





































 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
https://www.designforsocialchange.org/journal/index.php/DISCERN-J 
 
ISSN 2184-6995 
 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 
International License. 

 

  

 

 
 
Teaching design in emerging countries: A train-the-trainer methodology 
 
Arianna Vignati, Busayawan Lam, Philip Azariadis, Silvia D’Ambrosio, Spyros Bofylatos 

 

Published online: May 2022 

 
To cite this article:  
Vignati, A., Busayatawan, L., Azariadis, P., D’Ambrosio, S., & Bofylatos, S. (2022). Teaching design in 
emerging countries: A train-the-trainer methodology. Discern: International Journal of Design for Social 
Change, Sustainable Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 54-66. 
 
 
  



 

55 

Teaching design in emerging countries: A train-the-trainer methodology  
 
Arianna Vignatia, Busayawan Lamb, Philip Azariadisc, Silvia D’Ambrosiod, Spyros Bofylatose 

 
aUniversity of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. a.vignati@unsw.edu.au  
bBrunel University London, UK. Busayawan.Lam@brunel.ac.uk  
cUniversity of the Aegean, Greece. azar@aegean.gr  
dPolitecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy. silvia.dambrosio@polimi.it  
eUniversity of the Aegean, Greece. bofy@aegean.gr  

 

Abstract 

Design disciplines have constantly evolved to keep up with the emerging demands of the 21st Century. 

Design education is thus called to change its methods, tools and approaches. There is an increasing interest 

in emerging economies in design education, especially in India, where the role of creativity, communication 

and technology can support social and economic development. This paper aims to present the educational 

approach developed in the context of the Erasmus+ KA2 project entitled ‘Design and Innovation Capacity 

Building in India/DESINNO’. The modernisation and internationalisation of Indian universities with 

innovative and contemporary design courses have been the main goals of a set of research and training 

activities. In this paper, the state-of-the-art methodologies in design thinking, sustainability, design 

research, social innovation and ethical issues in design are presented, leading to a bespoke educational 

approach that provides a platform for Indian design academics to apply modern educational approaches  

to their specificities and needs. 

 

Keywords: Integrated product design, Interaction design, Human-centred design, Train the trainer, 

Strategic design, Blended learning, Design thinking, Indian universities 

Introduction 

The state of the art of practice-based design approaches undertakes the focus on the design studio and 

design workshop methods for learning. Contemporary design approaches and associated skills are moving 

design education to answer to emerging issues such as the service economy, digitisation and integrated 

product design that are new areas of education for the Indian design institutions participating in DESINNO. 

The research question explored in the DESINNO project and presented in this paper aims to answer this 

need with a solid understanding of the value of the practice-based design approach and its implication  

in the tools, learning methods and related programmes. This paper presents a methodology to create 

innovative design courses through the transfer of knowledge to academics. This train-the-trainer 

methodology aims to balance the global evolution of design discourse and pedagogy and local needs, 

competencies and challenges. The DESINNO project revolves around the role of design and innovation 

centres inside the universities as places that provide a common ground for: 

1. The development of innovative and permanent methods for research and design approaches. 

2. The establishment of cross-sectoral projects for collaboration and co-learning. 

3. The establishment of inter-industry projects to facilitate the inclusion of design thinking approaches. 

4. The development of extreme affordability principles for the benefit of developing nations while taking 

care of the accessibility and sustainability aspects of design. 

5. The development of community-based programmes to enable designers, craftsmen and artisans. 

6. The modernisation and internationalisation of Indian Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) by the 

improvement of university design courses that will encompass product and service design by following 



 

56 

state-of-the-art methodologies in design thinking, sustainability, design research, social innovation, 

ethical issues in design, etc. 

` 

Design and innovation centres have a design lab with certain equipment and software for new product 

development and prototyping. These centres have a strategic role in the practice-based approach to design 

education. In addition to the establishment of said centres, courses new to the curricula of the three 

participating HEIs are to be added to support the use of the centres. Design can foster meaningful social 

change in emerging economies such as India, as it provides the tools to sustain economic growth, to better 

address the needs of citizens by providing low-cost innovation and create jobs. For the DESINNO project, 

we developed a social innovation approach that brings grassroots innovators in contact with designers to 

scale up tools and products created. Creating design-related social entrepreneurship by collaborating with 

academia through design and innovation tools is an important goal of the DESINNO project. To support the 

Indian academics in the creation of the novel courses, three capacity-building sessions were undertaken to 

provide them with material, content and educational methodologies to develop courses that better fit their 

needs and competencies. 

 

The paper is structured in three main sections. First, the research approach, question, and state-of-the-art 

educational approaches concerning design pedagogy are presented. The second section presents the three 

capacity-building programmes put forward. In the last section, conclusions are drawn, and the lessons 

learned are reflected upon. 

Design education 

Teaching design today needs a specific training methodology and the establishment of new educational 

experiences and services in higher educational institutions and universities. In addition, the COVID-19 

pandemic has accelerated changes towards remote and blended learning, and its consequences will be  

felt for years to come. 

 

The theoretical framework for a new training methodology in design starts with the concept of the well-

known ‘experiential learning theory’, which stems from the assumption that learning is best conceived as  

a process, not in terms of outcomes. According to this theory, ideas are not fixed and immutable elements 

of thought but are formed and re-formed through experience, and thus new knowledge, skills and attitudes 

are achieved through an immersive and concrete learning experience. Put differently, learning is a process 

where concepts are derived from and continuously modified by experience (Kolb, 1984). Such a learning 

experience works within a boundary between observation and reflection on the one side and theory and 

practice on the other. 

 

Experiential learning theory offers an asset of awareness that is increasingly demanded by professionals 

and apprentices in all fields of design (strategic design, service design, fashion design, interaction and 

communication design, etc.). The boundary between theory and practice is one in which design finds  

its best nourishment. 

 

According to the six propositions of Kolb’s theory, the specific focus of a new training methodology  

in design supports the application of an innovative didactic method (Vignati et al., 2017): 

 

1 Learning is best conceived as a process, not in terms of outcomes. 

2 All learning is relearning. 

3 Learning requires the resolution of conflicts. 



 

57 

4 Learning is a holistic process of adaptation to the world. 

5 Learning results from synergetic transactions between the person and the environment. 

6 Learning is the process of creating knowledge. 

 

The training methodology developed would therefore support the implementation of a learning experience 

by balancing abstract conceptualisation and reflective observation with concrete experience and active 

experimentation (Kolb, 2005). This methodology has been tested through three capacity-building 

programmes for a group of Indian delegates to train the trainers and improve an innovative design 

education scenario for new courses in the Indian universities. Moreover, building upon experiential learning 

and Kolb’s theory, the didactic methodology proposed in the DESINNO project would notably offer  

a dynamic and innovative learning experience strictly linked to the practical and ‘hands-on’ dimension  

proper of the design discipline. 

 

Design disciplines have constantly evolved to keep up with the emerging demands of the 21st century. 

According to Meyer and Norman (2020), the emerging challenges faced by designers can be grouped into 

four categories: performance challenges, systemic challenges, contextual challenges and global challenges. 

It becomes evident that design education for the 21st century can no longer focus on traditional skills.  

It must equip young designers with new knowledge and expertise that can help them tackle complex 

problems holistically, such as critical and systematic thinking. 

 

Sanders and Stappers (2008) observed that traditional design disciplines tended to concentrate on the 

designing of products. Subsequently, these disciplines were defined by the outputs of the design process. 

To address emerging challenges, design practice has changed, and new design disciplines have emerged. 

These new design disciplines focus on designing for a ‘purpose’. The results are not limited to one type of 

output, e.g. physical products or built environments. In response to these changes, several traditional 

design disciplines have been redefined to help them stay relevant to the changing world. 

 

This paper will focus on three emerging design disciplines, namely interaction design, service design and 

integrated product design, as they will become new core knowledge assets for the creative industries. To 

help students develop new knowledge and skills (such as systematic thinking), they must go beyond surface 

learning, where they are expected to reproduce materials, and adopt a deep approach where they focus  

on making sense of materials (Gibbs, 2010). This means that the educators also should move away from 

conventional ways of teaching, where most decisions are made by teachers, and adopt a student-centred 

approach, where the emphasis is on integrating learning across the curriculum (Cannon & Newble, 2000). 

Project/problem-based Learning (PBL) is one of the student-centred learning approaches that has been 

widely adopted, since it can help students develop critical and systematic thinking by engaging them in 

solving complex real-world problems (Nagarajan & Overton, 2019; Yew & Goh, 2016). 

 

Two relevant methods for learning in design education were adopted to bring Kolb's theory and the 

process-based design education approach to practice, the design studio and the design workshop. The 

‘design studio’ is central to the pedagogy of design (Demirbas & Demirkan, 2007; Shaffer, 2007). Design 

studios are a synthesis of the three diverse types of courses constituting a design curriculum (Uluoǧlu, 

2000). According to Hokanson (2012), the ‘design studio’ includes two main pillars, the public presentation 

of ideas to the teaching staff and the interaction between tutors and students. The basic elements of the 

design studio include the design brief, the design research, transitions between design thinking and 

practice, and the desk crit (Sagun & Demirkan, 2009; Schön, 1987) that happens on students’ desks from 

the master designer and the design reviews. 



 

58 

 

The guided learning philosophy of the design studio is seen as the means to engage in ‘learning by doing’ 

(Schön, 1987). The design studio requires intensive, closely coupled cooperation for design work in teams 

with minimal supervision. For students’ design competencies to flourish, emphasis is given to facilitating 

the three factors put forward by Christiaans and Venselaar (2005): knowledge of the design process, the 

integration of different disciplines and the integration of theoretical knowledge in practice. The role of the 

tutors is more to facilitate and provide high-level guidelines and links to resources rather than to teach or 

directly correct participants along the way. This is according to a problem-based approach to learning, 

which has been applied in previous projects in short-term learning activities (Koutsabasis et al., 2011) as 

well as during the duration of studio courses (Vosinakis & Koutsabasis, 2013). Additional principles of 

problem-based learning include that participants are provided with an authentic problem at hand, i.e.  

a) it is related to (their future) practice, and the design problem is ill-defined or wicked (Kolko, 2012),  

in the sense that it does not have a unique solution which can be good or bad (not ‘optimal’ or ‘best’),  

b) the participants work in groups of complementary competencies, c) the participants are responsible for 

their learning about the problem at hand and d) the participants gradually develop a solution by practising 

design and engineering methods. 

 

The second learning method investigated is the design workshop. In the context of design, workshops 

typically involve participatory or co-design activities and have been defined as “a form of participatory 

design, consolidating creative co-design methods into organised sessions for several participants to work 

with design team members” (Hanington & Martin, 2012). However, there can be several arrangements  

of a design workshop, depending on the learning goals and the problem context. Design workshops have 

been proposed in several contexts and forms to deal with complex problems that require a participatory 

design approach, including co-design activities (Holman et al., 2008), change management (Holmberg  

& Robèrt, 2000), urban studies (Hou, 2013) and urban planning (Wates, 2014). 

 

Generally, design workshops entail several activities that facilitators plan and orchestrate. The workshops 

often begin with an overview of topics and an agenda, may continue with field visits (Goodman et al., 

2012), observation or ethnographic research, followed by brainstorming and closely coupled cooperative 

design, modelling, artefact making and testing. In between these activities there may be breaks with short 

inspirational presentations or stakeholder visits. 

 

According to this preliminary research, it is relevant to remark on the importance of the practice-based 

approach in the learning methods adopted in design education. Three key findings emerged as strategic 

pillars for the definition of an innovative teaching design methodology customised for the contemporary 

needs of Indian academics: 

 

- Integration of different disciplines 

- A problem-based approach in a real-life environment 

- Co-design and co-creation of knowledge and values (trainer to trainer,  

trainer to student, student to student). 

 

With the theoretical foundations and formative decisions on how to train the trainers set in stone, we 

moved to develop three capacity-building sessions. These sessions aimed to apply the state-of-the-art 

findings and give our Indian colleagues the content and scaffolding to build their courses that would make 

use of the design and innovation centres established and combining them with contemporary design 

pedagogy. In the next section, these three capacity-building sessions are presented and discussed. 



 

59 

Capacity-building sessions 

In this section, the authors present the experience of running three capacity-building sessions aimed at 

supporting an HEI in India in planning and developing educational content to support the three design and 

innovation centres. The capacity-building sessions adopted a train-the-trainer methodology with a specific 

methodology and tools for training, research and applied research activities with companies and 

institutions. Before training design students, it is fundamental to train who is going to train them. The train-

the-trainer methodology has equipped a panel of 35 Indian experts (PhD students, researchers and 

professors from three universities) with a particular method and set of design tools with the following aims: 

- To start developing future courses and laboratories 

- To practise a constructive, holistic, empathic and iterative approach that is flexible  

and that can be applied as both an educational and collaborative strategy 

- To provide resources, content and an overall educational approach to teaching design  

in a hands-on, experiential way. 

 

The methods and tools offered and explored during the capacity-building sessions can be further used by 

the Indian experts along with students in teaching and designing new services but also with local entities, 

external stakeholders and international partners. These choices were informed by desk research and 

fieldwork (Bofylatos & Azariadis, 2022). The synthesis of the research supported the establishment of the 

design centres as a focal point for the development of the design strategy in India. The train-the-trainer 

methodology was chosen as an effective method to scale up the interventions selected and to complement 

and strengthen the labs with both educational material as well as pilot projects. The following sections 

present the educational approach, the tools and methods adopted and the didactic organisation of the 

three capacity-building sessions. 

Face-to-face session with a focus on integrated product design 

Brunel University London hosted a capacity-building programme titled Integrated Product Design in 

Uxbridge, UK between 24 February and 6 March 2020 for nine delegates from three Indian partner 

institutions. The programme was developed based on the concept of T-shape designers. According to 

Hansen and von Oetiger (2001), the horizontal part of the T refers to a breadth of knowledge across various 

aspects of design, while the vertical part of the T is defined as the depth of knowledge of professional 

designers. Thus, this capacity-building programme aimed to build upon designers’ core skills and broaden 

their knowledge in other areas. The subjects delivered under this programme can be grouped into  

four areas: 

1. Professional practice (e.g. co-design and research-informed teaching) 

2. Strategic design (e.g. strategic design management, branding and future forecasting) 

3. Entrepreneurship (e.g. innovation process and innovation management) 

4. Technical design (e.g. design for manufacturing and advanced manufacturing) 

 

The programme is underpinned by the Double Diamond model (Design Council, 2019). The model was 

chosen because it reflects design practices in industry. It was constructed based on 11 case studies from 

diverse types of organisations, such as product and service design (e.g. LEGO® and Starbucks), physical and 

digital design (e.g. Whirlpool and Microsoft) and emotional and functional design (e.g. Xerox and Alessi). 

The process contains four main stages: discover, define, develop and deliver. The first two stages focus  

on exploring and framing the question(s), while the latter stages concentrate on creating and realising 

solution(s). At the heart of the process is the notion of convergent and divergent thinking in the design 



 

60 

process. Designers need divergent thinking to explore all possibilities at the discover and develop stages. 

However, they also require convergent thinking to systematically narrow down the scope and deliver 

practical solutions in the define and deliver stages. This model was integrated into many lecture materials 

and activities. 

 

Although the programme offered several hands-on activities, it did not involve a task that linked all aspects 

together. At the end of the teaching activities, the courses were formally evaluated with questionnaires and 

a final group discussion. According to the feedback collected for the first capacity-building session, it would 

have been more useful to include a task that connects all subjects, such as portfolio development. In 

general, the delegates found the process-oriented approach useful. They observed that the application of 

the Double Diamond model in teaching and learning activities could help assure the quality of the process 

and outcomes, as well as avoid subjectivity in assessment. 

Blended e-learning session focused on service design  

Due to COVID-19 restrictions, Politecnico di Milano organised a remote capacity-building programme 

between 10 and 23 October 2020 for 18 professors and experts from the three Indian partner institutions. 

The programme took place through an exploration of blended e-learning potential and assets using both 

online interactions and offline activities: 

1 Online interactions: 

• Lectures 

• Gamified learning experience (several challenges and feedback) 

• Microlearning (learning nuggets) 

2 Offline interactions: 

• Assessments 

• Co-working activities and round table discussions 

 

The topics, contents and tools were planned and offered to guide the Indian partners in starting  

to design their future courses and labs by envisioning possible synergies as systems, both internal and 

external to academia. 

 

To achieve this goal, the training programme focused on service design and was implemented through  

a creative process based on the human-centred design approach and, thus, throughout three main phases 

of inspiration, ideation and implementation. The human-centred design makes systems desirable from  

a human point of view with what is technologically feasible and economically viable (Ideo, 2011). This 

approach enhances effectiveness and efficiency, improves human well-being, user satisfaction, accessibility 

and sustainability and counteracts possible adverse effects of use on human health, safety and 

performance (International Organization for Standardization, 1999). 

 

According to the feedback, the Indian professors and experts appreciated the innovative ways of using 

online platforms and tools proposed during the programme. The topics and themes offered a fresh 

perspective based on a systemic approach that keeps participants’ motivation and ambition high. Further 

reflections and improvements lie behind the possibility of cooperative sessions among the three Indian 

universities. 

Blended learning session focused on interaction design 

Due to the COVID=19 restrictions, the session offered by the University of the Aegean (UAEGEAN) also  

had to be delivered online with synchronous and asynchronous learning activities. During a two-week 



 

61 

programme, the university offered a multifaceted lecturing cycle to cover the main aspects of interaction 

design, ranging from theory to practical examples and case studies. 

 

The presentations and dialogues on the selected theoretical issues implemented examples, and co-working 

activities were designed to offer inspiration and insights to both the UAEGEAN lecturers and the 

participants from the Indian universities.  

 

UAEGEAN offered a broad and holistic view of the fields and connected them to digital heritage 

management (Chatzigrigoriou et al., 2021) and connected computer-aided design subjects to human-

computer interaction (HCI) and its evaluation tools. Thanks to the assignments, the Indian experts had 

hands-on experience of usability studies in the local setting and implemented the empirical conclusions  

in the framework of DESINNO. Thanks to a selection of online platforms and tools, the Indian experts could 

work together remotely in a collaborative way. 

 

During the capacity-building session, the lecturers introduced the concept of interaction design through an 

introduction to HCI. They presented how it is educationally approached as a theoretical course, as a studio 

course and in terms of research outcomes. In this direction, the participants were given specific scientific 

papers to discuss among them at the next online session. Hence, the first assignment focused on an 

overview of HCI and education in design engineering and research in the UAEGEAN by reading three 

relevant papers outlining different tools applied to HCI and usability, with digital heritage as the central 

case study. The second assignment focused on running a heuristic evaluation of the Indian Railways  

e-service and filling in the heuristic evaluation sheet through task analysis. The participants were asked  

to try to define the individual tasks involved in the process of booking the ticket, e.g. “you could use task 

analysis to determine the separate steps the user follows to book a ticket and turn them into tasks to 

measure their time and errors”. Thus, the third and last assignment was dedicated to running a usability 

test and producing a report of the key findings and directions to redesign the same platform. 

 

Overall, the two-week programme managed to achieve a high degree of success. The participants evaluated 

the course highly. The lecturers provided an overview of the fields of HCI and interaction design, outlined 

the synergies with fields adjacent to it such as digital heritage management, design for all and service 

design and pushed the participants to reflect and gain a second-order understanding of interactive systems 

through the two evaluation assignments. 

 

Conclusions 

Lessons learned 

After the completion of each capacity-building session, the participants were invited to provide feedback 

through an online questionnaire on their experiences of the training provided. Overall, all three capacity-

building sessions were considered highly successful, receiving an average score of 4.5/5 on a Likert scale 

(1=Poor, 5=Excellent). 

 

Thanks to the capacity-building sessions, 35 Indian experts received training on all three main design 

disciplines that the target Indian universities focused on, namely industrial product design, service design 

and interaction design. Additionally, a vast volume of resources has been produced, e.g. educational 

material, presentations, scholarly articles, videos and audio-visual material that can be used by the Indian 

HEIs for the development of their courses and lectures. 



 

62 

The blended approach adopted in the three capacity-building sessions allowed the authors to measure the 

impact of design education delivered both traditionally (face to face) and with an innovative e-learning 

approach. The most valuable insights collected from the practical application are: 

 

- Design contents: In addition to the three focus of the design disciplines included in the teaching 

activities (product design, service design and interaction design), the Indian experts declared a high 

interest in exploring the fields of design for social innovation and human-centred design. 

 

- Design methods: The hands-on and assignment-based approach to teaching was evaluated as 

effective. The opportunity to apply what the participants learned in practical assignments with  

a strong relation to real applications in new courses or new educational experiences was evaluated 

as a relevant outcome. The blended sessions were evaluated to be well planned and apt for the 

educational goal. The adoption of a practice-based approach in e-learning education allowed for the 

exploration of new ways of applying and including technologies in the design of teaching 

programmes. 

 

- Design Tools: The participants enjoyed going through the exercises that were supported and 

facilitated using templates and formats. 

 

The train-the-trainer methodology applied for field testing the design education in the capacity-building 

sessions has demonstrated the following: 

 

- The effectiveness of the systemic approach in design education: train the trainer with a 

multidisciplinary and systemic approach to support the building of an innovative mindset for the 

future education of Indian students with contemporary skills and visions of the design discipline. 

Instead of providing a concrete framework of western design, our Indian colleagues were given  

a scaffold to create a bespoke approach that better addresses local challenges and existing design 

perspectives, hoping to decolonise Indian design education. 

 

- The use of a blended approach demonstrated the possibility to adopt an inclusive approach in design 

education in emerging countries. The effectiveness of new tools using digital technologies can 

improve the number of experts and professors involved in train-the-trainer experiences without 

losing effectiveness and engagement. 

 

- The capacity for social change through increased empathy developed by the adoption of human-

centred design approaches. Both human-centred design, as elaborated in design thinking, and 

human-computer interaction usability and design for all tools foster understanding of the users  

in the context of creativity. 

 

- The evolution of the diffuse design capacity of grassroots innovators in the context of the maker 

movement as part of the labs established. Leveraging design as a facilitator of bottom-up solutions 

can create new social value that is context-specific and embedded in everyday problems in  

a local context. 



 

63 

Repeatability and scalability 

All capacity training programmes, namely integrated product design, service design and interaction design 

(or digital design) were developed to be turned into either new elective courses or new content that can be 

integrated into existing courses. 

To scale up 10-day capacity training programmes into proper courses, further developments were carried 

out. Firstly, all teaching materials were gathered, formatted and shared on the online repository. In this 

way, all the professors involved in the train-the-trainer courses could access these materials and use them 

for their teaching and learning activities. The teaching materials and feedback were then used to form the 

basis for new elective courses or to add content to existing courses. Next, the three Indian universities 

engaged were asked to identify which courses they would like to develop further, and a benchmarking 

exercise was carried out. The aim was to capture the good practice of leading courses in related fields to 

develop the teaching materials further and address the feedback collected. The courses included in the 

benchmark exercise are shown in Table 1 below. 

 

Topics Courses included in the benchmarking exercise 

Integrated Product 

Design 

BSc Product Design & Technology, Loughborough University, UK 

MEng Design Engineering, Imperial College, London, UK 

MA Collaborative and Industrial Design, Aalto University, Finland 

Service Design MA Service Design, Royal College of Art, UK 

MDes Design Innovation & Service Design, Glasgow School of Art, UK 

MA Service Design, University of the Arts London, UK 

Introduction to HCI  BA User Experience Design, University of the Arts London, UK 

MSc Human-Computer Interaction Design, City, University of London, UK 

MSc Human-Computer Interaction, University College London, UK 

 

Table 1: Courses included in the benchmarking exercise. 

 

After the capacity-building sessions, a concrete application of the tools and methodologies tested has been 

implemented through the definition of specific syllabuses for three new courses, with the involvement of 

the professors who attended the capacity-building sessions. The new syllabuses were developed based on 

key points extracted from the benchmarking exercise and the capacity-building training materials. After 

that, they were reviewed by corresponding staff at the Indian institutes. Once the syllabuses were 

approved, the tutor’s guidance for each course was developed accordingly. The teaching teams who 

created and delivered the capacity-building programmes were also invited to add relevant information  

and to provide further feedback/comments to all syllabuses and tutor guidance. The practical application  

of the contents and the teaching methodologies in innovative design education programmes represent the 

beginning of the answer to the research aim of the authors, namely the modernisation and 

internationalisation of Indian universities with innovative and updated design courses with a set  

of methodologies based on design thinking, sustainability, design research, social innovation and  

ethical issues in design. 

 

Acknowledgements 
This work was co-funded by the Erasmus+ programme of the European Union under the project entitled 

“Design and Innovation Capacity Building in India/DESINNO”  

(Project No: 598404-EPP-1-2018-1-IN-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP). 

 



 

64 

 
References 
Bofylatos S., & Azariadis P. (2022). Supporting the emergence of Indian design through Design and 
Innovation Centers – a methodological approach. The Design Journal. In press. 
 
Bradbury, N. A. (2016). Attention span during lectures: 8 seconds, 10 minutes, or more? Advances  
in Physiology Education, 40(4), 509–513. http://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00109.2016 
 
Brown, T. (2009). Tim Brown urges designers to think big [Video]. TED Conferences. 
http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_brown_urges_designers_to_think_big.html  
 
Cannon, R., & Newble, D. (2000). A handbook for teaching in universities and colleges (4th ed.).  
Kogan Page. 
 
Chatzigrigoriou, P., Nikolakopoulou, V., Vakkas, T., Vosinakis, S., & Koutsabasis, P. (2021). Is architecture 
connected with intangible cultural heritage? Reflections from architectural digital documentation and 
interactive application design in three Aegean islands. Heritage, 4(2), 664-689. 
 
Christiaans, H., & Venselaar, K. (2005). Creativity in design engineering and the role of knowledge: 
Modelling the expert. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(3), 217-236. 
 
Demirbas, O., & Demirkan, H. (2007). Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic 
performance and gender in design education. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 345-359. 
 
Design Council. (2019). What is the framework for innovation? Design Council’s evolved Double Diamond. 
https://tinyurl.com/4pd494rp 
 
Gaver, B., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. Interactions, 6(1), 21-29. 
 
Gibbs, G. 2010. Using assessment to support student learning. Leeds Met Press. 
 
Goodman, E., Kuniavsky, M., & Moed, A. (2012). Observing the user experience: A practitioner's  
guide to user research (2nd ed.). Elsevier. 
 
Graham, C., et al. (2001). Seven principles of effective teaching: A practical lens for evaluating online 
courses. Technology Source, 30(5), 50. http://www.technologysource.org/?view=article&id=274 
 
Hanington, B., & Martin, B. (2019). Universal methods of design expanded and revised: 125 ways to 
research complex problems, develop innovative ideas, and design effective solutions. Rockport Publishers. 
 
Hansen, M. T., & von Oetiger, B. (2001). Introducing T-shaped managers: Knowledge management’s next 
generation. Harvard Business Review, 79(3), 106–116. 
 
Hokanson, B. (2012). The design critique as a model for distributed learning. In L. Moeller & J. B. Huett 
(Eds.), The next generation of distance education: Unconstrained learning (pp. 71-83). Springer. 
 
Holman, I. P., Rounsevell, M. D. A., Cojacaru, G., Shackley, S., McLachlan, C., Audsley, E., & Richards,  
J. A. (2008). The concepts and development of a participatory regional integrated assessment tool. Climatic 
Change, 90(1), 5-30. 
 
Holmberg, J., & Robèrt, K. H. (2000). Backcasting—A framework for strategic planning. International Journal 
of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 7(4), 291-308. 
 



 

65 

Hou, J. (Ed.). (2013). Transcultural cities: Border crossing and placemaking. Routledge. 
 
Ideo. (2011). Design kit: The human-centred design toolkit. https://www.ideo.com/post/design-kit 
 
International Organization for Standardization. (1999). Human-centred design processes for interactive 
systems. (ISO Standard No. 13407:1999(E)). 
 
Kolb, A., & Kolb D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher 
education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212.  
 
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development,  
David A. Kolb, Prentice-Hall International, Hemel Hempstead, Herts., 1984. No. of pages: xiii + 256. Journal 
of Organizational Behavior, 8(4), 359–360. http://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030080408  
 
Kolko, J. (2012). Transformative learning in the design studio. Interactions, 19(6), 82-83. 
 
Kolko, J. (2015). Design thinking comes of age. Harvard Business Review, 93(9), 66-71. 
https://hbr.org/2015/09/design-thinking-comes-of-age  
 
Koutsabasis, P., Stavrakis, M., Spyrou, T., & Darzentas, J. (2011). Perceived impact of asynchronous  
e-learning after long-term use: Implications for design and development. International Journal of Human-
Computer Interaction, 27(2), 191-213. 
 
Li-Tze, L., & Hung, J. (2015). Effects of blended e-Learning: A case study in higher education tax learning 
setting. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences, 5(1), 1-15.  
 
Meyer, M. W., & Norman, D. (2020) Changing design education for the 21st century, She Ji, 6(1), 13-49. 
 
Mulgan, G. (2014). Design in public and social innovation: What works and what could work better. NESTA. 
https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/design_in_public_and_social_innovation.pdf  
 
Nagarajan, S., & Overton, T. (2019) Promoting systems thinking using project- and problem-based learning. 
Journal of Chemical Education, 96(12), 2901-2909.  
 
Pinna, C., Cattaneo, L., Rossi, M., Dell Era, C., Terzi, S., Pestarino, A., & Vignati, A. (2018). Teaching design  
in Europe: Challenges and trends. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and 
Innovation, ICE/ITMC 2018 - Proceedings (pp.1-6). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICE.2018.8436363 
 
Sagun, A., & Demirkan, H. (2009). On-line critiques in collaborative design studio. International Journal  
of Technology and Design Education, 19(1), 79-99. 
 
Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2014). Probes, toolkits and prototypes: Three approaches to making  
in codesigning. CoDesign, 10(1), 5-14. 
 
Sanders, E.B.N., & Stappers, P.J. (2008) Co-creation and the new landscapes of design.  
CoDesign, 4(1), 5-18. 
 
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass. 
 
Shaffer, D. W. (2020). Learning in design. In R. A. Lesh, E. Hamilton, & J. J. Kaput (Eds.), Foundations  
for the future in mathematics education (pp. 99-125). Routledge. 
 
Uluoǧlu, B. (2000). Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques. Design Studies, 21(1), 33-58. 
 



 

66 

Verganti R. (2009). Design-driven innovation. Changing the rules of competition by radically innovating 
what things mean. Harvard Business Press. 
 
Vignati A., Fois L., Melazzini M., Pei, X., & Zurlo F. (2017). E-learning and design practice. Tools and methods 
for professional learning of strategic design approach. Design Journal, 20(Suppl. 1), 1026-1036. 
 
Vosinakis, S., & Koutsabasis, P. (2013). Interaction design studio learning in virtual worlds. Virtual Reality, 
17(1), 59-75. 
 
Wates, N. (2014). The community planning handbook: How people can shape their cities, towns and 
villages in any part of the world. Routledge. 
 
Yew, E. H. J., & Goh, K. (2016) Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. 
Health Professions Education, 2(2), 75-79. 
 


	Introduction The state of the art of practice-based design approaches undertakes the focus on the design studio and design workshop methods for learning. Contemporary design approaches and associated skills are moving design education to answer to eme...
	Design education
	Capacity-building sessions In this section, the authors present the experience of running three capacity-building sessions aimed at supporting an HEI in India in planning and developing educational content to support the three design and innovation ce...
	Face-to-face session with a focus on integrated product design Brunel University London hosted a capacity-building programme titled Integrated Product Design in Uxbridge, UK between 24 February and 6 March 2020 for nine delegates from three Indian par...
	Blended e-learning session focused on service design  Due to COVID-19 restrictions, Politecnico di Milano organised a remote capacity-building programme between 10 and 23 October 2020 for 18 professors and experts from the three Indian partner institu...
	Blended learning session focused on interaction design Due to the COVID=19 restrictions, the session offered by the University of the Aegean (UAEGEAN) also  had to be delivered online with synchronous and asynchronous learning activities. During a two...

	Repeatability and scalability All capacity training programmes, namely integrated product design, service design and interaction design (or digital design) were developed to be turned into either new elective courses or new content that can be integra...


