Editorial. Training the Researchers of the Future Emerging Practices in Design Schools

Main Article Content

Ursula Bravo
Giovanna Danies
Trinidad Lazcano

Abstract










Although design has historically been closely linked to project-based practice and experimentation, in recent decades it has consolidated as an academic field with its own methodologies and conceptual frameworks. However, much of the knowledge generated by undergraduate students remains invisible, confined to institutional archives and excluded from scientific dissemination circuits. In response to this situation, the special issue “Educating the Researchers of the Future” seeks to make visible research projects developed in design schools across different countries, highlighting their potential to generate relevant and situated knowledge. The articles gathered in this issue address topics such as biodesign, sustainability, pedagogical methodologies, and collaborative creativity, demonstrating that undergraduate research constitutes a key space for strengthening disciplinary development and building a collective memory for the design field. Likewise, the editorial underscores the need to strengthen methodological standards, promote institutional support structures, and integrate research more systematically into design school curricula. Educating designers capable of conducting research, critically reflecting, and producing knowledge thus emerges as a fundamental condition for addressing complex social, environmental, and technological challenges.






 

 






 
Keywords:
design research, design education, undegraduate research, design research education, teaching research

How to Cite

Bravo, U., Danies, G., & Lazcano, T. (2026). Editorial. Training the Researchers of the Future: Emerging Practices in Design Schools. Base Diseño E Innovación, 10(12), 2-5. https://doi.org/10.52611/bdi.num12.2025.1849

References

Archer, B. (1995). The nature of research. Co-Design Journal, 2(11), 6–13.

Cross, N. (1999). Design research: A disciplined conversation. Design Issues, 15(2), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511837

Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793601750357196

Findeli, A. (2001). Rethinking design education for the 21st century: Theoretical, methodological, and ethical discussion. Design Issues, 17(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1162/07479360152103796

Frankel, L., & Racine, M. (2010). The complex field of research: For design, through design, and about design. In D. Durling, R. Bousbaci, L. Chen, P. Gauthier, T. Poldma, S. Roworth-Stokes, & E. Stolterman (Eds.), Design and complexity – DRS International Conference 2010 (pp. 1–10). Design Research Society. https://dl.designresearchsociety.org/drs-conference-papers/drs2010/researchpapers/43

Frayling, C. (1994). Research in art and design. Royal College of Art Research Papers, 1(1), 1–5. https://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/id/eprint/384

Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT Press.

Rodgers, P., & Yee, J. (2023). Design research for a complex world: A companion to design research. Bloomsbury.

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.