IMPLEMENTING CLAY SCULPTING AS AN IDEATION STRATEGY IN TEACHING PRODUCT FORM DESIGN TO FIRST-YEAR INDUSTRIAL DESIGN STUDENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24191/VoA.v22i1.11043Keywords:
Clay Modeling, Form Exploration, Hands-on Learning, Ideation, Industrial Design EducationAbstract
This study investigates the use of clay sculpting as a hands-on ideation strategy in teaching product form development to first-year industrial design students. A qualitative, studio-based approach was employed involving 17 students, from which 5 were purposively selected to represent diverse form outcomes. Data were collected through observations, photographic documentation, and analysis of clay models and sketches. Using open coding and visual analysis, the study identified three key themes: (1) clay sculpting encouraged exploration of unconventional product forms beyond typical walkie-talkie archetypes, (2) subject matter inspiration supported structured abstraction and meaningful form translation, and (3) the physical-to-visual sequence improved students’ understanding of proportion, usability, and design refinement. The results indicated that clay sculpting expanded students’ form exploration and strengthens their ability to interpret inspiration sources and apply them in a clear design direction. It also promoted creative risk-taking, reduces design fixation, and strengthens form reasoning in early design education. Overall, this study provides evidence that tangible ideation effectively supports the transition from abstract exploration to functional product concepts, offering practical value for foundational design education.
References
Bardt, C. (2019). Material and mind. In The MIT Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12199.001.0001
Cardoso, C., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2011). The influence of different pictorial representations during idea generation. Journal of Creative Behavior, 45(2), 130–146.
Charlesworth, C. E. (2007). Student use of virtual and physical modelling in design development: An experiment in 3D design education. The Design Journal, 10(1), 35–45.
Chugh, D., & Tiwari, V. (2024). Effective ways of teaching form studies as a course to product design students. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 5(ICETDA24), 73–79. https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v5.iICETDA24.2024.1303
Conradie, P., Nafzger, R., Vanneste, C., De Marez, L., & Saldien, J. (2015). Methods for ideation: Reviewing early phase concept generation among industrial design engineer students. Presented at the 17th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (EPDE 2015), Loughborough, UK.
Corremans, J. A. M. (2009). Measuring the effectiveness of a design method to generate form alternatives: An experiment performed with freshmen students product development. Journal of Engineering Design, 22(4), 259–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820903312416
Daly, S. R., Yilmaz, S., Christian, J. L., Seifert, C. M., & Gonzalez, R. (2012). Design heuristics in engineering concept generation. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 601–629.
Das, S., & Das, A. K. (2019). Tool for teaching physical model making in product design. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 686(1), 012034. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/686/1/012034
Gomes, M. G., Ogliari, A. J., Fernandes, R. B., & Marques, K. (2022). Evaluation of physical models as creative stimuli in conceptual design of products. Design Studies, 80, 101061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101061
Gürsoy, B. (2018). From control to uncertainty in 3D printing with clay. In A. Kepczynska-Walczak & S. Bialkowski (Eds.), Computing for a better tomorrow (pp. 21–30). Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, Vol. 2. https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.ecaade.2018.2.021
Hill, S., & Baker, E. W. (2016). An active learning exercise for product design from an operations perspective. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 14(3), 273–284.
Jalali, Y., Bürer, M. J., Petringa, N., & Zufferey, J. D. (2023). What role do tangibles play in fostering design thinking skills? An exploratory study. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 86, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/fie58773.2023.10343272
Jensen, D. (2004). A design methodology for hands-on classroom experiences. In 2004 Annual Conference Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--12990
Karni, R., & Shalev, S. (2004). Fostering innovation in conceptual product design through ideation. Information, Knowledge, Systems Management, 4(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.3233/IKS-2004-00062
Kuhns, A. (2024). Exercising the Everyday: A Pedagogical Approach.
Lu, X. (2024). Using augmented reality for sculpture teaching in art schools. Membrane Technology, 222, 222–227. https://doi.org/10.52710/mt.161
Lyche, W., & Øverjordet, P. (2021). New manual and digital exploration in surface textile design: A superuser approach in design education. DS 110: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (EPDE 2021). https://doi.org/10.35199/epde.2021.82
Memikoğlu, İ., Berker, O. S., & Tolun, E. (2015). Experience with clay in the basic design education. Global Journal on Humanities & Social Sciences, 1(2), 221–226. http://www.world-education-center.org/index.php/pntsbs
Parisi, S., Rognoli, V., & Sonneveld, M. (2017). Material tinkering: An inspirational approach for experiential learning and envisioning in product design education. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S1167–S1184. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1353059
Ramduny-Ellis, D., Dix, A. J., Evans, M., Hare, J., & Gill, S. (2010). Physicality in design: An exploration. The Design Journal, 13(1), 48–76.
Ruth, D. (2022). Transforming learning through tangible instruction: The case for thinking with things. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(4), 495–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2022.2100053
Smithwick, D., & Kirsh, D. (2015). Let's get physical: Thinking with things in architectural design. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 37. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6d52231n
Stevens, J. K. (2024). Access + opportunity = empowerment: Overcoming impostor syndrome through hands-on material exploration. 112th ACSA Annual Meeting Proceedings, Disruptors on the Edge, 584–591. https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.am.112.74
Su, H., & Phanthabutr, S. (2024). Innovative product design for clay dogs. International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews, 4(3), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.60027/ijsasr.2024.4177
Urrea, C. C., & Hailey, C. (2023). Designing, making, and the body intuitive. UF Journal of Undergraduate Research, 25. https://doi.org/10.32473/ufjur.25.133478
Viswanathan, V., Esposito, N., & Linsey, J. (2012). Training tomorrow’s designers: A study on the design fixation. ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings.
Viswanathan, V. K., & Linsey, J. S. (2012). Physical models and design thinking: A study of functionality, novelty and variety of ideas. ASME Journal of Mechanical Design, 134(9), 091004.
Wong, A. N. T., & Au, W. T. (2019). Effects of tactile experience during clay work creation in improving psychological well-being. Art Therapy, 36(4), 192–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421656.2019.1645501
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Mohd Hamidi Adha Mohd Amin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
