design research conducted at KA or not. CITA s architecture-related design research work is in compliance with the current standards for design research. We wish to emphasise that, like research, artistic development work is highly relevant and important for the society and indeed relevant and important for the architectural education. Some of the Nordic countries have even taken the consequence of this fact by establishing foundations for supporting artistic development projects and by establishing PhD education related to artistic development projects. Also the Ministry of Culture has initiated a process aiming at defining and promoting artistic development in the institutions under the Ministry. The educations under the Ministry, including the architectural educations, are based on both artistic practice, artistic development and research, and it is factors such as the nature of the specific discipline and the particular educational needs and focus that decide how to weigh and integrate these three activity bases in each individual educational programme. It is not within the framework of this evaluation, though, to assess the quality, extent and relevance of KA s artistic development or artistic practice activities. The school has expressed an understandable focus on maintaining its long and rich tradition. This confronts KA with a challenging task to balance between conservatism and renewal. KA states in the self-evaluation that it belongs to the (art) academy tradition, where research, artistic development and education take place within a coherent continuum in ateliers and studios. It is an environment that is clearly in line with basic research strategies that put emphasis on the connections between artistic development and research. Also in terms of governance of the school the Panel has got the image of an institution with huge potential and strong individuals. However, we find that the school s resting in tradition is overshadowing development of the environment, and the present governance system reflects conservatism in relation to stateof-the-art management practices in knowledge-intensive organisations. The present focus on tradition seems to have held the school back from a rapid and successful transition into an up-todate research institution, as regards (architecture-related) design research, which fulfils international standards and the Ministry of Culture s definition of research. 1 Artistic development is the term used in this report for the Danish term kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed, in accordance with the official English translation of the Act on Artistic Higher Educational Institutions under the Ministry of Culture. Internationally, kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed is typically termed artistic research. 4

5 KA s general lack of compliance with the current standards in the field of design research is particularly regretful, because KA s design research strategies are sound, the physical environment is good, and the faculty holds unique competences and knowledge. In fact, these circumstances provide an excellent foundation for developing a design research activity which could become of significance in an international context. The Panel believes that KA can succeed with such a development. The school s faculty appears highly confident in terms of the excellence of their work, and we find this well justified the faculty holds unique knowledge and competences and appears to conduct excellent artistic development work in the field of design. The risk for misunderstandings and conflicts with other groups, which is entailed in a closed and isolated environment, could be overcome by more cooperation and openness that would create a mutual understanding. Furthermore, employment of academic staff from other environments could bring in new perspectives and enrich the school s environment. The Panel has observed that Danmarks Designskole (DKDS) and Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole will be co-located at KA s site during 2010 and that a merger between DKDS and KA is on the agenda of the Ministry of Culture. We commend the co-location, and we find it relevant and logical to complete the merger. The future of the design research of this new institutional combination has to be done in unison between these two parties. We are confident that in this way also the architecture-related design research can open up, take up challenges and grow into an international flow of debate, argumentation and mutual exchange of knowledge. Despite a low volume of scientific publication of design research, we have the impression that KA conducts sound and appropriate popular dissemination of its work and results to a broad audience, among others via exhibitions and books. The broad, popular dissemination of knowledge from design research is somewhat difficult to assess, due to the small volume of what can be termed design research. However, based on the present broad dissemination of artistic work and artistic development in the field of design, we are confident that the school will also conduct sound broad dissemination in the future, of knowledge from a possibly growing volume of design research. It is furthermore our clear impression that KA has benefited from the services of Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR), particularly since the re-organisation of the centre in The precise benefits are somewhat difficult to lay out due to the small volume of design research at KA, The Panel does not exclude that the complex organisational structure of KA, and the special place design has at the school being integrated with architecture, may have somewhat blurred the Panel s impression of the design research activity. As explained in the self-evaluation of KA, design research is integrated in research at all four institutes which perhaps makes it difficult to present it as one coherent body of research distinct from the other architectural research at the school. This of course raises interesting questions about the identity of design research; what is design research and what is not? Furthermore, our impression may have been influenced by the school s way of presenting its design research. KA s self-evaluation and other background material together with the site visit have not given a clear or convincing image of the research conducted and of its level in terms of quality and extent. The Panel has the following recommendations regarding the research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole: KA s design research has to display a clearer picture by increasing transparency and clarity of theories and methods through documentation and validation, including increased scientific publication in peer reviewed articles and conference papers. 5

6 KA s design research has to, to a much larger degree, breathe with and be informed by design research worldwide this in order to form a dialogue with architectural research beneficial for both. A number of external funds are available for design research. KA should continue to pursue and achieve external funding for design research with main focus on strengthening the focus areas and design research competences of the school. At the same time it is important to maintain a significant share of basic finances for ensuring stability of the design research activity and coherent development of the research competences. Serious attention should be paid to the challenges and added values of the anticipated merger between KA and Danmarks Designskole, in order to facilitate the success of the merger. KA should develop its management system to become better in compliance with state-ofthe-art management of knowledge-intensive organisations. With respect to research, this includes formally appointed leaders with formal authority for developing and implementing research strategies and significant involvement of the academic staff in formulation and implementation of research strategies and plans. It should be considered whether there is need for changes in the regulatory framework for supporting KA s development of its management, e.g. need for changed rules concerning formal authorities of research leader(s) and/or procedures regarding communication between leaders and faculty. KA should go carefully through its organisation and make specific decisions for recruitment of design research staff in order to avoid discontinuation of unique knowledge and competences in this field. 1.3 Introduktion og sammenfatning Introduktion Denne rapport er resultatet af den internationale evaluering 2010 af designforskningen ved Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) Evalueringen af Kunstakademiets Arkitektskoles designforskning er en del af den evaluering af designforskningen under Kulturministeriet, der er blevet gennemført i 2010 af et nordisk evalueringspanel. Panelet har således evalueret designforskningen ved Designskolen Kolding, Danmarks Designskole og Arkitektskolen Aarhus ud over ved Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. For hver af de fire institutioner omfatter evalueringen endvidere institutionens andel i Center for Designforskning (CDF). Evalueringen er et af målene i resultatkontrakterne for arkitekt- og designskolerne under Kulturministeriet. Resultatet af evalueringen er en evalueringsrapport for hver af de fire skoler samt en overordnet evalueringsrapport om designforskningen under Kulturministeriet. 6

7 Ud over den korte introduktion indeholder kapitel 1 en sammenfatning af evalueringspanelets vurderinger, anbefalinger og overordnede konklusioner vedrørende designforskningen ved Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. Kapitel 2 præsenterer kort evalueringspanelet samt evalueringens formål og gennemførelse. Kapitlet redegør endvidere kort for de politiske og lovgivningsmæssige rammer for designforskningen, herunder for Kulturministeriets forskningsstrategi og Panelets syn på designforskning i et internationalt perspektiv. Endelig indeholder kapitel 2 et afsnit med faktuel information om Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. Kapitel 3 omfatter Panelets vurderinger, konklusioner og anbefalinger struktureret i overensstemmelse med de fem evalueringsemner, som er anført i kommissoriet for evalueringen. I overensstemmelse med kommissoriet har Panelet evalueret Kunstakademiets Arkitektskoles designforskningsaktivitet i evalueringsperioden og givet anbefalinger for den fremtidige designforskning og dens organisering ved skolen, med hovedfokus på de seneste år af evalueringsperioden. Der er tilknyttet otte bilag til rapporten, inklusive kommissoriet for evalueringen, en liste med baggrundsdokumenter og andre bilag, som er relevante for evalueringen. Sammenfatning af Panelets vurderinger og anbefalinger Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) har en righoldig og navnkundig historie og er stadig i dag en betydningsfuld arkitektfaglig uddannelsesinstitution. Som de fleste lignende institutioner rundt om i verden har KA i de senere år inkluderet forskning som en del af sine aktiviteter med henblik på at tilføre arkitektuddannelsen forskningsbaseret, ny viden. Dette inkluderer en streng af designforskning med en fra KA s side bevidst tilsigtet arkitektfaglig tilgang et godt og naturligt sigte for en arkitektskole. En stor del af de aktiviteter, der er præsenteret for Panelet som forskning, er imidlertid hvad der kan betegnes som kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed, ikke forskning de opfylder hverken internationale kriterier for designforsknings beskaffenhed og kvalitet eller stemmer overens med Kulturministeriets forskningsbegreb. Vi har bemærket, at KA finder, at dens arkitekturrelaterede designforskning er unik og ikke kan sammenlignes med en traditionel designskoles designforskning. Dette er imidlertid ikke overbevisende demonstreret. En stor del af aktiviteterne præsenteret for Panelet som forskning er sparsomt autentificeret i form af videnskabelig dokumentation, og de anvendte teorier og metoder er ikke tilstrækkeligt transparente eller validerede. På baggrund af det leverede materiale og Panelets besøg på skolen er indtrykket et noget isoleret forskningsmiljø i forhold til den internationale designforskningsscene. For så vidt angår designforskning er KA s indsats således ikke tilfredsstillende i forhold til de ressourcer, der er rapporteret afsat til formålet. KA s Center for IT og Arkitektur (CITA) er en bemærkelsesværdig undtagelse herfra, men det er uklart fra baggrundsmaterialet hvorvidt CITA er defineret som en del af designforskningen ved KA. CITA s arkitekturrelaterede designforskningsarbejde er i overensstemmelse med de nuværende standarder for designforskning. Vi ønsker at understrege, at kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed, ligesom forskning, er overordentlig relevant og vigtig for samfundet og absolut relevant og vigtig for arkitektuddannelsen. Nogle af de nordiske lande har endda taget konsekvensen af dette ved at etablere fonde, som støtter projekter og ph.d.-uddannelse inden for kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed. Også Kulturministeriet har igangsat en proces rettet mod definition og fremme af kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed ved institutionerne under ministeriet. 7

8 Uddannelserne under Kulturministeriet, herunder arkitektuddannelsen, er baseret på både kunstnerisk praksis, kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed og forskning; og det er faktorer såsom den specifikke disciplins natur og dens særlige uddannelsesmæssige behov og fokus, som afgør, hvordan de tre aktivitetstyper skal afvejes og integreres i hvert enkelt uddannelsesprogram. Det er imidlertid ikke inden for rammerne af denne evaluering at vurdere kvaliteten, omfanget og relevansen af KA s aktiviteter inden for kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed eller kunstnerisk praksis. Skolen har udtrykt et forståeligt fokus på at bevare sin lange og righoldige tradition. Dette konfronterer KA med den udfordrende opgave at balancere mellem at bevare og forny. KA udtrykker i selvevalueringen, at den tilhører (kunst-)akademitraditionen, som blandt andet er karakteriseret ved, at forskning, kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed og undervisning foregår i et sammenhængende kontinuum i ateliers eller studios. Det er et miljø, som er klart i overensstemmelse med basisforskningsstrategier, der lægger vægt på forbindelserne mellem kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed og forskning. Også for så vidt angår ledelse, har Panelet et billede af en institution med stort potentiale og stærke individer. Vi finder imidlertid, at skolens hvilen i tradition overskygger udvikling af miljøet, og det nuværende ledelsessystem afspejler konservatisme i forhold til state-of-the-art praksis for management i videnstunge institutioner. Det nuværende fokus på tradition lader til at have tilbageholdt skolen fra en hurtig og succesfuld overgang til en up-to-date forskningsinstitution, hvad angår (arkitekturrelateret) designforskning, som opfylder internationale standarder for, og Kulturministeriets definition af, forskning. KA s generelle mangel på overensstemmelse med de nuværende standarder for designforskning er især beklagelig, fordi KA s designforskningsstrategier er sunde, de fysiske omgivelser er gode, og den akademiske stab har unikke kompetencer og viden. Faktisk udgør disse forhold et fremragende grundlag for at udvikle en designforskningsaktivitet som kan blive markant i en international sammenhæng. Panelet mener, at KA kan gennemføre en sådan udvikling. Skolens akademiske medarbejdere lader til at have stor tillid til excellencen af deres arbejde, og vi finder dette meget berettiget den akademiske stab lader til at udføre fortræffeligt kunstnerisk udviklingsarbejde inden for designområdet. I et lukket og isoleret miljø er der risiko for misforståelser og konflikter med andre grupper. Den risiko kunne fjernes ved mere samarbejde og åbenhed, som ville skabe en gensidig forståelse. Yderligere kunne ansættelse af akademiske medarbejdere fra andre miljøer berige skolens miljø og bringe nye perspektiver ind. Panelet har observeret, at Danmarks Designskole (DKDS) og Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole bliver samlokaliseret ved KA i løbet af 2010, og at en fusion mellem DKDS og KA er på Kulturministeriets dagsorden. Vi går ind for samlokaliseringen, og vi finder det relevant og logisk at gennemføre fusionen. Designforskningens fremtid i denne nye institutionelle kombination må nødvendigvis gøres i enighed mellem de to parter. Vi har tillid til, at på denne måde kan også den arkitektfaglige designforskning åbne op, tage udfordringer op og vokse ind i et internationalt flow af debat, argumentation og gensidig vidensudveksling. På trods af et lille omfang af videnskabelig publicering af designforskning, er det vores indtryk, at skolen har en god og passende populærformidling af sit arbejde og resultater til et bredt publikum, blandt andet via udstillinger og bøger. Den brede formidling af viden fra designforskning er noget vanskelig at vurdere på grund af det lille volumen af det, som kan betegnes designforskning. Men, baseret på den nuværende brede formidling af kunstnerisk arbejde og kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed, har vi tillid til, at skolen fremover også vil gennemføre solid bred formidling af viden fra et eventuelt voksende omfang af designforskning. 8

9 Det er endvidere vores klare indtryk, at KA har haft udbytte af Center for Designforsknings (CDF) services, især efter omorganiseringen af CDF i Det nøjagtige udbytte er noget vanskeligt at vurdere på grund af det lille omfang af designforskning ved KA. Panelet udelukker ikke, at KA s komplekse organisatoriske struktur, og designs særlige placering i den arkitektoniske kontekst, i en vis grad kan have sløret Panelets indtryk af designforskningsaktiviteten. Som forklaret i KA s selvevaluering, er designforskning integreret i forskning ved alle fire institutter, hvilket måske gør det vanskeligt at præsentere den som én sammenhængende forskningsaktivitet adskilt fra den øvrige arkitektfaglige forskning ved skolen. Dette rejser naturligvis interessante spørgsmål om identiteten af designforskning; hvad er designforskning, og hvad er ikke? Vores indtryk kan endvidere være påvirket af skolens måde at præsentere sin designforskning på. KA s selvevaluering og øvrige baggrundsmateriale har, sammen med vores besøg på institutionen, ikke givet et klart eller overbevisende billede af den udførte forskning og dens niveau i form af kvalitet og omfang. Panelet har følgende anbefalinger vedrørende designforskningen ved Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole: KA s designforskning bør udvise et tydeligere billede ved at øge gennemsigtighed og klarhed i teori og metoder gennem dokumentation og validering, herunder øget videnskabelig publicering i peer-reviewede artikler og konference-papers. KA s designforskning bør i meget højere grad leve med i og blive informeret af designforskningen internationalt dette med henblik på at forme en dialog med arkitekturforskning til fordel for begge. En række eksterne fonde er tilgængelige for designforskning. KA bør fortsætte med at opsøge og opnå ekstern finansiering til designforskning med hovedfokus på at styrke skolens fokusområder og designforskningskompetencer. Samtidig er det vigtigt at bevare en væsentlig andel af basisfinansiering for at sikre stabilitet i designforskningsaktiviteten og sammenhængende udvikling af forskningskompetencerne. Med henblik på at fremme en vellykket fusion, bør der rettes seriøs opmærksomhed mod udfordringerne og fordelene ved den forventede fusion mellem Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole og Danmarks Designskole. KA bør udvikle sit managementsystem, så det kommer i bedre overensstemmelse med state-of-the-art management i videnstunge institutioner. Hvad angår forskning omfatter dette formelt udpegede ledere med formelle beføjelser til at udvikle og implementere forskningsstrategier, samt væsentlig involvering af den akademiske stab i formulering og implementering af forskningsstrategier og -planer. Det bør overvejes, om der er behov for ændringer i lov- eller regelgrundlaget for at understøtte KA s managementudvikling, fx behov for ændrede regler vedr. forskningsleder(e)s formelle beføjelser og/eller procedurer vedrørende kommunikation mellem ledere og akademisk stab. KA bør omhyggeligt gennemgå sin organisation og træffe specifikke beslutninger om rekruttering af designforskningsstab med henblik på at undgå tab af unik viden og kompetencer inden for dette felt. 9

10 2. Purpose and process of the evaluation This chapter presents the purpose and process of the evaluation of the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole, including a brief introduction to the background for the evaluation and to the evaluation Panel. In addition the chapter includes a brief description of the political and regulatory framework for the institution and the design research. Furthermore the chapter introduces the Research strategy of the Ministry of Culture, including the Ministry s definition of the concept of (design) research, followed up by an international perspective on design research. A brief factual description of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole and its design research ends the chapter Background for and purpose of the evaluation The evaluation of the design research of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole is part of an evaluation of the design research under the Ministry of Culture in the period , which is carried out in 2010 and also includes evaluation of the design research of Designskolen Kolding, Danmarks Designskole og Arkitektskolen Aarhus. The evaluation of the design research of each of the four educational institutions includes evaluation of the institution s share in Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR). The evaluation is included as an item in the Performance Contracts for the architect and design schools under the Ministry of Culture. The Evaluation has been carried through in accordance with the Terms of Reference for evaluation of the design research under the Ministry of Culture of 26 January 2010 (annex 1), and in compliance with Vejledende retningslinier for forskningsevalueringer under Kulturministeriet (Guidelines for research evaluations under the Ministry of Culture) of 11 January In accordance with the Terms of Reference, the purpose of the evaluation has been to establish an unbiased and independent assessment of the design research of the four institutions during 2004 to The Terms of Reference stipulate that, with basis in the assessment of the period , the evaluation must make status and provide recommendations for the future research and its organisation at the four institutions. 2.2 The Evaluation Panel The evaluation was conducted by an external evaluation panel of Nordic design researchers, who hold relevant expertise in relation to the design research under the Ministry of Culture. The Panel was composed of the following five members: Vice Dean, Professor, PhD Pekka Korvenmaa (Chair), MA Programme in Industrial and Strategic Design, Aalto University School of Art and Design, Helsinki Professor, PhD Lars Hallnäs, Interaction Design, the Swedish School of Textiles, University of Borås Professor, PhD Sara Ilstedt Hjelm, Department of Computer Science, KTH, Stockholm 10

11 Professor, PhD Birger Sevaldson, the Oslo School of Architecture and Design Professor, PhD Minna Uotila, Department of Industrial Design, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi. M.Sc.Eng. Pia Jørnø, independent consultant and science writer, served as process consultant for the Panel. 2.3 Method and process of the evaluation In accordance with the Terms of Reference, the Evaluation Panel has made assessments of the different design research disciplines and of the design research as a whole, and the conditions and framework for the research, at Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. The Panel has not evaluated the design researchers of the school individually. In order to provide assessments the Panel has studied the design research and its framework and conditions in a historical perspective ( ). But in view of the rapid development of the field of design research, the evaluation has placed weight on the present situation and future trends for the institution and its design research. The Panel s recommendations refer thus mainly to the research and its organisation in the present and coming years. The evaluation of the institution s design research includes assessments and future-oriented recommendations as regards the following five topics indicated in the Terms of Reference: The conditions and framework for the research, including the economic framework, resources for research and possibilities for recruitment of researchers Planning and organisation of the research, including the research policy/strategy of the institution and its research management and research administration Extent, quality and relevance of the research The research environment and scientific collaboration with national and international research groups Dissemination of knowledge from the research Under each of these five main topics the Panel has formulated a number of sub-topics, which have formed a supplementary and more specified basis for assessing the design research and its conditions. The sub-topics are indicated in annex 2. Furthermore, for each of the five main topics the Panel has formulated a number of keywords for issues, about which the Panel has enquired information from the evaluated institution. The keywords are presented in a document attached as annex 3. Reference framework for the evaluation In the evaluation the Panel has used the Research strategy of the Ministry of Culture as a reference framework for its assessments of and recommendations. The Ministry s Research strategy is summarized in section

12 Furthermore, the Panel has included the political and regulatory conditions for the design research under the Ministry of Culture in its considerations during the evaluation. The political and regulatory framework for the design research is described in section 2.4. The Panel has thus evaluated the design research of the institution in relation to the specific traditions, methods and conditions for the design research under the Danish Ministry of Culture. In addition, the Panel has taken common international standards and practices for design research into consideration when formulating its assessments of and recommendations. The international standards and practices of design research are briefly addressed in section 2.6. The Panel has obtained the information from the institution by the following channels: - Background documents, including annual reports, key data, research strategies and reports, selected scientific publications, etc. A list of the background material from the evaluated institution is attached as annex 6. The Ministry s request for background material is attached as annex 4. - A self-evaluation report prepared by the institution. The Panel s guidelines for preparation of the self-evaluation report are attached as annex 5. - Dialogue, including meetings, with management, administration and researchers of the evaluated institution. - Dialogue, including meetings, with management and employees at Danish Centre for Design Research, in which the evaluated institution has part. The abovementioned meetings with Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole took place 13 April The order of the meetings, and the participants in them, are indicated in annex 7. The meetings in Danish Centre for Design Research took place 17 March. Annex 8 shows the overall time and work plan for the evaluation. The meetings were started with brief introductory presentations by the attendants from the institutions followed by informal discussions and questions from the Panel with focus on information further to, or clarifying, the received written information, and with relevance for the topics of the evaluation. During May-September the Panel completed the evaluation report, assisted by the consultant. The Panel s internal communication on the report took place in this period via , telephone and meetings. The completed report was ed to the institution 13 September for commenting. Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole forwarded its comments 21 September by . The Panel, however, has retained the final decision as to the inclusion or exclusion of the proposed alterations or amendments in this final version of the report, which was mailed to Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole 4 October. The planning and organisation of the evaluation were drafted in communication between the Panel, the Ministry of Culture and the evaluated institution, with assistance from the process consultant. For planning, organisation and provision of relevant information, the institution had appointed a reference group and a contact person. 2.4 The political and regulatory framework for the design research 12

13 Legislation The legislative framework for Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole, as well as for Danmarks Designskole, Designskolen Kolding and Arkitektskolen Aarhus is decreed in the Act on Artistic Higher Educational Institutions under the Ministry of Culture (Order no. 889 of 21 September 2000) 2. This act regulates all the artistic educational institutions under the Ministry of Culture, all of which are based on artistic development 3 and/or research. According to the Act, the objective of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole, as well as of Arkitektskolen Aarhus, is to provide education on artistic and scientific basis within architecture until the highest level, to conduct artistic development activity and conduct research on scientific basis within the architecture. The doctoral education of the two architect schools follow the rules decreed by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation on PhD education and the PhD degree 4. The Ministry of Culture is in a process of formulating regulation for doctoral education at the institutions under the Ministry. The two architect schools employment of scientific staff is regulated by the directive of the Ministry of Culture on employment of artistic/scientific staff and a memorandum on employment of Multiannual political agreements for the educational programmes and performance contracts of the Ministry of Culture From 2003 to 2010 included, the higher educations under the Ministry of Culture have been embraced by four-year political agreements. Strengthened focus on design research has been an important political focus area in the whole period. In 2003 initiative was taken, and funding allocated, to strengthen the design research and establish obligatory collaboration between the four schools (the two architect schools and the two design schools) on a joint competence centre, Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR). The aim was to establish basis for the two design schools offering research based design education programmes which can become accredited in 2010 as research based Bachelor and Master programmes. As part of the implementation of the multiannual agreements, the design and architect schools are governed through performance contracts between the institution and the Ministry of Culture. The performance contract includes a number of targets which are the focus areas for the contract period ( at present). The targets are areas which demand particular attention in the contract period in order to fulfil the strategy of the institution. The performance contracts of the two architect schools include, among others, targets on research, doctoral education and the collaboration facilitated by DCDR. 2 LBK nr 889 af 21/09/2000 med senere ændringer LOV nr 1268 af 16/12/ Artistic development is the term used in this report for the Danish term kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed, in accordance with the official English translation of the Act on Artistic Higher Educational Institutions under the Ministry of Culture. Internationally, kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed is typically termed artistic research. 4 Bekendtgørelse om ph.d.-uddannelsen ved universiteterne (ph.d.-bekendtgørelsen). BEK nr 114 af 8. marts Bekendtgørelse nr af 14. december 2006 om ansættelse af kunstnerisk/videnskabeligt personale ved visse uddannelsesinstitutioner under Kulturministeriet and notat om stillingsstrukturen from

14 Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR) The Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR) is an organisation under the Danish Ministry of Culture, established as a collaboration between Danmarks Designskole, Designskolen Kolding, Arkitektskolen Aarhus and Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole. The centre acts as an independent centre for the design research that takes place at the four institutions. DCDR is anchored at Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole in accordance with an agreement between KA and the Steering Committee of DCDR. The aim of Danish Centre for Design Research is to build and promote design research in Denmark, to disseminate knowledge and building Danish and international networks among research institutions, enterprises and the general public. The overall management of the centre is handled by the Steering Committee which comprises a Chair (appointed by the Danish Ministry of Culture), the rectors of the Danish schools of architecture and design, and two external, international members (from Oslo and Helsinki). DCDR disposes of a pool allocated in the Danish Appropriation Act for design research. The centre's Advisory Research Committee, which is constituted by three impartial design researchers, review the grant applications and makes recommendations about the allocation of grants for specific research projects to the centre's Steering Committee on basis of a set of guidelines. The centre receives grant applications a year. Until 2010 the centre has granted funding for a total of 57 research projects (one of which has never been realised). The total funding budget has been 12 million DKK in , 3 million DKK in 2009 and 6 million DKK in DCDR s annual reports account for those of the four schools activities which are taking place in the collaboration on DCDR, so that these reports can be appendices to the annual reports of the four schools. The annual reports of DCDR thus contribute to the architecture and design schools reporting on fulfilment of the targets of the performance contracts. The Research Committee of the Ministry of Culture The objective of the Research Committee of the Ministry of Culture is to provide advice and recommendations to the Ministry of Culture concerning the research at the research institutions under the Ministry, including advice on research programmes, research structure and important research political questions. The Research Committee prepares rules and guidelines for research evaluations and their follow-up. Finally the Research Committee administrates the Research Pool of the Ministry of Culture, funding from which the Ministry s institutions can apply for research projects. 2.5 The research strategy of the Ministry of Culture A working group which was established in 2008 by the Ministry of Culture has formulated the present research strategy of the Ministry. The research strategy is published in the document Forskningsstrategi for Kulturministeriets område of 1 March

15 The purpose with the research strategy is to strengthen the research under the Ministry of Culture. The strategy forwards a number of recommendations, which can be summarized as follows 6 : - It is important that each research institution of the Ministry of Culture develops a long-term research strategy. Each institution is therefore recommended to consider the following at long term through research strategies: o Which activities support the purpose and objectives of the institution; o o Which research activities can and should attain external support; To which extent there is need for development of new research areas, and how to define the interface with contiguous activities. - The institutions are recommended to orient themselves towards a common concept of research in their strategic planning of the research effort rather than towards specialist or/and institutionally specific concepts of research. - The research institutions are recommended to establish a joint research administrative advice service with the purpose of building common knowledge on application procedures, quality assurance, networks, reporting of research statistics etc. for solid support of the research of the individual research institution. - The research institutions are recommended to actively and systematically disseminate their research to universities and industry in order to brand themselves as attractive collaboration partners. - The research institutions are recommended to establish new networks or expand existing networks to binding collaborative relations across the institutions of the Ministry, including universities and industry, nationally and internationally, where relevant. - The organization of PhD training within the area of the Ministry of Culture must be adapted in light of the restructuring at the universities in respectively PhD programmes and graduate schools. In this connection it is important to have focus on critical mass in the PhD training. The concept of research Particularly as regards the definition of research or concept of research the Ministry s Research strategy finds a need for viewing research and development of the Ministry s institutions in relation to research and development in the general research community 7. As mentioned in the summarized recommendations, the Research strategy finds it essential that: - the institutions of the Ministry of Culture orient themselves towards a common concept of research in their strategic planning of the research effort rather than towards disciplinespecific or/and institutionally specific concepts of research in order to being able to compete about the central research funds on equal terms with other research communities. The Ministry s Research strategy has thus focused on establishing generally accepted criteria for research. The criteria can be derived from the definition of research of both OECD and the Research Committee of the Ministry of Culture, and from the criteria for applications to the funds of the Danish Council for Independent Research. The Research strategy formulates the criteria in relation to the dimensions originality, validity and transparency as follows: 6 Cf. page 9 of Forskningsstrategi for Kulturministeriets område 7 Cf. page of Forskningsstrategi for Kulturministeriets område 15

16 Originality: that the research develops new knowledge, insight and understanding This may happen through: o development of new methods, models, concepts and theories o use of existing research results and methods in new contexts o creation of new, or significant improvements of existing, materials, products, processes, techniques and methods, systems or services. Research projects which can be characterized as experiments (afprøvning) and development may use artistic development competences and reflective data collection competences. Transparency: use of relevant methods and construction of theories The research must be objectified through application of the methods and theoryconstructions which are relevant for the research area in question. Possible methodological deviations or method developments in a research activity must be well documented, well argued and relevant in relation to the standards of the research area in question. Validity: Account for the relation of the research to the relevant research areas The relation of the research to the relevant research areas must be accountable, and the research must be formulated in a way which is accessible for peer reviewing. The Research strategy adds to the above criteria that reflection in written form is a precondition for dissemination of the research results and for assessment of the quality of the research. Furthermore the strategy emphasizes that the focus on commonly acknowledged criteria for research should not remove attention from the other central tasks of the institutions or hinder development of new areas of research. As implied in the summarized recommendations of the Ministry s Research strategy, the Strategy finds it essential that the institutions strengthen their research by clarifying their research and development activities, prioritizing the different activities and by working strategically with the organization and financing of the research. The Ministry s Research strategy therefore recommends that the institutions prepare research strategies and plans for their research and development activities in overall and long-term perspective: strategies for activities which support the purpose of the institutions, and current goals, including strategies for the wanted balance between: - activities which can be acknowledged directly as research and obtain external support (from the Danish research councils, EU s research programmes etc.) - activities which can be developed into new fields of research, through a particular effort on development of methods, theories and networks, and which can thus at a longer term become recognized as research and achieve support from the research councils. - activities which are central for the institution and may be integrated in research processes, but which cannot be recognized, isolated seen, as research and therefore not achieve external research funding. The research strategies and plans of the institutions must furthermore address the extent to which the concrete research projects facilitate establishment of formal collaborations with other research institutions, in order to obtaining scientific (faglig) strength and effectiveness. This may improve the competitiveness of the institutions for obtaining increased research resources nationally as well as internationally. 16

17 In continuation of its recommendations on research, the Strategy invites the institutions to initiate similar strategic work with focus on artistic development. 2.6 Design research in an international perspective Design research is a relatively young research discipline, and the international concepts and methods for this field of research are still in a state of development. Among others, the international discussion concerns the concepts research into design, research for design and research by design (also termed research through design), including discussion about the borderline between research and artistic development. The current international trend is that design research is moving towards greater complexity in terms of both issues and approaches. In addition the concept of research by design is becoming ever more central, because this research field produces unique knowledge not found in other domains. In other words, the design research discipline moves towards approaches where design practice and artistic development is subject for reflection and knowledge production. The concept of research by design comprises several approaches, spanning from reflection and knowledge production based on outside observations of others design practice, looking at practice retrospectively or contemporarily as in case studies, to participatory research and insider perspective where the designer-researchers use their own practice as a means for investigation and a subject for reflection and knowledge production. The concepts of Originality and Validity used in the research strategy of the Ministry of Culture works well in relation to the international perception of design research, but the focus on research methodology in the definition of Transparency is perhaps more problematic. While this is of main importance in many areas of empirical and experimental research, it is a rather different matter in, for example, practice based design research, being more explorative in nature. In our assessments in chapter 3 of the design research work of the school we have therefore interpreted the concept Transparency in more general terms of clarity and precision in results. 2.7 Facts about Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole Brief introduction Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) is a research- and educational institution under the Danish Ministry of Culture. The school offers academic, profession-oriented bachelor-, master and PhD educations within the field of architecture. The architecture students and PhD scholars have a possibility for specialising within the field of design. The school does not have a separate design degree, though. The research and artistic development of the school is mainly conducted in the field of architecture. A smaller strand of the research and artistic development is conducted in the field of architecturerelated design. Purpose/objectives of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole 17

18 Pursuant to the legislation concerning artistic higher education institutions under the Ministry of Culture, cf. Act no. 889 of 21 September 2000, the objective of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole is to provide education within architecture until highest level, to conduct artistic development activity and conduct research within the architectural science. According to its self-evaluation, KA has prioritised the following in the evaluation period in relation to its field of design: - Development of aesthetical theory for the design area, including in particular theory for the architectural approach to design. - Consolidation of the school s tradition for research and research based education in graphic design and furniture design, including development of reference material within these specific fields. - Recruitment of researchers with architectural/design specialist Master degree and including theoretical and methodical qualification of the Master degree from KA/Department Preparation of reference basis for use for the design specialist education in materials. - Establishment of an architectural/design specialist method for user-centered design, innovation and management of creative processes. According to the self-evaluation, summarised, the vision for KA s design research is to develop the competences on basis of the strengths that can be found today, namely the strong anchoring in the architectural profession, the historical continuity, the research-based project teaching and the fine management competences of the masters. KA s vision is hereby to contribute to Danish and international design research with a specific aspect. An aspect which partly concerns the architecture-related field of design, partly concerns development work and theory that support the artistic approach. (Translated by the Panel from KA s self-evaluation report, page 6). Organisation of KA KA is organised in nine study departments in which the education is based, while the research and artistic development are organised within four institutes which include various centres. Figure 1 shows the four institutes, the centres and the nine departments. According to page 5 in the overview document Bilag til selvevalueringsrapport, the research management team of KA is constituted by the four heads of institutes, the Head of Doctoral Education, Rector and the Head of Administration. The research administration supports the school s core tasks within the field of research in close collaboration with the school s management and researchers. The research administration is headed by the Head of Research Administration who is a member of the administrative staff of KA. 18

19 Figure 1. Organisational structure Organisation of the design research The design research is primarily based in the institute 4, Design and Communication. The institute addresses three areas of which one concerns design. Education in the field of design is based in Department 11, Architecture, design and industrial shape. The Department 11 and Institute 4 overlap mutually in terms of personnel and activities. One professor and 5 associate professors conduct design research attached to Institute 4, and teach in department 11. In total Institute 4 has about 40 researchers and 6 PhD students. In addition a number of part-time teachers are attached to the Department 11, which has students per year. Table 1A shows the core research staff at KA. In 2009 the core design research staff includes 2 PhD scholars besides the above-mentioned one professor and 5 associate professors. Table 1B shows the core plus periphery design research staff. Thus in 2009, besides the core design research staff, also 2 professors, 6 associate professors, 2 assistant professors and 2 PhD scholars work (to some extent) with design research. The ratio research-teaching is 40%-60% for associated and full professors and 50%-50% for assistant professors. 19

20 Table 1A. Design research staff at Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole core Professors Associate Professors (lektorer) Senior researchers* Assistant Professors (adjunkter) Postdocs* PhD Scholars Research assistants Administrative and technical personnel Other research staff? Total * Senior researchers and Postdocs are equivalent to respectively Associate Professors and Assistant Professors at KA Table 1B. Design research staff at Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole core + periphery Professors Associate Professors (lektorer) Senior researchers Assistant Professors (adjunkter) Postdocs PhD Scholars Research assistants Administrative and technical personnel Other research staff?h Total * Senior researchers and Postdocs are equivalent to respectively Associate Professors and Assistant Professors at KA In 2009, the total number of staff at KA was 235, while the total number of academic staff was 185. The design research activity The following main focus areas and methodical tracks on design research are indicated in KA s self-evaluation: - Theory and history of the design profession - Space, furniture and object - Graphics, identity and wayfinding - Material, process and shape - Dialogue-based design and innovation According to KA s Forskningsplan (Research Plan ), the plans for Institute 4 are summarised as follows: IT og arkitektur Frem til 2010 har Center for IT og Arkitektur CITA som mål at styrke netværk og samarbejder med eksterne partnere og udvikle og gennemføre de etablerede forskningsprojekter. I workshops og kurser med deltagelse af instituttets forskere og inviterede gæsteforskere præsenteres studerende for ny digital teknologi og nye materialer. Målet er at skabe et eksperimenterende og afsøgende miljø, som på samme tid overfører teknisk ekspertise og undersøger relaterede forskningsspørgsmål. Som nyt satsningsområde 20

21 igangsætter KA forsknings- og udviklingsarbejde inden for DDB/BIM (Det Digitale Byggeri/Byggeriets informationsmodel). Design I planperioden vil genstandsfeltet Rum, møbel og genstand have høj prioritet. Instituttets forskere har som mål at etablere et møbelkonsortium med deltagelse af KA, en række videninstitutioner og erhvervspartnere. Et andet mål er at styrke genstandsfeltet Skrift, identitet og wayfinding i et samarbejde mellem flere uddannelses- og forskningsinstitutioner. Projektet har arbejdstitlen: Æstetik og Kommunikation. Table 2 shows the total publication activity, including the total number of research publications, of KA for the period Table 2. Publication activity of KA, total, (source: re-ad.dk) Forskningspublikationer A Artikler i peer-reviewed videnskabelige tidsskrifter og peer-reviewed konferenceartikler B Artikler i videnskabelige tidsskrifter, ikke peer-reviewed C Videnskabelig bog, monografi D Bidrag til videnskabelig bog, monografi Review, videnskabelig anmeldelse, editorial, kommentar/debat Konferencebidrag A Konferencebidrag: artikel, paper - ikke peer-reviewed B Konferencebidrag: poster, abstract Videnskabelig rapport, bidrag til videnskabelig rapport Working paper/arbejdspapir/preprint Øvrige forskningsbidrag A Patenter B Opfindelser C Andet, lyd og billedmedie, software, musik, mv Formidlingspublikationer A Artikel i tidsskrift/avis B Kronik i tidsskrift/avis C Anmeldelse i tidsskrift/avis D Forskningsformidlende bog/antologi/rapport E Bidrag til forskningsformidlende bog/antologi/rapport F Leksikonartikel, kommentar Øvrige formidlingsbidrag A Mundtlig forskningsformidling B Deltagelse i faglige udvalg, råd og nævn C Deltagelse i formidling via TV, radio o.lign D Andre formidlingsbidrag; software, udstillinger, databaser, musik mv Undervisningspublikationer Lærebog Kompendium/Forelæsningsnoter Bidrag til lærebog/antologi Lyd- og billedmedie Andet undervisningsbidrag The educational activity 21

22 The school educates architects in the fields of architectural design and restoration, urban and landscape planning, and (architecture-related) design. The education of the school follows the Bologna Declaration. At Department 11 the Bachelor programme holds design specialist elements and is fully compatible with the other Bachelor programmes of the school. The Master programme of the department is differentiated in three different design specialist areas, namely industrial, graphic, and furniture design. As shown in table 3, KA s total number of students, as well as the number of students at Department 11 has decreased in the evaluation period. In spring 2009 KA had 882 students in total, of which 87 attended the design specialisation at department 11. The number of Bachelor students at Department 11 has varied between 63 and 44 in the evaluation period, while the number of Master students has varied between 50 and 27. Table 3. Number of students at KA in total and at Department 11 spring 2004 spring 2005 spring 2006 spring 2007 spring 2008 spring 2009 No. of students total at KA No. of students at Dep. 11 Source: Enclosure 6 to KA s self-evaluation Costs and financing The costs of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole are indicated for each year of the evaluation period and totally for the period in table 4 specified in research & artistic development; education; management, administration and buildings; and: other costs. KA s total costs for the period have thus been 932 million DKK, of which the budget for research & artistic development have been approximately 179 million DKK. In the evaluation period the total research & artistic development costs have thus constituted 19,2 % in average of the total costs. The costs for design research & artistic development are estimated by KA to constitute 10 % of the total costs for research & artistic development. The estimation is based on the number of personyears engaged in design research & artistic development compared with the total number of academic person-years. Table 4. Distribution of cost, total for KA, million DKK (source: Annual reports of KA) Education 47,7 47,3 47,3 47,3 48,7 52,8 291,1 Design research & artistic development 2,3 3,1 3,2 3,2 3,0 2,8 17,6 Other research & artistic development 21,1 28,7 29,4 29,4 27,2 25,2 161 Management, Administration and buildings 70,5 68,7 65,1 64,5 69,7 74,3 412,8 Other costs 7,6 8,4 7,8 7,8 8,0 9,9 49,5 Total costs 149,2 156,2 152,8 152,2 156,6 165,0 932 Total research&art.dev. as share of total costs (%) 15,7 20,4 21,3 21,4 19,3 17,0 19,2 Design research & art.dev. as share of total costs (%) 1,5 2,0 2,1 2,1 1,9 1,7 1,9 Total research&art.dev. as share of education and total research&art.dev. costs (%) 32,9 40,2 40,8 40,8 38,3 34,7 38,0 22

23 Table 5 shows the total basic funding as well as the total external financing for KA. For the evaluation period as a whole, 9,6 % of the total financing has been from external sources. Table 5. Funding/financing for KA, million DKK Total basic funding 143,9 149,2 149,8 152,2 156, ,7 Total external financing 19,9 14,7 14,5 13,5 14,1 20,4 97,1 Total financing 163,8 163,9 164,3 165,7 170,7 185,4 1013,8 Ext. financing as share of total financing (%) 12,1 9,0 8,8 8,1 8,3 11,0 9,6 Table 6 shows the external financing for the research and artistic development, distributed on three categories, one of which is design research and artistic development. In the evaluation period, 45,8 % of the total costs for research & artistic development has been financed by external sources. Table 6. External financing of research & artistic development (million DKK) External financing for design research & 1,6 1,6 1,6 1,4 2 2,3 10,5 artistic development External financing for other research & 11,6 10,8 12,0 10,6 9,7 16,6 71,3 artistic development Other external income 6,7 2,3 0,9 1,5 2,4 1,5 15,3 Total external financing 19,9 14,7 14,5 13,5 14,1 20,4 97,1 Ext. financing of res.&art.dev. as share of total costs for R&D (%) = table6(row2+3) : table4(row3+4) 56,4 39,0 41,7 36,8 38,7 67,5 45,8 Table 7 shows the external financing for research & artistic development distributed on funding from the DCDR foundation and other sources. The numbers in table 7 are the actual granted amounts distributed by year of granting, while the numbers in tables 5 and 6 are the actual spending. In addition KA has informed that the numbers in table 7 include DCDR financing for persons who are administratively employed by KA but actually employed in other institutions. The numbers in table 7 are thus not directly comparable with the numbers in tables 5 and 6. Table 7. External grants for research & artistic development (million DKK) From the 0,3 0,3 0,3 0,2 0,8 0,4 DCDR foundation From other sources 13 12,1 13,3 11,8 10,9 18,5 Total 13,3 12,4 13, ,7 18,9 23

24 3. The Panel s assessments and recommendations Overall Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) has a rich and renowned past and is still today a major institution of architectural, professional education. As most similar institutions worldwide it has included research as part of its activities within the later years, in order to feed the professional education with research-based, new knowledge. This includes a strand of design research, which KA deliberately aims at being architecture-related a sound and natural aim for the school being an architect school. However, the activities presented to the Panel as research are to a great deal what can be termed artistic development, not research they are neither meeting international criteria for the nature and quality of design research nor complying with the concept of research of the Ministry of Culture. A large part of the activities presented to the Panel as research are sparsely authenticated in terms of scientific documentation and the used theories and methods are not sufficiently transparent or validated. With respect to the international scene of design research, the provided material, as well as the site visit, furthermore gives an impression of a somewhat isolated research environment. The achievements of KA, regarding design research, are thus not satisfactory in relation to the reported resources allocated for it. KA s Centre for IT and Architecture (CITA) is a notable exception to this, but it is unclear from the given background material whether CITA is defined as part of the design research conducted at KA or not. We wish to emphasise that, like research, artistic development work is highly relevant and important for the society and indeed relevant and important for the architectural education. Some of the Nordic countries have even taken the consequence of this fact by establishing foundations for supporting artistic development projects and by establishing PhD education related to artistic development projects. Also the Ministry of Culture has initiated a process aiming at defining and promoting artistic development in the institutions under the Ministry. The educations under the Ministry, including the architectural educations, are based on both artistic practice, artistic development and research, and it is factors such as the nature of the specific discipline and the particular educational needs and focus that decide how to weigh and integrate these three activity bases in each individual educational programme. It is not within the framework of this evaluation, though, to assess the quality, extent and relevance of KA s artistic development or artistic practice activities. We have noted that KA finds that its architecture-related design research is unique and cannot be compared with the design research of a traditional design school. This is not convincingly demonstrated, though, and we therefore maintain that a major part of what KA presented as architecture-related design research does neither fulfil the Ministry s definition of research nor meet the current international criteria for the nature and quality of design research. (Again, we wish to mention CITA as an exception. CITA s architecture-related design research work is in compliance with the current standards for design research.) KA s general lack of compliance with the current standards in the field of design research is particularly regretful, because KA s design research strategies are sound, the physical environment is good, and the faculty holds unique competences and knowledge. In fact, these 24

25 circumstances provide an excellent foundation for developing a design research activity which could become of significance in an international context. The school has expressed an understandable focus on maintaining its long and rich tradition. This confronts KA with a challenging task to balance between conservatism and renewal. We find that the school s resting in tradition is overshadowing development of the environment. It seems to have held the school back from a rapid and successful transition into an up-to-date research institution, as regards (architecture-related) design research, which fulfils international standards and the Ministry of Culture s definition of research. In terms of governance of the school the Panel has got the image of an institution with huge potential and strong individuals. However the present governance system reflects conservatism in relation to state-of-the-art management practices in knowledge-intensive organisations. With respect to research management at KA we find a sketchy and outdated division of responsibilities and weak visions for future development and improvement of governance. Leaders formal powers are unclear, as well as it is uncertain how the more general aspects of governance meet the more content-based activities. We are concerned that with the present governance conditions an international level of the design research cannot be reached. Although KA s basic strategy for, and overall foundations of, research gives a very good impression, the value of the design research work done at the school has not been convincingly demonstrated to the Panel. The Panel thus concludes that in spite of the excellent foundations of KA for conducting design research of high quality, the school has not done so to sufficient extent in relation to the resources which are reportedly working within the field of design. The Panel does not exclude that the complex organisational structure of KA, and the special place design has at the school being integrated with architecture, may have somewhat blurred the Panel s impression of the design research activity. As explained in the self-evaluation of KA, design research is integrated in research at all four institutes which perhaps makes it difficult to present it as one coherent body of research distinct from the other architectural research at the school. This of course raises interesting questions about the identity of design research; what is design research and what is not? Finally, our impression may have been influenced by the school s way of presenting its design research. KA s self-evaluation and other background material together with the site visit have not given a clear or convincing image of the research conducted and of its level in terms of quality and extent. 3.1 The conditions and framework for the research Changes in the regulatory framework for supporting transition to state-of-the-art management of KA? The regulatory framework includes some rules regarding the governance structure of Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (Elected School Council (skoleråd), elected Rector etc.). As addressed in the beginning of this chapter and further explained in section 3.2, we find KA s management of the design research weak and conservative in relation to state-of-the-art management practices in knowledge-intensive organisations. Supplementary to our recommendation (in section 3.2) for KA developing its management into compliance with such state-of-the-art management practices, we recommend it to be considered whether there is need for changes in the regulatory framework for supporting 25

26 KA s development of its management, e.g. need for changed rules concerning formal authorities of research leader(s) and/or procedures regarding communication between leaders and faculty. Financing stable basic funding The Panel finds it positive that the basic funding budget from the Ministry of Culture has been stable (by and large increasing with the overall development in prices) in the evaluation period, and that KA has had free possibility for distributing the basic budget on research & artistic development, education, administration and other costs. In the evaluation period, KA has used 178,6 million DKK to research and artistic development in total. This amount constitutes 19,2 % in average of KA s total costs in the period (see table 4 in section 2.7). In comparison, the basic research funding to the Danish universities constitutes between 29 and 47 % of the total turnover in The accounts of the universities show that the research costs constitute between 22 and 52 % of total costs in KA s total costs for research and artistic development thus appear to be at a fair level, particularly in view of that one further activity, artistic practice, contributes to the basis for KA s educations, and therefore needs budget allocations. KA estimates that 10 % of the costs for research and artistic development are used for design research and artistic development; while, naturally, the major part (90 %) is spent on architectural research and artistic development. KA s estimated annual costs for design research and artistic development have varied between 2,3 and 3,2 million DKK in the evaluation period. In terms of human resources, the core design research staff comprised 1 professor, 5 associated professors, 1 assistant professor and 2 PhD students in In view of that design research and artistic development constitutes only a minor part of the activities of the school, we find that the stable basic funding to Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole provides adequate basis for the school s long term planning and development of its design research activity. Basic funding is necessary for ensuring stability of focus areas and continuity in research competences Additional to Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole s basic funding income the school has achieved some external funding for research and artistic development. As further explained in section 3.2, the Panel has not received clear information about the actual external financing of design research and artistic development. However, we have observed that one of the external funding sources has been the Ministry of Culture s foundation administered by DCDR. Overall, in terms of design research under the Ministry, it appears to have been relatively easy to achieve funding from this foundation, including funding for activities for development of the research environment. In view of the small volume of the design research and artistic development at KA, we find the Ministry s DCDRfoundation important for KA s future development of its design research. Furthermore, a number of other funds are available for design research. In general external research funds are important, e.g. for facilitating new focus areas of research, but we also wish to emphasise the importance of a continuous basic funding for the research. Basic funding which is without pre-demands or restrictions is critical for ensuring stability in terms of research focus areas and for continuous development of the research competences. Co-location of DKDS and KA may create good synergies The Panel has observed that Danmarks Designskole (DKDS) and Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole will be co-located at KA s site during The Panel commends this co-location. It can advance 8 The University Evaluation 2009, Evaluation report, annex 7, table 6, p100, table B. Omkostninger,

27 collaboration between the design researchers of the schools, facilitate synergies between the two research groups and create benefits by shared access to workshops and laboratories. Merger between DKDS and KA has pros and cons and serious attention should therefore be paid to risks and added values when initiating the merger Furthermore, the Panel has observed that a merger between Danmarks Designskole and Kunstakademiets Arkitektskole (KA) is on the agenda of the Ministry of Culture. Overall we find it relevant and logical to complete the merger. The design research environments at each of the two schools are relatively small, and it seems a clear advantage that the merged design research environment would be larger and stronger: a stronger PhD school in design, broader discussions at research seminars, a larger basis for applications for external funding and for more ambitious experimental research projects etc. We have learned from discussions at the site visit that there is a certain scepticism among staff at KA concerning the merger. In discussions at the site visit it was clear that KA considers design research to be different at an architect school than at a design school in the sense that KA s design research has its roots, and comes from the perspective of, architecture; while DKDS s research is rooted in the arts and craft tradition. However, this is the usual type of difference we find in comparing for instance physics (or mathematics) at a technical university with physics (or mathematics) at a university. Such a difference in environment can for sure lead to differences in perspectives and specialities, in both research and teaching, but it can certainly be questioned if it is a matter of different subjects in any deeper sense. The view on design research at KA appears to have a very solid foundation in a practice-based tradition, while DKDS has accomplished a very solid foundation in research methodology with a still increasing linking of the research with design practice. KA may thus adopt the very valuable knowledge and focus of DKDS on theoretical and methodological foundations, while DKDS ongoing development towards further practice-base in the research may benefit from KA s practice-based tradition. In this way the merger holds a clear potential for that both schools could increase their international research profile in terms of research though design of very high quality, solidly founded in theories and methods which are in line with the international trends in the field of design research as well as with the concept of research defined by the Ministry of Culture. Seen from a historical perspective the merger would also make sense as KA earlier seems to have had the responsibility for higher education in design (furniture design, industrial design and graphical design). So, merging the schools seems reasonable from the perspective of strengthening both research and education in design. The merger holds some challenges one of which has to do with the differences in culture and status between the two schools. We have a concern that things can go very wrong here, and it is therefore important to carefully mapping the potential differences and risks and how to avoid them when initiating the merger. Among others the organisational structure needs to be carefully considered and planned. The merging may very well imply an entirely new organisation of the research. Furthermore, for facilitating the success of the merger, KA should prepare for a common culture and management by improving its research management (KA s management is further addressed in section 3.2). Good management can promote an accommodating common culture with latitude for several subcultures. In fact it is crucial to ensure a strong state-of the-art management, and a clear organisational and communication structure, for achieving an efficient and effective merged organisation for design research and education. To this comes the challenge of the considerable effort of faculty and administration which is necessary for completing any merger, while measureable positive effects of mergers typically emerge at long term only. Furthermore, it should be taken into consideration that there is a risk for a change of balance between research volumes in Copenhagen and the two design research and education institutions in Århus and Kolding. 27

28 When the merger is initiated, serious attention should thus be paid to the challenges and added values in order to facilitate the success of the merger. 3.2 Planning and organisation of the research The research strategy constitutes a good basis for a design research activity at KA KA s self-evaluation, research plans and other written material, as well as site visit discussions, gives clear impression of a research strategy firmly rooted in an art academy tradition with a long, and rich, history of experimental design work related to architecture. KA has a deliberate strategy for the school s design field to be deeply integrated in the architecture field, and there are no clear limits/borders between the design discipline and the architect discipline. The school thus explains that it has been a challenge in connection with the evaluation to separate the design research from the research activity as a whole of the school. All the research of KA takes basis in architecture and is mainly conducted by architects. We find it natural and sound that KA aims at fields of design research which are closely connected to architecture; and the strategy provides good foundations for a design research activity in close interaction with design aesthetics and design practice. Furthermore KA s strategy holds relevant managerial elements, for example an extensive and well specified plan for quality assurance of the research. However, as explained further in section 3.3, in terms of research the strategy is not well implemented or fulfilled in the organisation as mentioned most of the activities which were presented to the Panel cannot be characterised as research complying with the current international standards for design research. It should be added, though, that KA s Centre for IT and Architecture (CITA) is an exception from this. CITA has implemented well its research strategy and plans. (Our assessment of CITA is further explained in section 3.3). Research strategy difficult to assess the achieved external funding for design research and artistic development KA estimates the external funding for its design research and artistic development to be 10 % of the external funding for KA s total research and artistic development. This corresponds reportedly to a total of 10,5 million DKK external financing for design research and artistic development in the evaluation period (see table 6 in section 2.7). However, we have not received a clear specification of the actual external financing of design research and artistic development. For example the external grants, including some DCDR grants, indicated in enclosure 4 to KA s self-evaluation, amount to about a half million DKK; while the grants from DCDR shown in table 7 in section 2.7 (reported by KA) constitute 2,3 million DKK in total in the evaluation period. Due to this unclear background information, we do not find ourselves able to assess the actual significance or impact of KA s achievements with respect to external funding to design research and artistic development. We appreciate, though, that achieving external funding for design research is part of KA s strategy, and we understand well that it is difficult for KA to separate the economy involved with design research from the total picture. In terms of external sources, from which KA has achieved funding, we wish to highlight a design research grant from the Nordic Council and funding for an industrial PhD scholarship from a private company and the Danish Agency of Research and Innovation under the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation. However, we also wish to point out that to our knowledge the school has not achieved any funding for design research from the Danish national research councils. 28

29 Complex organisational structure and weak management of the (design) research activity Design research is mainly organised within the Institute of Design and Communication (Institute 4), but the self-evaluation states that design research is done at all of the four institutes of the school and that all research mainly has its foundation in architecture. This is reflected in the thematic definition of design research around two main areas, Space, furniture and object and Graphical design, within a working perspective of three methodological tracks, Materials, process and form, Theory and history of design and Dialogue-based design and innovation. KA s structure of the research anchored in the four institutes and the education in the nine departments, and with an overlap of faculty members between the institutes and departments is rather complex; and the fact that design research is conducted in all four institutes makes the picture even more complex. This complexity certainly calls for good management, both in terms of management structure and management procedures. However, the Panel has got a clear impression of weak management structure and procedures at KA. The management is not complying with state-of-the-art management in knowledge-intensive organisations like higher educational institutions. The management group involved with research seems to comprise some skilled staff members, but the structure lacks leaders with sufficient formal authority. For example, the school has a Head of Research Administration who holds administrative authority, but there is not a head of research position who is managerial responsible, overall, for KA s research strategy or its implementation. Furthermore, even though the strategy forms a good basis for running a (design) research activity, it is not convincing that the strategies have been developed in communication with the research staff, and the school has not demonstrated that the strategy is implemented into (design) research to a sufficient extent in relation to the resources allocated for it (as further explained in section 3.3). There seems to be a weak structure and procedure for facilitating internal communication about research strategies and activities. There is for example insufficient background documentation on internal forums, meetings or other activities which could promote the internal communication and adequate co-involvement of the faculty in decisions concerning research. It thus appears to the Panel that the design researchers do not take part in the strategic leadership. Finally we wish to mention that we find lack of professionalism and commitment in the material presented and at the meetings during our visit at KA an observation which also reflects problems with the management of and internal communication about the (design) research at KA. The voluminous material sent to the Panel and an insufficient consistence between the selfevaluation and supporting background papers made it hard to find documentation for a number of core issues. Therefore the Panel eagerly expected the site visit to clarify the picture. However, several of the presentations lacked effective focus on the topic of the evaluation, design research; sometimes the oral presentations did not match the written; and the academic staff members and leaders were not always aware of the contents of the background material. This leaves the Panel with the clear impression that the self-evaluation report has been written by a few staff members without involving the whole of the faculty working in the field of design research. Furthermore, some relevant persons never showed up at the agreed meetings; and inadequate use of presentation media for example laptop screen instead of projector hampered the understanding of the information embedded in complex figures. The Panel is concerned that with the present governance system at KA, an international level of the design research cannot be reached. KA should re-consider its organisational structure and develop its management system into compliance with state-of-the-art management of knowledge-intensive organisations. With respect to research, this includes formally appointed leaders with formal authority for developing and implementing research strategies and significant involvement of the academic staff in formulation and implementation of research strategies and plans. Good foundation for developing research-based education 29

30 Despite the overall structural complexity and governance weaknesses there appears to be good integration and synergy, in terms of activities and academic staff, between the institute 4 (responsible for the core of the design research and artistic development) and department 11 (responsible for the core of the design elements of the architectural education). In general the faculty members are both teachers and developers/researchers. Furthermore, as explained in KA s self-evaluation, the school aims deliberately at ensuring a high level of knowledge in all courses concerning design. These circumstances and intentions form a strong foundation for conducting research-based education in the field of architecture-related design, and the Panel has got a clear impression of strong links between the artistic work and development and the education. As mentioned previously the education is based on both artistic practice, artistic development and research, and it is factors such as the nature of the specific discipline and the particular educational needs and focus that decide how to weigh these three activity bases in each individual educational programme. Therefore, and due to the good foundation for integrating design research and the education, we are confident that the education will become increasingly research-based concurrently with a possible future increase in the design research. Supervision of PhD scholars The design researchers at institute 4, the Institute of Design and Communication, consists reportedly (in 2009) of one professor, five associate professors and one assistant professor together with 2 PhD students. Only a few in this faculty have a PhD degree a fact which raises our concern as to whether the PhD supervision is sufficiently competent in the field of design research at KA. We find that, although the amount of doctoral students in design research is scarce at KA at the time of the evaluation, the resources for state-of-the-art research supervision are not sufficient enough. There is need of a mix with home-based/school-based supervision strengthened with external expertise in design research, especially if (and hopefully) the number of PhD scholars will grow. Risk for discontinuation of competences With respect to faculty KA confronts a significant succession in the present years. KA s research plan for includes plans for extensive recruitment of new faculty members for ensuring continuity of the competences within important educational and research areas. In 2009 the school had e.g. allocated 3 million DKK for employing a number of faculty members. However, we have observed that in some important design specialist fields, where present faculty members have excellent competences, there are still no young researchers or PhD scholars recruited, and we have not even seen this specific challenge addressed in the plans received with the background material. According to the information conveyed at our visit there are no plans for recruitment in these fields, despite the relatively high age of the present faculty members with a high risk that they may retire before the expertise can be transferred to a new generation. KA should therefore go carefully through its organisation and make specific decisions concerning continuation of competences. This risk of loosing excellent competences without having addressed it specifically is another example of weak management. It reflects that decisions taken at the overall level are not well implemented further down in the organisation. 3.3 Extent, quality and relevance of the research KA is rich in tradition and highly respected as an educational institution. The activities of the school hold very high artistic and aesthetic competences, the school nurtures very well the artistic and crafts base and there is clear knowledge transfer via objects. 30

31 However, KA has not demonstrated, in a convincing manner, that the school s definition of design research complies with the Panel s or with current international standards in the field as well as the concept of research of the Ministry of Culture. KA s definition of research (in architecturerelated design) has thus not come clearly out, neither in the self-evaluation and other background material nor during the Panel s site visit. The scarce crop of articles presented shows fundamental weaknesses of scientific argumentation; and workshop results, presented as research, have not been elaborated sufficiently to match the generally accepted concept of research. Once again we wish to emphasise that CITA is an exception from this. We must remember, though, that the Panel mainly has seen the design research aspect of the school. The (architecture-related) design research is a smaller strand in the overall focus of the school, architectural education and research, and there is a sound motivation and justification for defining the design research as subordinate to the discipline of architecture. Still, the Panel has to conclude that a large part of what was presented as research belongs to the category of artistic/design development and has its merits there. This may find its rooting in the somewhat hermetic ambiance and focus on traditions that the school as a whole radiated. Here, we wish to repeat that, like good research, good artistic development work is highly relevant and important for the society, and indeed for the architectural education. The level and quality of KA s design-related artistic development may very well be very good or excellent, but it is not within the framework of this evaluation to assess these activities. The current international discourse on theory and methods in the field of design research emphasises practice-based design research or research by design (also called research through design), and we commend the high level of practice-base in the activities presented by KA. However (as mentioned) for a large part of the activities, the approaches used, and reflections on the achieved knowledge are not documented/reported in a manner which complies with the international standards for design research or with the Ministry of Culture s definition of research. While tradition and practice-based research is important to keep and develop, there also needs to be a balance between that and keeping in touch with other researchers and research traditions. Design research includes achievement of new knowledge and dissemination of it in a transparent and reflective manner. The theories and methods used, and the knowledge achieved must be presented reflectively, clearly and transparently by the school. However, the scientific literature from the last five years seems to be poorly cited in KA s research works. This is an indication of insufficiently knowledge of the state of the art of the research. For example KA s dialogue-based research/design at hospitals does not show convincing knowledge of the extensive literature and environments on participatory research involving hospitals. The school s design research has to, to a much larger degree, breathe with and to be informed by design research worldwide this in order to form a dialogue with architectural research beneficial for both. The identity of design research In the design/artistic research discourse in general issues of methodology and ways of presenting research have been very prominent, whereas the nature of the research results has been discussed less. This is something that in the long run can cause problems in the overall international development of the design research discipline. It is after all in the nature of results that we find the strong identity of a research discipline. Clarity of results is something that is of importance for an emerging field of research even if the outside academic world can view these results as provocations to the very idea of research work. In design research and especially at the border between research and artistic development, where the artefacts play an important role, the clarity of research results is a difficult matter, since clarity in research most often refers to propositional precision. 31

32 History of science and research is full of artefacts, systems and things playing a central role as results, models, tools etc. But there has always been a search for conceptual precision in interpretations and explanations. There is a lot to be done here with respect to the foundations of practice-based design research methodology. It is clear from provided material, and very positive, that KA takes on this challenge. Like other institutions having their research situated on the border between traditional research and traditional artistic developmental work, KA has good basis for further develop this idea of the design object as a research result, a bearer of knowledge. Scientific dissemination needs to be improved The publication lists of KA shows a rather broad number of publications, but there is only a small number of what can be defined as research publications and a very low number of peer reviewed publications during the evaluation period. The number of peer reviewed articles is too low for an acceptable standard in relation to the human resources working in the field of design research at KA. There is thus need to display a clearer picture of design research at KA in relation to the international scene. KA has a stated strategic emphasis on publication in scientific journals (cf. KA s self-evaluation page 8). A first step for displaying a clearer picture of KA s design research at the international scene is therefore to further implement the school s strategy for scientific publication. The Panel believes that KA can succeed with such a development. The school s faculty appears highly confident in terms of the excellence of their work, and the Panel finds this well justified the faculty holds unique knowledge and competences and appears to conduct excellent artistic development work in the field of design. Furthermore the academic staff members discuss issues, which are less discussed in less confident academic groups. For example they discuss the relationship between design research and other science disciplines. We take this as a good sign of that KA does not necessarily comply with dictates from politicians and leaders, nor bend under pressure from trends in the scientific environment. That attitude is a good platform for breakthroughs and innovations in research. It must be added, though, that it also implies a risk for shutting down for inspiration and updating from the outside scientific environment as well as from society. Relevance KA s design activities appear relevant, including the narrow portfolio of what can be termed as research, for industry and society. The large part of the presented activities which are artistic development, not research, have in general a potential for having scientific relevance, but they have to be developed into research. As explained in section 3.2, the activities also appear relevant for the educational activities. Dialogue-based research In its self-evaluation KA explains that its research in the field of dialogue-based design and innovation concerns exploration of the processes, methods and results used in user-centred innovation. The term dialogue-based design research is not as such an established term in the design research methodology, but we interpret dialogue-based design research as research within the field of design in cooperation with users, which is large, and still growing, field of design research both nationally and internationally. Also Denmark has a long tradition in this area, since it was developed in the early 1980s. The area has many names: user-centred design, cooperative design, participatory design, user-driven design, co-design. But the basic principles are the same to design together with users and other stakeholders. However, we find that both the theoretical and the empirical findings of KA s dialoguebased research are not methodologically transparent, and the school s work in this field is sparsely documented in terms of scientific documentation. The main project presented to us within KA s dialogue-based research is a series of workshops at an emergency ward at a hospital. The 32

33 workshops and results are briefly described in a popular article, but the Panel has not found it satisfactory scientifically documented. Another project, presented orally at our visit, concerns users perception of the quality of chairs. We have also not seen this project sufficiently documented for being considered as research. If it is not possible to publish the projects and their results in peer reviewed journals and conferences, they should at least be documented fully in a report. KA sees user-centred research as a methodological field that is not confined to design but can be used in the whole architecture research field. This is sound and justifiable. The faculty states that dialogue-based research has a long tradition at KA and that it differs essentially from other similar approaches in user-centred design within IT or design-anthropology. The claim that KA has a unique approach to user-centred design is made in several places, in articles, in the self-evaluation and at the visit to the school, but it is not explained sufficiently clearly why and how the approach is unique. In a research context such claims need to be argued with care and well built arguments. Our conclusion is that while the projects might be relevant and well carried through, they are artistic development projects, not research projects they have an insufficient scientific level compared with the world-wide standards for research, also within the fields of user-centred design, participatory design as well as co-design. Graphic design The graphic work presented to the Panel is influenced by the position of the school resting in its tradition. When this is said, some of the work is both interesting and of originality. Example is the restoration work on building graphics. Also the book publications of the graphic design unit are of a high quality, showing a fine production of books on different themes. However, there is a lack of scientific publication which urgently needs to be addressed. Although the books are of a high quality also seen from a research perspective there is a need for increasing the scientific publication and reflection. Furthermore, in order to ensure continuity of competences, resources should be channelled to the graphic design area before retirement of senior faculty members who have a unique first hand knowledge and insight into techniques and skills. The Panel was also presented to KA s emerging activity in the field of way-finding. Way-finding, as an area of design research, is highly multi- and interdisciplinary oriented and therefore challenging. Recent discussion in the field has revolved around traditional visual communication (graphic design) and the know-how (visible form of communication) involved, and only few references can be found in the literature to the conceptual points of departure used in research on user-centred and service-driven sign and signage system design related to industrial design. Architectural-related research, which is more familiar with way-finding challenges, may bridge this gap together with design research and open for a new kind of an innovative academic discussion on the field. Furniture design The main research concepts of the furniture design activity are very interesting and the inclusion of a dynamic perspective on the objects and spaces, and also a space perspective, have a great potential to be developed into good research. However, the analyses and understanding of these themes seems still to be immature at KA. In fact the furniture design activity demonstrates very little research in terms of scientific publication, and an academic discourse would help to bring the level of thinking forward at KA. Although there is interesting work going on that also has elements of research and development, and innovation, the section needs to gear up towards a more massive academic publication of results. This is not only about getting the research documented and disseminated, it is also about helping the research to develop a deeper level of understanding, and a more advanced criticality around the research themes. 33

34 Centre for IT and Architecture (CITA) CITA has been very successful in building up a research cluster with several doctoral students and massive scientific publication and dissemination in a short period of time. The publications have a good international standard. The research is within a relatively new but also well established and fast moving field of research into digital technologies in relation to tectonics related to advanced geometries. The projects and research at CITA is generally situated in this emerging field but has also some original themes to it. The research is departing from an interest in materials and technology and explores what one can achieve with this starting point. From CITA s website we can read: CITA examines how architecture is influenced by new digital design- and production tools as well as the digital practices that are informing our societies culturally, socially and technologically... This agenda is quite wide and general. There are four themes: Behaving Architecture is researching robotics and responsive spaces, Digital Formations is centred around a digital crafting network, Interface Ecologies work with digital interfaces in mostly projected media and installation format with international collaboration and lastly BIM develops this theme towards a better understanding of the whole architectural process. For the first three themes it would be beneficial to further clarify and bring forward targeted agendas similar to what can be found in other environments researching the same or similar topics. Such focal themes have for example been diversification, differentiation, microclimatic modification and critical addressing of the building envelop. This recent development in digital architecture reaches beyond the digital themes but uses the technology to do things, e.g. developing structures and materials with new features, that have so far not been possible. CITA s work does similar things but with the digital as the main point of attention. The original work emerges from the technology and the material studies, e.g. the use of textiles and application of textile techniques on other materials. It is in that sense a bottom up research by design perspective which is a very good approach to generate new knowledge from within design. A further clarification of the results and the formulation of new overarching concepts might be a way to reformulate the bottom up research and to bring it further. One researcher with education outside of KA is very central for the research at CITA. We find it very positive that KA is open to external influence in this case, which is an exception from KA s general prioritisation of employing academic staff who are educated from KA. The setup, networking, financing and publication activities at CITA are exemplary for KA and could be used as a model to help other areas to move forward. 3.4 The research environment and scientific collaboration with national and international research groups KA states in the self-evaluation that it belongs to the (art) academy tradition, where research, artistic development and education take place within a coherent continuum in ateliers and studios. A large majority of the research staff have an architectural background, often with a period of professional work prior to research. It is an environment that is clearly in line with basic research strategies that put emphasis on the connections between artistic development and research. In addition we find that KA s physical environment is very inspiring for conducting design research. However, with respect to the international scene of design research, the provided material as well as the site visit gives a clear impression of a rather isolated research environment with domination of artistic development where the artefacts themselves display results with CITA as a notable exception. It has been difficult for the Panel to trace the reasons for that within given limits of the evaluation. Is it because design research at KA is strongly embedded in architectural research and is there too little communication between that world and the international scene of design research? (KA has to a very large extent employed architects who are educated from KA itself). Is 34

35 it because of too much focus on maintaining the rich traditions of the school? (For example, the faculty seems to focus on writing teaching books rather than publishing in conferences and journals. This reflects, and reinforces, the school s focus on its long tradition, and hampers influence from external environments, for example external teaching material). The risk for misunderstandings and conflicts with other groups, which is entailed in a closed and isolated environment, could be overcome by more cooperation and openness that would create a mutual understanding. Furthermore, employment of academic staff from other environments could bring in new perspectives and enrich the school s environment. We wish to emphasise, again here, that, like good research, good artistic development work is highly relevant and important for the society. The level and quality of KA s internal and external networking and collaboration within the field of artistic development may very well be excellent, underlined by KA s good international reputation, but it is not within the framework of this evaluation to assess this. 3.5 Dissemination of knowledge from the research Despite the low volume of scientific publication (addressed in section 3.3) of KA s design research, we have the impression that the school conducts sound and appropriate popular dissemination of its work and results to a broad audience, among others via exhibitions and books. The broad, popular dissemination of knowledge from design research is somewhat difficult to assess, though, due to the small volume of what can be termed design research. However, based on the present broad dissemination of artistic work and artistic development in the field of design, we are confident that the school will also conduct sound broad dissemination in the future, of knowledge from a possibly growing volume of design research. Furthermore the Panel welcomes the collaboration about dissemination between the four design research schools and the Danish Centre for Design Research (DCDR), which is implemented via re-ad.dk and DCDR s webmagazine MindDesign, particularly in view of the limited design research volume of KA. 3.6 Benefits for KA of DCDR and DCDR s services It is the clear impression of the Panel that that KA has benefited from the services of DCDR, particularly since the re-organisation of the centre in The precise benefits are somewhat difficult to lay out due to the small volume of design research at KA, but nevertheless we find that the following activities and services of DCDR have been beneficial to the design-related activities of KA: The foundation of the Ministry of Culture, administrated by DCDR, has supported several of KA s activities including books, financing of researcher time for writing on books, pre-doc projects and conferences and seminars. The funding, particularly of activities which can develop the design research environment, activities and skills of KA, will be important in the coming years also. The Coordination Committee constitutes a platform where the four schools meet and discuss their design research activities. It has promoted good collaboration and exchange of experience between the four schools, which in principle are competitors, as regards design-related activities. The Coordination Committee meets once a month and comprises the heads of research at the two 35

36 design schools and the schools of architecture as well as the DCDR's director and research coordinator. DCDR s services for facilitating networking between the design researchers of the four schools have been important for building a network between the design-related faculties of the four schools. Particularly the annual seminar held in August is an excellent facilitator of networking between the researchers and a source for exchange of experience and inspiration. Furthermore we wish to repeat here that KA has benefited from DCDR s broad/popular dissemination, and that the school can benefit from this collective dissemination activity also in the future. KA has expressed that its collaboration with DCDR is positive, particularly since the re-organisation of the centre in The school finds that the primary target of DCDR is (has been) to upgrade the design research at the two design schools, and that this is fulfilled. KA suggests that for the future the other activities of DCDR (coordination, mutual information on design research between the four schools and the Master vocational training programme) could be maintained by the schools themselves. KA proposes that DCDR s functions could be organisationally placed at one of the schools, and implies that this could be effectively done by placing them at the merged KA and DKDS. In addition, KA recommends that the researchers of DCDR become embedded in the research environments of the four schools. We wish to emphasise that the visions for the future of collective activities indicated above represent points of view expressed by KA, not by the Panel. We find that a number of activities of collective interest will be beneficial for all the evaluated schools also in the future, particularly in view of the relatively small volumes of the individual schools, even after the expected merger. We present our assessments and recommendations regarding future common activities in the overall evaluation report. 36