Knowledge Base Repository
In addition to research papers, the Design Society is developing several valuable resources for those interested in the study of design. These include a repository of PhD theses, a library of case studies and transcripts of design activities, and an archive of our newsletters. Please note that these resources are accessible exclusively to Design Society members.
JIGSAW OR SPIRAL? INDUSTRIAL/PRODUCT DESIGN COURSES COMPARED
Hua DONG (1); Abdusselam Selami CIFTER (1); Chang GE (2); Yangshuo ZHENG (3); Yongmeng WU (4); Weining NING (1)
Type:
Year:
2025
Editor:
Yong Se Kim; Yutaka Nomaguchi; Cees de Bont; Jianxi Luo; Xiaofang Yuan; Linna Hu; Meng Wang
Author:
Hua DONG (1); Abdusselam Selami CIFTER (1); Chang GE (2); Yangshuo ZHENG (3); Yongmeng WU (4); Weining NING (1)
Series:
Other endorsed
Institution:
1: Brunel University of London, United Kingdom; 2: Xi'an University of Technology, China; 3: Wuhan University of Technology, China; 4: Southwest Jiaotong University, China
Page(s):
210-217
Abstract:
Industrial and Product Design programmes vary widely across national contexts, shaped by different educational traditions and institutional frameworks. However opportunities for systematic comparison remain limited, making it difficult to understand how students’ learning experiences are structured internationally. This paper compares four undergraduate programmes from China, Türkiye, and the UK using a common course overview template. Two illustrative models are proposed: the Jigsaw and the Spiral. The jigsaw model, common in China, represents a stepwise acquisition of discrete skills in the early years, with integration only in later stages. The spiral model, typical in the UK, introduces core skills early on and develops them iteratively in subsequent years. Programmes in Türkiye demonstrate a hybrid structure, combining jigsaw-like electives with spiral-like iterations of compulsory design modules. The analogy provides a clear and accessible way to visualise programme structures. Feedback from educators indicates that the models help to clarify the distribution of learning outcomes and the realities of students’ workloads, supporting reflection and the exchange of good practice in design education.
Keywords:
