Brendon Clark, Ylva Fernaeus
pp. 110 - 131, view paper, download
(, Google Scholar

Submitted on 16 Jun 2023 - Accepted on 31 Oct 2023

Interaction Design and Architecture(s) IxD&A Journal
Issue N. 58, Autumn 2023


This article explores the shift in design education from traditional, hands-on practices to digitally-based approaches, particularly accelerated by the sudden and temporary remote teaching mandates that affected design schools during the global pandemic restrictions of the early 2020’s. It uses a case involving an interaction design class during such restrictions, where students engaged in, designed, and facilitated 15-minute remote collaborative activities called “Fire-up” sessions, to demonstrate how a short design doing task can provide surface what is at stake in the design of hybrid learning activities. Reflections of the students and teachers are used to take the pulse of remote and hybrid teaching arrangements that are physicality and materiality inherent in design education, emphasizing the perceived elasticity of physical and digital arrangements in these contexts. The paper offers three main sensitizing instruments to consider when arranging and engaging in hybrid design work.

Keywords: design education, hybrid formats, interaction elasticity

CRediT author statement: Brendon Clark: conceptualization, methodology, writing – original draft and review & editing. Ylva Fernaeus: conceptualization, writing – original draft and review & editing.

Cite this article as:
Clark B., Fernaeus Y.: Playing with the elasticity of hybrid design education, Interaction Design & Architecture(s) – IxD&A Journal, N.58, 2023, pp. 110–131, DOI:


1. Schön D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner, Routledge, (2017)
2. Schön D.A.: Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions, Jossey-Bass, (1987)
3. Buchenau M., Suri J.F.: Experience prototyping Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. pp. 424-433. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2000)
4. Ehn P., Kyng M.: Cardboard Computers: Mocking-it-up or Hands-on the Future in Greenbaum, J. and Kyng, M. (eds.) Design at Work: Cooperative Design of Computer Systems (pp. 169-195). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1991)
5. Dewey J.: Experience and Education Educ Forum, 50, pp. 241-252 (1938)
6. Binder T., Brandt E.: The Design:Lab as platform in participatory design research CoDesign, 4, pp. 115-129 (2008)
7. Rittel H.W.J., Webber M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning Policy Sci, 4, pp. 155-169 (1973)
8. Jahnke I.: Digital Didactical Designs, Teaching and Learning in CrossActionSpaces, (2015)
9. Green J.K., Burrow M.S., Carvalho L.: Designing for Transition: Supporting Teachers and Students Cope with Emergency Remote Education Postdigital Science and Education, 2, pp. 906-922 (2020)
10. Charles B. Hodges, Stephanie Moore, Barbara B. Lockee, Torrey Trust, M. Aaron Bond: The Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning, (2020)
11. Goodyear P., Dimitriadis Y.: In medias res: reframing design for learning Research in Learning Technology, 21, (2013)
12. Pischetola M., de Miranda L.V.T., Albuquerque P.: The invisible made visible through technologies’ agency: a sociomaterial inquiry on emergency remote teaching in higher education Learn Media Technol, 46, pp. 390-403 (2021)
13. Toney S., Light J., Urbaczewski A.: Fighting Zoom Fatigue: Keeping the Zoombies at Bay Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 48, pp. 40-46 (2021)
14. Viberg O., Mavroudi A., Fernaeus Y., Bogdan C., Laaksolahti J.: Reducing Free Riding: CLASS – A System for Collaborative Learning Assessment Methodologies and Intelligent Systems for Technology Enhanced Learning, 9th International Conference, Workshops . International Publishing. pp. 132-138 (2020)
15. Wragg N.: Online communication design education: the importance of the social environment Studies in Higher Education, 45, pp. 2287-2297 (2020)
16. Fleischmann K.: From studio practice to online design education: Can we teach design online? Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 45, (2019)
17. Tessier V., Aubry-Boyer M.P.: Turbulence in Crit Assessment: From the Design Workshop to Online Learning Design and Technology Education, 26, pp. 86-95 (2021)
18. Thomas P., Spruce J., Moriarty S.: From sharing screens to sharing spaces Des Technol Educ, 26, pp. 96-111 (2021)
19. Lave J.: A Comparative Approach to Educational Forms and Learning Processes Anthropol Educ Q, 13, pp. 181-187 (1982)
20. Ellis C., Adams T.E., Bochner A.P.: Autoethnography: An Overview Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 36, pp. 273-290 (2011)
21. Antonelli P.: Design and the Elastic Mind, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, (2008)
22. Garfinkel H.: Studies in ethnomethodology, Prentice-Hall, (1967)
23. Goffman E.: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Doubleday, (1959)
24. Cairns B.: Spatial Deixis-The Use of Spatial Co-ordinates in Spoken Language Working Papers / Lund University, Department of Linguistics and Phonetics, 38, pp. 19-28 (1991)
25. Benford S., Greenhalgh C., Giannachi G., Walker B., Marshall J., Rodden T.: Uncomfortable interactions Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 2005-2014. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2012)
26. Djajadiningrat J.P., Gaver W.W., Fres J.W.: Interaction relabelling and extreme characters Proceedings of the 3rd conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques. pp. 66-71. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2000)
27. Lucero A., Arrasvuori J.: PLEX Cards Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fun and Games. pp. 28-37. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2010)
28. Wilson C.E.: Inverse, reverse, and unfocused methods Interactions, 14, pp. 54 (2007)
29. Bardzell J.: Interaction criticism: An introduction to the practice Interact Comput, 23, pp. 604-621 (2011)

back to Table of Contents