Office: Huntington 271. Rm 241
Office Hours: By appointment
Email: c.ledantec@northeastern.edu
Class Meetings: Wednesday, 1:35–5:05PM
Location: Richards Hall 140
Course Description
The seminar provides an overview of research designs and methods across disciplines. Provides presentation and discussion of these methods and strategies in how to select and use them, discusses IRB procedures, and includes guest presentations from faculty across the campus. This course is not meant as a comprehensive methodological training, but rather an overview that should be complemented with at least one specialized methods courses to be selected from a university wide list of courses in the first semester of study, and two others in the second semester of study.
Course Objectives
By the end of the course you will
- Design your own research study.
- Appreciate the differences between different research methods.
- Articulate the landscape of different research methods.
- Describe existing research efforts and how they used research methods.
- Collaborate with peers on group research projects.
Analyze the strengths and weaknesses of different research methods for a given research question. - Analyze the appropriateness of a particular research method to a field.
- Recognize and adhere to responsible conduct of research.
What you’ll do
- Use diagramming approaches to illustrate understandings of complex material
- Use models to elucidate important concepts in design theory,
- Reflect upon and evaluate your and other students design and structure of models
lectures, readings and discussions, individually and in groups, covering a range of topics
Why you’re doing it
- to develop an understanding of possible research methods in design and media
- to develop strategies for planning and authoring your own research
- to develop an approach for analyzing the research of others
Learning outcomes:
In this course, students will learn
- conceptual models of research and their theoretical basis
(in linguistics, sociology, philosophy, etc.), - the advantages and drawbacks to different methods,
- to identify markers of quality in the implementation of different methods,
- develop greater facility in constructing a research plan, reasoning within, and arguing for method,
- build a theoretical foundation for research practice.
Grading
The total grade for the class will be based upon the following factors and weights:
| Participation | 10% |
| Reading Discussant | 20% |
| Research Reviews | 30% |
| Research Design | 40% |
Late Work
I do not accept late work except in rare instances where arrangements were made ahead of time.
Participation
Class attendance and participation is mandatory. Participation in discussion is imperative because it allows you to explore the content collaboratively. Participation in class also challenges you to continuously question, refine, and articulate your own ideas and interpretations of the theories, methods, and approaches we will cover over the course of the semester.
Each student has 2 no-questions-asked absences. More than 2 absences will result in the loss of a one (1) letter grade for the class.
Readings & Reading Discussants
Completing the readings each week is expected of every student. Completing the readings allows you to engage in class discussion in an informed and intelligent manner. Learning how to manage the readings – in fact, learning how to read research – is part of the of the skillset you are beginning to develop.
To help drive discussion and engagement with the readings, readings will be presented by small groups each week. Your responsibility will be to engaged more deeply with the readings that week, including the stretch readings, and to develop a set of questions, and to facilitate class discussion. We will establish groups and presentation schedule on the first day of class.
A handout with additional guidance will be provided to help you plan for and structure your presentation.
Generative AI
The use of GenAI to produce reading notes, presentation content, or any written assignments is not permitted. The reason for this is that this class is the beginning of your journey to becoming a scholar, a researcher. The vast majority of your professional research life will be spent reading and writing research articles in different forms. The use of GenAI will not aid you in that professional and intellectual development.
Working from LLM generated summaries or highlights of the readings means you are missing how those arguments come together and articulate the intellectual contribution. Using LLMs to build your own arguments, is not in fact building your own arguments.
Research Reviews
For each topic area of the course, your group will write a literature review synthesizing the readings covered in that topic along with 7-9 additional studies/publications that articulate the methods/approaches covered in the topic. These reviews are an opportunity to explore different research practices as they relate to multiple fields of knowledge comprising our interdisciplinary group.
A handout with additional guidance will be provided to help you plan and structure your reviews.
Research Project
For the semester Research Project, you will each develop an individual research proposal that is rooted in and relevant to your research agenda. You will need to articulate your research questions, select appropriate method(s) and defend them, and layout a plan for for how your study will be conducted, analyzed, and the contribution(s) you anticipate upon completion.
More details about the project will be shared as the semester progresses, and I am always happy to discuss individual approaches throughout the semester as we cover different methods that may be more or less relevant to individual research programs.
Course Schedule
What follows is an outline for the semester. As the semester progresses, we may adjust dates and materials.
| Week 1 | Introduction & Administrivia
Introductions, Readings, Discussants, Reviews, Projects. READ: Martin & Hanington, (2012) Introduction Grand, S., & Jonas, W. (Eds.). (2012). Mapping Design Research, Introduction & Chapter 1 Burrell and Morgan (1979) Social Paradigms and Organisational Analysis, Chapter 3
|
|
| Week 2 | Qualitative: Interviews – Ethnographic & Phenomenologic
Emerson (2011) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes (Ch 2) Dourish, P. (2007). Responsibilities and implications: further thoughts on ethnography and design Manen, M. Van. (2007) Phenomenology of practice Zeisel (2006) Focused Interviews (Ch 10) Robinson, R Building a Useful Research Tool Laurier, E. (2008). How Breakfast Happens in the Cafe. Merton, R. K., & Kendall, P. L. (1946). The Focused Interview. Sarah Pink (2015) Digital Ethnography: Principles & Practices |
|
| Week 3 | Qualitative: Case Studies & Historical Research
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research Zeisel (2006) Archives (Ch 13) Wyche, S., Sengers, P., & Grinter, R. E. (2006). Historical analysis: Using the past to design the future. Findeli, A. (1995). Design History and Design Studies : Methodological , Epistemological and Pedagogical Inquiry. Robert Yin (2003) Case Study Research: Design & Methods Atkinson, H., & Oppenheimer, M. R. (2016). Histories for Future Focused Thinking. DRS2016: Future-Focused Thinking, 7, 1–8. Blog post by Terry Love, Design Thinking and the insights Design History could have offered but hasn’t yet |
|
| Week 4 | Qualitative: Grounded Theory
Cresswell (2007) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, Ch 4, Ch 10 Charmaz, K (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory, Ch 7, 8 |
|
| Week 5 | Applied: Action Research & Practice-based Design Research
Kurt Lewin: groups, experiential learning and action research Archer, B (1995) The Nature of Research Koskinen, Zimmerman, Binder, Redström, Wensveen (2011) Design Research Through Practice Vaughn, L (2017) Practice Based Design Research Swann, C (2002) Action Research and the Practice of Design IDF’s Introduction to Action Research Vaughn (2019) Practice Based Design Research” |
|
| Week 6 | Applied: Participatory Research
Introduction to Codesign video Claire McCallum, Miglena Campbell, Kate Hackett and John Vines, Co-designed or evidence- based? Developing digital self-management interventions for long-term conditions Slattery et al. – 2020 – Research co-design in health a rapid overview of reviews Liz Sanders, Erika Braun, Sapna Singh Co-Designing with Communities Convivial Toolbox (book) Ryan Bruggeman – Int. Design and Media, Northeastern |
|
| Week 7 |
Applied: Material Cultural Studies
READ Material Culture in America (Introduction & a few random entries of choice) Appadurai, The Social Life of Things (Ch 1, 2) Redstrom & Wiltse, Changing Things (Ch 2, 3) Carlile, How Matter Matters Malafouris, How Things Shape the Mind Dr. Craig Roberston – CAMD, Communication Studies, Northeastern |
|
| Week 8 | Usability+Design: Think-aloud & Environmental Behavior
Uta Brandes, Sonja Stich, & Miriam Wender (2009) Design by Use: the Everyday Metamorphosis of Things Dr. Miso Kim |
|
| Week 9 | Usability+Design: Design Probes
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2014). Probes, toolkits and prototypes: three approaches to making in codesigning. Gaver, W. W., Dunne, A., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Design: Cultural probes. William W. Gaver, Andrew Boucher, Sarah Pennington, and Brendan Walker. 2004. Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. interactions 11, 5 Connor Graham, Mark Rouncefield, Martin Gibbs, Frank Vetere, and Keith Cheverst. 2007. How probes work. (OZCHI ’07). Dr. Anhton Tran – Human-Centered Computing, Georgia Tech (grad ’25) |
|
| Week 10 | Usability+Design: Sensors/Data/Traces
Gabrys (2019) How to Connect Sensors, How to Do Things with Sensors, 2019, pp. 29-52 (24 pages) Zeisel (2006) Observing Physical Traces (Ch 8) Usability Testing Research Center US-GSA Nielson Norman Group – Usability Testing Guide STRETCH van der Ploeg, Irma (1999) The illegal body: `Eurodac’ and the politics of biometric identification Getting Started with Sensors Additional handouts in Google Drive A nice quick video by NNG on Analytics vs Usability Testing Brett Halperin – Human-Centered Design & Engineering, University of Washington |
|
| Week 11 | Transition & Futures
Irwin, T., Kossoff, G., & Tonkinwise, C. (2015). Transition Design Provocation Fry, Tony (2008) Design Futuring, Ch 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 (if you have limited time, Ch 4 & 5 are the most significant) Quist, J. (2007). Backcasting for a sustainable future: the impact after 10 years, Chapter 2 Fry, T. (2007). Redirective Practice: an elaboration Akama, Y. (2017). ‘With great power comes great responsibility’ when we co-create futures. María Fernanda – Int. Design and Media, Northeastern |
Week 12 | Quantitative: Surveys & Statistics
Ponto, J (2015) Understanding and Evaluating Survey Research Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. L. (2007). Feminist Measures in Survey Research Fink, A. (2002). How to design survey studies (2nd ed.). SAGE. () Ashley Boone – Human-Centered Computing, Georgia Tech |
| Week 13 | Thanksgiving
No Class.
|
|
| Week 14 | Quantitative: Randomized Control Trial
READ Sommer, Robert & Sommer, Barbara. (May 2020). A Practical Guide to Behavioral Research: tools and technique, Chapter 6, Experimentation” |
|
| Week 15 | Poster Session
Held in Center for Design.
|
General Class Policies
Students whose work meets all criteria outlined for an assignment will receive a grade of C; students whose work meets all criteria and shows additional sophistication, thoughtfulness, research, and creativity will receive a grade of B; students whose work meets all criteria and goes well beyond the expected in terms of sophistication, thoughtfulness, research, and creativity will receive a grade of A; students whose work fails to meet to all criteria outlined for an assignment will receive a grade of D or F.
Two points will be deducted for all typographic, spelling, and grammatical errors in all writing assignments.
Late assignments will not be accepted. Presentations must be given on the designated day.
Lectures or in-class materials will not be posted. It is your responsibility to take notes and remain attentive in class.
If you have questions or concerns about this or any other course policies stated in this syllabus, class assignments, email correspondence, or announced in class, please speak with me in class, during office hours, or via email as soon as possible so that we can discuss your concerns.
Debate, Diversity, and Respect
In this class, we will present and discuss a diversity of perspectives. Although you may not always agree with others’ perspectives, you are required to be respectful of others’ values and beliefs. Repeated inappropriate or abusive comments and/or behavior will be cause for disciplinary action. If you feel that your perspectives are being ignored or slighted, or you in anyway feel uncomfortable in the classroom, please contact me immediately.
The Writing Center
The Northeastern University Writing Center – part of the Writing Program and Department of English in the College of Social Sciences and Humanities – is open to students, staff, faculty, and alumni of Northeastern and exists to help writers at any level, and from any academic discipline, in their written communication.
For information on making an appointment please visit their website.
Students with Disabilities
Students who have disabilities may wish to consult the Disability Resource Center for aid with resources and accommodation. Those who wish to receive academic services and accommodations must present the accommodation letters from the DRC to their instructors at the beginning of the semester so that accommodations can be arranged in a timely manner.
Language Support for Non-Native English Speakers
Global Student Success (GSS) supports the success of international students at Northeastern University. We offer services to students, faculty, and staff. For more information, visit their website.
Scholastic Dishonesty and Academic Misconduct
A commitment to the principles of academic integrity is essential to the mission of Northeastern University. The promotion of independent and original scholarship ensures that students derive the most from their educational experience and their pursuit of knowledge. Academic dishonesty violates the most fundamental values of an intellectual community and undermines the achievements of the entire University. The following is a broad overview, but not an all-encompassing definition, of what constitutes a violation of academic integrity:
- Cheating – using or attempting to use unauthorized materials, information, or study aids in any academic exercise
- Fabrication – falsification, misrepresentation, or invention of any information, data, or citation in an academic exercise
- Plagiarism – using as one’s own the words, ideas, data, code, or other original academic material of another without providing proper citation or attribution
- Unauthorized collaboration – instances when students submit individual academic works that are substantially similar to one another. While several students may have the same source material, any analysis, interpretation, or reporting of data required by an assignment must be each individual’s independent work unless the instructor has explicitly granted group work
- Participation in academically dishonest activities – any action taken by a student with the intention of gaining an unfair advantage over other students
- Facilitating academic dishonesty – intentionally or knowingly helping or contributing to the violation of any provision of the University Academic Integrity Policy
For further details, see the complete Academic Integrity Policy.