Qualitative data obtained by this researcher to date suggests ambiguity and uncertainty with respect to evaluating outcomes in design education and yet ‘novelty’ and ‘utility’ are terms of reference for formal design registration and patent assessment. Notwithstanding patent law is a socio-political institution and that understanding it is a somewhat interpretive art in itself. This mixed methods research aims to provide insight into ways to improve the design evaluation process and to provide a new approach to design education curricular.

In keeping with the aim, valid evidence of how the axioms of value and law are compatible with design education is sought. A practice-based approach involving application for design registration of a human computer interface artifact informs the research. It is intended that analysis of this process will inform a solution for the elusive validation and measuring of design artifact outcomes and a credible and scholarly assessment model for design education.

This paper specifically discusses the role of the artifact itself in establishing value, using as a starting point the Design Research conceptual framework of Bruce Archer, and the ideas of Nigel Cross on designerly ways of knowing.