SAMPLE ABSTRACTS [good, okay, poor]

Argument

Scope

Aims/benefit

Abstract 1: Clear, concise and fulfilling all requirements

The chair, more than any other piece of furniture, has come to act as a design barometer

representing social, economic and technological change in the modern world. As a designed object

common to us all, they invariably possess materiality, form and pragmatism. Modern chairs also

speak figuratively of the post-modern age in which we live. Whilst the cultural and symbolic history

of the chair dates back to antiquity, the last century, in particular the post-war era, has seen the

chair ascend to what is arguably as important an artifact as any.

This paper will contend that the chair is the consummate designed object in defining our time and

place in the world since 1945. By initially investigating the work and ideology of the avant-garde

movements in the early part of the twentieth century, we will see how and why they influenced

chair design in the second half of the century. As an extension to this, chairs presented from

prominent designers in the latter half of the twentieth century will offer why such an object is

emblematic of the era from which it came. Moving forward to contemporary and present day chair

design, it will be revealed that many designers are now using the chair as a social narrative and offer

it as an object of critical, not necessarily pragmatic design. The culmination of the research will

reinforce that a designed object, often overlooked through its commonality is indeed emblematic of

the age in which we exist.

Abstract 2: convincing but lacking in full description of scope

As modern designers we face the daily choice of choosing to design either products, advertising and

other saleable goods, or critically oriented objects which stimulate questioning into people’s values

and inspire thought and ideas.

I intend to argue that the former, affirmative design (less the context of necessity), is socially

destructive and does not contribute to the happiness of individual. Furthermore I'll argue that

product design and advertising generally exist for the sole purpose of increasing profit and therefore

encourage a materialistic outlook, entrapping people in a society that value things and money more

than the individual and his/her subjective happiness. This trend often leads to inequality and

encourages negative emotions and the selfish, destructive effort of individuals seeking to raise their

social status with wealth, at the cost of others.

However the alternative, critical design, I argue is a constructive way to create a questioning and

flexible lifestyle. It encourages the individual to think about the values they hold and to generate

ideas for their own betterment. I will also outline the fundamental principal that ideas and their

influence on life are lasting, where material things and designer products are not.

Encouraging the development of wisdom (defined as knowing the most positive and constructive

action to undertake at any moment) is essential in creating a happier more productive society.

Production, should therefore be focused on ideas and finding values that support happy lives rather

than on “things”. The design of objects should therefore be delegated to the purpose of creating an

economical and efficient system to support an ever growing population in a world where resources

are limited and the potential for individual happiness, through better ideas and thought processes, is

not.

**This abstract is missing a clear statement of the scope of the study

Sample 3: presents a clear point of view, but NOT an argument, also fails to specifically address

the scope of the study and does not articulate what benefit this study might offer

Environmental sustainability has received a large amount of attention in recent years, with the

introduction of hybrid cars and electricity saving light-bulbs people have grown to embrace the new-

age technology. However this embracement has grown to a new level in the last decade, the huge

advancements of technology that have focused towards promoting consumerism have begin to strip

away at whatever progress we as humans have made towards building for a eco-environment

friendly Earth. We as humans are forced to live a life of unemotional attachment towards our

advanced instruments, no-more do we appreciate the value of our gadgets, instead we are

constantly pining for better, newer, shinier and more resource hogging devices, our own human

addiction to these new-age gadgets are blinding us to the effects we are having upon our

environment. This impact goes unnoticed, something as simple as two Google.com search produces

the same amount of carbon-monoxide as boiling a jug of hot water [1]. The constant introduction of

new and updated products not only consume large amounts of resources, but also material, energy,

time space and real innovative potential, in some cases new models reach the consumer shelves

before the replaced model even does. Peter Verbeek and Adriaan Slob state that around 90% of

computers in the United Kingdom are disposed of while still functioning perfectly, while 20% of

washing machines are disposed of fully functioning. What’s known as the psychological lifespan

seems to be the most influential factor in discarding products. The psychological lifespan is based

around the concept of consumerism, where the consumer is forced into believing that a product

becomes obsolete much sooner than it does. In the case of computers, the average lifespan in the

UK is around 4 years, while computers can last over 10 years. This concept of consumerism blinds us

against the impact that our apparent need for the latest technology has upon the environment and

other factors.