Theory as habitus for scholarly design research

Higher education in design, scholarly research and design research need to be continuously clarified in relation to evolving concepts such as knowledge, theory and practice. Being awarded a Ph.D. in design about 25 years ago, when scholarly research in design was in its infancy, and working with students in master and Ph.D. programmes in design for more than two decades, I share with the reader what I keep on learning in this educational milieu. It is my own perspective, based either on past experience or on the ongoing perception of local concerns. More broadly, a number of underlying general issues are reported to highlight the spread of design research practice encompassing aspects such as theory as a practice; the lack of fully consolidated design research frameworks where design paradigms may be embed- ded; and the need to nurture and strengthen the process of theory-making in design doctorates. What it is finally claimed is the advantage of theory as formae mentis, intended as a habitus for design research learners. While education in design often collectively addresses the professions of design, architecture and engineering, the following reflections will mainly address the manifold domains of industrial design, intended as a comprehensive term for either tangible or intangible design domains, intersecting product, graphic, communication, visual and interaction design fields.