Colloquium 5.2: CAA 2019 Conference New York

Presentations and discussion in Research and Scholarship in Communication Design at the 107th Annual CAA Conference 2019 in NYC.

Hosted by CAA Affiliated Society, Design Incubation.

Research in Communication Design. Presentation of unique, significant creative work, design education, practice of design, case studies, contemporary practice, new technologies, methods, and design research. A moderated discussion will follow the series of presentations.

Design Incubation Colloquium 5.2: CAA 2019 New York City
Thursday, February 14, 2019 

10:30am–12:00pm
New York Hilton Midtown, Second Floor Regent

Abstract submission deadline: August 6, 2018.
Submit abstracts online at Colloquium Abstract Submissions.

The colloquium session is open to all conference attendees.

Co-Moderators

Liz DeLuna
Associate Professor 
Graphic Design
St John’s University

Robin Landa
Distinguished Professor
Michael Graves College 
Kean University

Presentations

10 Case Studies in Eco-Activist Design
Kelly Salchow MacArthur
Associate Professor
Michigan State University

Art, Interaction and Narrative in Virtual Reality
Slavica Ceperkovic
Professor
Seneca College

Form, Focus and Impact: Pedagogy of a 21St-Century Design Portfolio
Peter Lusch
Professor of Practice
Lehigh University, Bethlehem PA

Pitch & Roll: Exploring Low-Risk Entrepreneurship for Student Designers
Jennifer Kowalski
Professor of Instruction
Graphic Arts & Interactive Design
Temple University Tyler School of Art

Questioning the Canon: Discussing Diversity and Inclusion in the Classroom
Sherry Freyermuth
Assistant Professor
Lamar University

Design Activism & Impact: How Can Principles of Social Impact Assessment Improve Outcomes of Socially Conscious Design Efforts in Graphic Design Curriculum?
Cat Normoyle
Assistant Professor
East Carolina University

Cultural Competence for Designers
Colette Gaiter
Professor
University of Delaware

Exploring Narrative Inquiry as a Design Research Method
Anne Berry
Assistant Professor
Cleveland State University

State of Flux
Natacha Poggio
Assistant Professor
University of Houston Downtown

Design Incubation Fellowship 2019

January 10-12, 2019. New York City. A three-day workshop facilitating academic writing and publishing for designers.

The 2019 Design Incubation Fellowship Workshop will be presented by Maggie Taft, Managing Editor of the journal Design and Culture. Events include sessions with Elizabeth Guffey, Professor of Art and Design at SUNY Purchase and author of Posters: A Global History and Retro: The Culture of Revival; Louise Baird-Smith, Commissioning Editor – Design and Photography Bloomsbury Visual Arts; Robin Landa, Distinguished Professor, Kean University; and Brian James, Assistant Professor St. John’s University and as well as guest appearances by a number of authors and publishers. Aaris Sherin is director of the Design Incubation Fellowship program.

2019 Design Incubation Fellowship

January 10 –12, 2019
St. John’s University’s Manhattan campus

Schedule

Day 1—Thursday, January 10th

Introductions with Hosts
9:30am–10:00am

Dan Wong, Co-founder of Design Incubation and Liz DeLuna, Co-chair Design Incubation.

What, Why and How We Write
10am–12:30am
Lunch break
12:30pm–1:30pm
Writing for Journals: Workshop Session
1:30pm–5:30pm

Maggie Taft
Reviews Editor and former Managing Editor
Design and Culture

Day 2—Friday, January 11th

Book Publishing with Bloomsbury Publishing
9:15am–10:00am 

Louise Baird-Smith
Commissioning Editor – Design and Photography Bloomsbury Visual Arts

Break Out Session / Working Groups
10:00am–12:30pm

Facilitated by Maggie Taft, Robin Landa, and Elizabeth Guffey. Participants will work on drafts of their writing in small groups.

Lunch break
12:30pm–1:30pm
Reviews Writing
1:30pm –2:30pm

Brian James
Assistant Professor
St. John’s University

Break Out Session / Working Groups
2:30pm –5:30pm 

Facilitated by Maggie Taft, Robin Landa, and Elizabeth Guffey

Day 3—Saturday January 12th

Break Out Session / Working Groups
9:00am–12:30pm 

Facilitated by Maggie Taft, Robin Landa and Elizabeth Guffey.

Lunch break
12:30pm–1:30pm
Presentations
1:30pm–2:30pm

Robin Landa
Distinguished Professor
Kean University
Author of over twenty books including Nimble: Creative Thinking in the Digital Age.

Elizabeth Guffey
Professor State University of New York
(SUNY) at Purchase
Author of Posters: A Global Perspective, and Retro: The Culture of Revival and founding editor of Design and Culture.

Sharing Session / Wrap Up
3:00pm–5:00pm
Group Dinner (Optional)
6:00pm–8:00pm

Please note: This schedule is tentative and is subject to change.

2019 Design Incubation Fellows

Noopur Agarwal
Assistant Professor
The University of San Francisco

Leon Butler
Lecturer
Dublin Institute of Technology

Anneke Coppoolse
Assistant Professor
The Hong Kong Polytechnic University

Jeanne Criscola
Assistant Professor
Central Connecticut State University

Juan Carlos Rodriguez Rivera
Visiting Faculty
California College of the Arts

Rezan Gassas
Assistant Professor
Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University

Dave Gottwald
Assistant Professor
University of Idaho

Lisa Hammershaimb
Curriculum Designer, Full Time Instructor
Independence University

Christine Hauck
Design Director and Independent Arts Educator

Szilvia Kadas
Assistant Professor
SUNY Cortland

Amy Papaelias
Associate Professor
SUNY New Paltz

Kathy Mueller
Assistant Professor 
Temple University 

Kelly Murdoch-Kitt
Assistant Professor
University of Michigan

Holly Tienken
Assistant Professor
Kutztown University

Greg Turner-Rahman
Associate Professor
University of Idaho

Local Lunch and Coffee Spots

Starbucks
13-25 Astor Pl, New York, NY 10003

Pret A Manger
1 Astor Pl, New York, NY 10003

Le Petite Parisien – Sandwiches / Baguettes
32 E 7th St
New York, NY 10003

Mamoun’s Falafel – Middle Eastern
30 St Marks Pl
New York, NY 10003

V-Spot – Vegan / with Gluten Free options
12 Saint Marks Pl
New York, NY 10003

Bluestone Lane (coffee shop)
51 Astor Pl, New York, NY 10003
(just downstairs in the same building as SJU)

Chopt Creative Salad Co.
51 Astor Pl, New York, NY 10003
(just downstairs in the same building as SJU)

Many tasty Ramen and Sushi places on St. Marks between 2nd and 3rd Ave.

Colloquium 5.3: Merrimack College, Call for Submissions

Call for design presentation abstracts: Deadline Monday, December 31, 2018.

Merrimack College, the Department of Visual and Performing Arts, and Nancy Wynn will be hosting a Design Incubation Colloquium.

Abstract submission: deadline Monday, December 31, 2018.

Design Incubation Colloquium 5.3: Merrimack College will be held on Saturday, March 30, 2019, 10:00am-6:00pm. All are welcome to attend.

Featured Presentation by Elizabeth Resnick.

We invite designers—practitioners and educators—to submit abstracts of design research. Presentations format is Pecha Kucha.

For more details, see the colloquia details and description. Abstracts can be submitted online for peer review.

Faculty Census 2018: Data on Design Professionals in Academia

Census data from a survey on the professional experiences of design faculty in U.S. colleges and universities.

The Design Incubation Faculty Census

Aaris Sherin, Dan Wong, Josh Korenblat, Aaron Ganci

The Faculty Census gathers information about trends affecting design faculty. Participants included full and part-time faculty at U.S. colleges and universities. All data contributions are anonymous and used exclusively for research purposes.

The following graphics and charts are based on data gathered in the first faculty census. They were developed to help visualize and evaluate different types and patterns of activities engaged in by faculty and administrators and to investigate conditions of their employment. We aim to reveal factors associated with academia which might be used for individual or institutional decision-making. This includes but is not limited to college and university budget planning, legislative agendas, anticipating shifts in student body makeup, etc. Our ultimate goal is to help faculty to understand the landscape of higher education within their discipline and to use data to proactively plan for and/or to react to shifts in thinking about the role of a design educator within the academy.

The Carnegie Classification®

Many of the graphics developed for the 2018 Faculty Census use the Carnegie Classification® as a system for comparison. The Carnegie Classification® has been the leading framework for recognizing and describing institutional diversity in U.S. higher education for the past four and a half decades. The framework is widely used in the study of higher education, both as a way to represent and control for institutional differences, and also in the design of research studies to ensure adequate representation of sampled institutions, students, or faculty. Looking up your own institution can help you understand which classification applies to you personally and may help inform your understanding of the visualizations from the Faculty Census.

Collaboration

We invite faculty, researchers and interested parties to engage with the data collected as part of the Faculty Census 2018 and to use the information gathered here to support their own work and their engagement with institutions in higher education. We encourage and welcome collaboration and are happy to discuss publishing findings and or additional visualizations using this data. If you have questions or would like more information please contact info@designincubation.com

Thank you to all who gave us meaningful feedback during the development of this survey including Michael Gibson, Amy Fidler, Kelly Murdock-Kitt, Carma Gorman, Alex Girard, AIGA DEC, UCDA.

Thank you to all who generously shared their professional experiences in academia.

Note: Please view on tablet or desktop for optimal visualizations. Tabbed navigation across the top reveals more census results.

Announcement: Educators Communication Design Awards 2018

Design Incubation, the esteemed awards jury, and Bloomsbury Publishing is pleased to announce the recipients of the 2018 Design Incubation Educators Awards in Communication Design. Thank you to all who entered the competition and those who participated in recognizing the efforts of academics in design research, teaching, and service. Jury chair, María Rogal, writes, “The common thread among these award winners is their ability to profoundly impact our world through design. They each inspire optimism and hope, and reinforce the potential of our discipline.”

CATEGORY: SCHOLARSHIP CREATIVE WORK

Works in Process

Scholarship: Creative Work Award Winner

George Garrastegui
Assistant Professor
Communication Design
New York City College of Technology, CUNY

What Does Democratic Design Look Like? Establishing the Center for Design in the Public Interest at the University of California, Davis

Scholarship: Creative Work Award Runner Up

Susan Verba
Professor
University of California, Davis

CATEGORY: SCHOLARSHIP PUBLISHED RESEARCH

Unawarded

CATEGORY: TEACHING

Lowering Barriers to Access at the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences

Teaching Award Winner

Helen Armstrong
Associate Professor
North Carolina State University

CATEGORY: SERVICE

LEAP Dialogues: The Educators Guide

Service Award Winner

Mariana Amatullo
Associate Professor
Parsons School of Design, The New School

Andrew Shea
Assistant Professor
Parsons School of Design, The New School

Jennifer May
Director, Designmatters
ArtCenter College of Design

Jurors

Steven McCarthy 
Professor of Graphic Design
University of Minnesota in Minneapolis/St. Paul

Jorge Meza Aguilar 
Professor of Strategic Design and Provost for Outreach and Collaboration
Universidad Iberoamericana

Ruki Ravikumar  
Director of Education
Cooper Hewitt, Smithsonian Design Museum

Maria Rogal (Chair)
Professor of Design
University of Florida

Wendy Siuyi Wong 
Professor of Design and Graduate Program Director
York University

 

Writing an Academic Research Abstract: For Communication Design Scholars

The following document is a practical quickstart guide and a rationale and analysis for developing an academic research abstract in the field of communication design.

Writing abstracts about research, teaching practices, creative work, etc. in Communication/Graphic Design can be challenging because there are no clear accepted or uniform protocols for how these documents must be crafted. Standards for acceptable modes of investigation, methodologies, subjects and preferred writing styles are still developing, especially when compared to the norms of traditional research disciplines. What we describe here are the criteria for judging the quality of abstracts that we ask peer reviewers of Design Incubation Colloquium to use. However, you may also find this information helpful as you draft abstracts to submit to other programs and publications.

The following document is a practical quickstart guide followed by a rationale and analysis for developing an effective academic research abstract in the field of communication design. (PDF version here.)

Quick Start Guide for Writing Abstracts

Aaris Sherin, Dan Wong, Jessica Barness

  1. Start by taking notes based on your responses to the questions outlined below.
    1. It is often easiest to start with your own motivation. Why did you think this research was interesting or has a unique perspective? This is the engaging introduction and the way to hook the reader into your own thoughts and perspectives.
    2. Problem Statement/Hypothesis/thesis. What exactly was the thing being investigated in this particular paper, conference proceeding etc.? Why is your topic particularly important? Who will benefit from this work? What makes this work unique? For example: its historical placement, contemporary challenges being solved, unique methodology for investigation or applying existing metrics or methodologies in new ways.
    3. What was your approach / methodology? For example: what were you researching or investigating? What did you do and how did you do it? Was a theoretical, exploratory framework being used? Or was an established scientific method used? If you are working on an experimental or unusual type of investigation be sure to indicate this to your readers.
    4. What were the outcomes of your investigation, area of inquiry or of your project? What do you want the reader/viewer/participant to know about what you found out? What were the most important things the reader/view/participant should take away from the project? For example: what was the outcome of your client project, your student’s participation in the exercise or course etc.? And, what makes this valuable to other scholars/researchers?
    5. Conclusion. What is your conclusion after undertaking this work and what is the last thing you want your reader/viewer/participant to think about in relation to the project or area of investigation? Your conclusion might be a summation of the outcome (either positive or negative), an indication that further investigation or more in depth work is needed in the area by you or other researchers.
  2. Once you have made notes on the points above organize your thoughts into a linear outline using bullet points.
  3. Craft a more formal narrative using complete sentences and paragraphs. In the first paragraph, capture reader attention and introduce the topic. In the middle paragraph(s), provide context for the project, including relevant theory, literature, methods, etc., including the value of the project. The final paragraph should contain the conclusion.
  4. Make sure to include a title, keywords, your thesis statement, approach/methodologies, outcomes, and a strong conclusion. In some cases it may be appropriate or necessary to refer to other researchers or educators work to show precedence and let your audience know you have a broad and deep understanding of your topic.
  5. Once complete, reverse the process. Re-read your draft and make an outline/notes on the narrative of your abstract based only on what is written.
  6. Then compare this new outline to your original notes and ask the following questions: Is any necessary information or relevant points missing and if so should you add anything into the draft? Critically analyze your writing. Would you follow the thesis of the abstract and understand the significance of the research/pedagogy conducted if you weren’t involved in the project? If not, consider revising for clarity.
  7. Does your draft include enough information about the methodology used and a strong conclusion? If not add these into your draft while still maintaining the approved word count of the organization you are applying to.
  8. Once you are happy, put your draft aside for a day (if possible) and then read your abstract aloud and/or have a computer program (screen reader) read it.
  9. Before you submit your draft double check spelling and grammar. Tools like Grammarly are very useful if these skills don’t come naturally.
  10. Ask at least one academically seasoned colleague—ideally one who has a lot of practice writing and reading and evaluating abstracts—to read yours. Then ask them to paraphrase for you what your thesis/claim was, and what your conclusion/contribution was. If they aren’t sure or answer incorrectly, that’s your clue that you need to revise.
  11. You’re done! Submit your abstract for peer review before the deadline.
  12. Every writer/researcher/designer benefits from feedback. Your abstract may be returned with comments and suggestions. Take this feedback the same way you would feedback on any design project. The reviewer might not be correct in what is wrong with your abstract or even with how to fix particular problems but if a reviewer flags a problem in a particular area it is worth going back and reviewing the writing for clarity of purpose and intent and then revising accordingly.

The Rationale and Analysis of AN Academic Abstract

Dan Wong, Aaris Sherin, Carma Gorman, Jessica Barness

An abstract is a synopsis or summary of

  • An article or book
  • A presentation or speech
  • A workshop or event
What is the Purpose of an Abstract?
  1. An abstract succinctly articulates an original contribution to the current state of knowledge in a specified field by explaining how the work overturns, challenges, inflects, advances, or confirms that field’s current wisdom on that subject.
  2. An abstract enables researchers who are conducting literature searches/reviews to gauge whether or not a published paper/presentation/session/book is relevant to their own research, and whether it makes a sufficiently significant contribution to merit reading in its entirety.
  3. An abstract allows conference organizers, peer reviewers, and editors to efficiently select from a large pool of submissions the research projects that provide the best thematic “fit” for their session/grant/book/journal and those which advance the most compelling claims. Abstracts are also efficient for authors because they do not need to write the full paper until/unless it has been accepted for presentation or publication. Conferences and journals sometimes use the term proposal instead of abstract but they are usually describing a similar piece of writing.
Elements of an Abstract

(Elements described in full in Anatomy of an Abstract, below.)

  1. Title
  2. Keywords
  3. Motivation/Problem and/or Opportuntiy
  4. Thesis
  5. Approach/Methodology
  6. Results/Outcomes/Analysis
  7. Conclusion
An Abstract is:
  • Is a synopsis of ideas specific to an article, presentation, workshop or event etc.
  • Requires a one-sentence thesis or claim that ideally is easy for even non-specialists to identify and understand.
  • Contains a clear, concise statement explaining the original contribution that the work makes to a specific field or discipline.
  • Includes facts which are clearly stated directly.
  • Includes findings, outcomes, and conclusions.
An Abstract is not:
  • Is not a teaser. It is not suggestive, hidden, or allusory, nor is it text written in an overly opaque or verbose narrative.
  • Is not primarily for marketing the work/practice/project/research.
  • Is not difficult to read, follow, or understand. Researchers/scholars often read the abstracts of papers to determine the relevance to their own work, and they may pull the details from the abstract, or reference it, without reading the entire paper. Peer reviewers use the abstract for a base-line evaluation of the work.
  • Is not a document that has references or citations.
Anatomy of an Abstract
Title
  • “Good research paper titles (typically 10–12 words long) use descriptive terms and phrases that accurately highlight the core content of the paper.” (editage.com)
  • Like the abstract itself, the title should not be a teaser. Instead it should state the facts plainly and directly.
  • The goal is to convey information and relevance, therefore overly casual titles are generally not appropriate in an academic setting. But intriguing titles may help draw an audience to your presentation if your abstract is for a conference presentation. Journals may shy away from funny/clever or casual titles and these may be more appropriate for industry/marketing-articles/conferences/events.
  • The title should be compelling, so as to encourage the reader to read further.
  • The title should contain as many intuitive or “natural-language” terms and phrases as possible, to increase the odds that search engines and indexes will facilitate discovery of your paper based upon natural-language searches. (See also keywords, below.)
Keywords
  • Keywords aid researchers in their search for papers and other text on a specific topic. Often, authors are required to select all or most of their keywords from a pre-existing authority list. Keywords can be more formal or technical than general usage words, which is why it’s important to make sure that natural-language terms are used in the title (see above).
  • Research databases index articles and books based on the abstract title, the words within an abstract, and the keywords assigned to it.
  • In most cases, keywords should not be brand names or proper nouns. They should be words selected from an appropriate taxonomic structure or topic list and should include general topics and specific topics.
  • It is appropriate to designate multiple keywords which is often limited in number by the publication/venue. Keywords are often phrases containing multiple words.
  • When listed, keywords should be arranged alphabetically.
Motivation/Context/Problem Statement (one sentence)
  • The abstract is often introduced with the motivation, background context, or problem, that frames the circumstances in which the research and article will be discussed.
  • Examples: “Most historians of design have argued that a postwar shift in the size and nature of corporations is the reason why the field of visual identity design flourished in the USA after World War II, but not before.”
  • “Although the US printing industries had shifted en masse to using the subtractive CMY(K) primaries by the mid-1940s, by which point the color photography, color film, and even the fledgling television industry had already adopted the additive RGB primaries, many of the faculty teaching art-and-design foundations courses continue to teach subtractive color mixing using the centuries-outdated RYB color wheel.”
Thesis (one sentence)
    • A strong thesis is key to a successful abstract, and that which makes it worthy of acceptance for publishing. Peer reviewers and/or an editor will ask, is the thesis statement clear and unique/original? Is it grounded within an established discipline or area of study?
    • A thesis is an original argument made about a specific topic which you claim to have knowledge of or expertise in because of the research you conducted prior to presenting or writing about the topic.
    • No topic is completely new. It is expected that you frame your original contribution as a response to the current state of knowledge in the field. To convincingly claim that your work is an original contribution to the field, you must first explain what the common wisdom currently is, which usually involves acknowledging the most influential and widely accepted claims that previous scholars have made. Establishing that frame of reference allows you to demonstrate how your own work builds upon and also challenges or inflects that previous work/understanding. (See references and citations.)
    • A helpful resources for use in drafting a thesis is the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Center for Writing Studies who publishes useful information on how to craft a thesis.
Approach/Methodology (one to two sentences):
  • The approach/methodology is the meat and potatoes “what I did, the why and how” section of the work.
  • Descriptions of this aspect of a project may be repeated across papers/abstracts. (Since stringent protocols don’t exist in our field, the methodology itself could be included in the thesis if the approach is innovative.)
  • The methodology should focus on the problem statement/hypothesis and how the author went about investigating their area of research. It may include information about what makes this approach unique or how existing methodologies are being used to investigate a new subject area.
Results/Outcomes (one sentence):
  • This section is only applicable to abstracts if you are working on a project or research with clear outcomes. You would begin by telling your reader what the results were of the project or investigation.
  • This section may include raw results and/or artifacts that come from the execution of the methodology or approach. For example: you may describe a finished design and how and where it was used.
  • It is also appropriate to present the initial analysis of the results and commentary on the methodology and/or the final outcomes.
  • Note about outcomes: Often, outcomes reveal unexpected results which may be byproducts found during the methodology/execution of the research. Typically research would be restructured and replicated to verify the outcomes. But due to funding or schedules, initial surprising outcomes might be presented. This is completely acceptable as long as the “results/conclusions” are not overstated.
Conclusion (one to two sentences):
  • The conclusion explains the significance of the work or project for the field, calling attention to generalizable knowledge or principles that others might be able to use successfully in similar situations.
  • The conclusion not only reiterates the thesis/claim, but also explains how and why the thesis/claim might be useful to others in the field.
  • It may also suggest ideas for further on what research might follow this work and why the work is worthy of presenting to an audience and/or to readers.
References and Citations:

References and citations recognize work that has already been done in the field, and is similar in topic, concept, and content. Though not included in the abstract, references and citations are expected and/or required in a manuscript of a full conference paper, journal article, book proposal or manuscript.

This exclusion is largely because abstracts should be concise, and referencing and citing other’s work simply takes up too much space. (The Writing Center at UNC Chapel Hill)

Notes about originality and duplication in multiple publications/venues.

In the purest form of academic publishing, research is published once, in one place. Then any reference to that idea/paper will be cited in subsequent publications both by the same author and by other researchers. However, it is acceptable to write multiple papers on a single research effort/investigation. It’s basically pulling apart the research, and focusing on all the possible elements/ideas/theses/results that were investigated or discovered. This reuse of results from one research effort is done in many disciplines.

In our field, researchers often get asked to present the same content or paper at multiple venues. For example, someone might see a presentation you made at a conference and then ask you to come and make the same presentation at their institution or to another group whom may benefit from the knowledge you are sharing.

How often it is acceptable to repeat conference presentations focused on the same project or content, and in what context it is appropriate to do so, is still being negotiated. How you choose to navigate this issue may depend on criteria indicated by the Promotions and Tenure committee at your institution.

In the very least, you may be asked to change the title of your presentation when you present the same content at a different venue. At some institutions it may be frowned upon to present the same material at multiple venues.

Academic and trade journals usually have rigorous specifications about when and where materials from your writing can be republished and in what form(s) are acceptable. In these instances we suggest you check with the editor for more information about each publishers criteria and also find out who holds copyright to the work and/or the ideas after the work is published.

Appendix/References/Bibliography

The structure may be adjusted depending on context, discipline and the requirements of particular organizations or publishers.

Some of the standard academic writing style formats are:

Modern Language Association (https://style.mla.org/formatting-papers/)

Chicago Style (https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html)

American Psychological Association (http://www.apastyle.org/)

Academic Sources

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
(https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/abstracts/)

University of Illinios at Urbana Champaign (writing resources: writer resources)
(http://www.cws.illinois.edu/workshop/writers/tips/thesis/)

USC Libraries: Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: 3. The Abstract
(http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/abstract)

Articles

How to write an effective title and abstract and choose appropriate keywords
(https://www.editage.com/insights/how-to-write-an-effective-title-and-abstract-and-choose-appropriate-keywords)

3 Basic tips on writing a good research paper title
(https://www.editage.com/insights/3-basic-tips-on-writing-a-good-research-paper-title)

Springer Title, Abstract and Keywords
(https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/authorandreviewertutorials/writing-a-journal-manuscript/title-abstract-and-keywords/10285522)

How to Write an Abstract
(https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/essays/abstract.html)

Books

A Manual For Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations
(https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo27847540.html)

Stylish Academic Writing
(http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674064485)

Guide to Publishing in Psychology Journals
(https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/guide-to-publishing-in-psychology-journals/DD1F7119040A76CE996FC683C23E2F25#)

The Elements of Style Fourth Edition
(https://www.pearson.com/us/higher-education/program/Strunk-Elements-of-Style-The-4th-Edition/PGM258483.html)

Portfolio Success: Strategies for Professional Development

Saturday, September 22, 2018. 2pm–5pm. Type Directors Club, 347 W 36th St., #603, New York, NY 10018

Type Directors ClubJoin industry professionals and design educators for a panel discussion on creating effective design portfolios. We will explore the role portfolios play in a successful design career now and in the future and will ask, are traditional portfolios still relevant? If so, what does a successful portfolio look like and what kind of projects should be included? Panelist will discuss what clients and employers want to see and which abilities industry leaders consider most important? You are invited to join the discussion as we look at new ways of teaching and explore emerging trends in effective portfolio development.

Panelists

Christina Black 
Vice President, Creative Director
Showtime Networks Inc.

Michael McCaughley
Lead Designer at OCD

Holly Tienken
Assistant Professor
Communication Design
Kutztown University of Pennsylvania

Peter Lusch
Assistant Professor
Dept of Art, Architecture & Design
Lehigh University

Moderators

Liz DeLuna 
Associate Professor 
St. John’s University

Janet Esquirol
Assistant Professor 
Borough of Manhattan Community College, CUNY

(Typography credit: Escalator from XYZ.)

The Design Incubation Residency at Haddon Avenue Writing Institute

Rolling acceptances until Sept 30, 2018. Only 12 seats are available for this event.

Design Incubation is proud to be able to partner with the Haddon Avenue Writing Institute to offer a design-writing residency. This 2-3 day residency allows researchers and scholars time to work on existing writing projects or to start a new writing project. The residency is open to design faculty and to those working in related fields. It offers participants concentrated time to work on writing projects and the opportunity to take advantage of one-on-one consultations with event facilitators Maggie Taft and Aaris Sherin. Using the online registration system (see below), applicants should submit a CV and a 200-500-word synopsis of the project they intend to work on. The cost is $100 for 2 days and $150 for 3 days. Participants may choose to attend either 2 or 3 days. A total of 12 seats are available for this event.

Applications will be considered immediately upon submission and they can be submitted through September 30th, 2018. Official letters of acceptance will be provided to allow attendees to request funding from their institutions.

Location:

Haddon Avenue Writing Institute
2009 W. Haddon Ave, Chicago Illinois

Please note: Housing is not included as part of this residency. Participants are encouraged to stay in Ukrainian Village or a nearby neighborhood though if you choose to stay at a hotel you may have to stay in downtown Chicago as options in the immediate area are limited to Airbnb’s.

REsidents:

Meaghan Barry
Assistant Professor of Graphic Design
Oakland University

Anne Berry
Assistant Professor of Graphic Design
Cleveland State University

Lilian Crum
Assistant Professor of Graphic Design
Lawrence Technological University

Sherry Freyermuth
Assistant Professor
Lamar University

Kimberly Hopkins
Assistant Professor
Towson University

Jessica Jacobs
Assistant Professor
Business & Entrepreneurship
Columbia College Chicago

Pouya Jahanshahi
Assistant Professor of Graphic Design
Oklahoma State University

Sarah Rutherford
Assistant Professor of Graphic Design
Cleveland State University

Ruth Schmidt
Visiting Industry Professor
Institute of Design (IIT)

Dimitry Tetin
Assistant Professor
State University of New York, New Paltz

Jennifer Vokoun
Associate Professor of Graphic Design
Director of the Food Design Institute
Walsh University

Penina Acayo Laker
Assistant Professor, Communication Design
Sam Fox School of Design and Visual Arts
Washington University in St. Louis

 

Dates:

October 26-28, 2018

The Haddon Avenue Design Writing Residency Schedule:

Friday, October 26th: 10-5

Facilitators: Maggie Taft and Aaris Sherin

10-12:30: Individual writing session

12:30-1:30: Lunch

1:30-5:00: Individual writing session

 

Saturday, October 27th: 9-5, 6-8 (optional reception)

Facilitator: Maggie Taft

9-9:30: Welcome; Goal setting

9:30-12:30: Individual writing session

12:30-1:30: Lunch (bring your own or in the neighborhood)

1:30-2:00: Techniques for overcoming writer’s block, the blinking cursor, and other writing obstacles

2:00-5:00: Individual writing session

5:00-6:00: Break

6:00-8:00: Reception (optional)

 

Sunday, October 28th: 9-4:30

Facilitators: Maggie Taft and Aaris Sherin

9-12: Individual writing session and optional one-on-one strategy sessions by appointment

12-1: Lunch (bring your own or in the neighborhood)

1-3:30: Individual writing session and optional one-on-one strategy sessions by appointment

3:30-4:30: Group wrap up

DePaul Colloquium After Party

Attendees and presenters of the Design Incubation Colloquium 5.1: DePaul University, and the Design Incubation Writing Residents will come together at the Haddon Avenue Writing Institute for a reception and tour of the facilities from 6-8pm. Drinks and refreshments will be provided.

October 27th, 2018
6-8pm
Haddon Avenue Writing Institute
2009 W. Haddon Ave, Chicago Illinois

Contact information:

Questions can be sent to Aaris Sherin, Director of Fellowships at Design Incubation

The Fellowship Program at Design Incubation

Call for Participation: 3-day academic design research and writing workshop. Application deadline, September 1, 2018

Application deadline: Sept 1, 2018
Fellowship dates: January 10-12, 2019
Location: St. John’s University, Manhattan Campus, 51 Astor Place, New York, NY 10003

Target Audience: Design academics in one or more of the following areas: graphic design, information design, branding, marketing, advertising, typography, web, interaction, film and video, animation, illustration, game design. Full-time tenure track or tenured faculty are given preference but any academic may apply. Applicants who are tenure track or tenured faculty are given first priority but other faculty or independent researchers may apply.

Format: All Fellows accepted into the program participate in the Fellowship Workshop as part of the overall experience. The Fellowship workshops offers participants the opportunity to share and develop ideas for research and individual writing projects while receiving constructive feedback from faculty mentors and peers in their field.

Fellows arrive with a draft of their writing and work on this specific project throughout the various sessions of the Fellowship Workshop. Each meeting includes a number of short informational sessions and a session devoted to analyzing and editing written work. The remainder of the 3-day workshop will be focused on activities which allow participants to share their projects with peers and receive structured feedback. Between sessions, Fellows will have time to execute revisions, review others participants work, and engage in discussions. Initiation of and work on collaborative projects is encouraged.

For more further details visit:
The Fellowship Program at Design Incubation

To apply visit the application details and online form:
Fellowship Program format and online application process

For Frequently Asked Questions visit the FAQ page:
Fellowship Program frequently asked questions

Colloquium 5.1: DePaul University, Call for Submissions

DePaul University, the School of Design Talks, and Heather Quinn will be hosting a Design Incubation Colloquium. Abstract submission deadline Saturday, August 25, 2018.

DePaul University, the School of Design Talks, and Heather Quinn will be hosting a Design Incubation Colloquium on Saturday, October 27, 2018, 10:30am-4:30pm. All are welcome to attend. Details and agenda can be found on the Colloquium 5.1: DePaul University.

We are accepting abstract submissions for presentations. Abstract submission Saturday, August 25, 2018.

We invite designers—practitioners and educators—to submit abstracts of design research. Presentations format is Pecha Kucha.

For more details, see the colloquia details and description. Abstracts can be submitted online for peer review.