Heidegger & Schön
Which came first, an understanding of the situation for design or the situation of design to be understood?
Schön
Heidegger
Mistakes are preconditions for reflection
Objects must be removed from context in order to reflect upon them
Technological equipment can be altered and reflected upon, but it is merely an objectification of practitioner’s own reflection
Knowledge-in-action comes from reflection-in-action; this is very scientific (trial and error)
Focuses on ‘present-at-hand’ situations


Reflective Practice - Dialogue with prior knowledge of phenomenon that doesn’t meet expectations.
Circumspection…  looking around
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
If we take Heidegger’s point, for designers to understand practice they need to first participate and see how things are done in context as a precursor to learning in practice
Know how of design is embedded in social practice and the use of equipment
Let things be by understanding how equipment works together and how equipment is used to tackle various projects
Understanding does not result from instruction, but from the use of the equipment
Breakdowns change our way of being in the world, not merely the way we reflect
Circumspection
Reflective Practice