Trondheim 2020 – Johan Van Den Berghe – Evidence

The evidence is in the sharpness and precision of my formulations, which is at the benefit of the very restricted time frame during these online sessions, where we have to miss all the other formal and informal talks with the candidates and colleagues during coffee breaks, lunches, etc… This evidence has been confirmed by Enrico Miglietta, with whom I could have a conversations after this online presentation.

Trondheim 2020 – Peter Rauch – Triggers

The discussion after the 2.6 session and at the workshop with Johan Van Den Berghe. The two occasions provided the situation when an evaluator puts forward his own practice or opinion as an argument.

Trondheim 2020 – Débora Domingo Calabuig – Areas

Perhaps due to the fact that this conference was online, in this edition, I concentrated more on the interventions of the presenter and the other panel members. I guess this was because there were no other ‘visual distractions’ (setting, audience). This context made me pay more attention to the content of the comments and I was struck by the wealth of approaches that occur in the panel members’ interventions. I think I was more sensitive to the diversity of evaluation.

Ghent 2019 – Anders Kruse Aagaard – Areas

The CA2RE+ conference helps me to follow, understand and reflect on the diverse landscape of DDDr. The conference thereby helps me to position myself and my own competencies, but also to challenge these and expand my horizon.

Ghent 2019 – Débora Domingo Calabuig – Areas

Attending the CA2RE+ congress helped me a lot to understand and expand my idea of ​design-driven​ doctoral research. It opened my mind to a plurality of ideas … I also understood that some of the exposed methodologies would not be so difficult to transfer to my country, where architecture schools do not offer ‘research-by-design’ doctoral programs.

Ghent 2019 – Paul O Robinson – triggers

The impact was perceived the first day, when the conference was introduced by the “role-play” session. This was a sort of orientation and, perhaps more, was a calibration of expectations and tool for initial orientation and self-criticism. I would say that each presentation, given the quality of the reviewers, offered a portal to the character of “impact” and its synthesis into other aspects of the conference and presentations…in that way the conference positively built upon itself.

Ghent 2019 – Tadeja Zupančič – areas

I’m searching for motivation, enhancement of my self-confidence and also for the necessary triggers to refresh and reboot the previous experiences as a doctoral and master supervisor and/or evaluator, as well as a researcher and research manager. My awareness of what I can offer and get at these events is increasing.

Ghent 2019 – Claus Peder Pedersen – Areas

The growing ‘CA2RE family’ provides a steadily developing in-depth understanding of the specificities of (design) research at each participating partner institution and allow me to get a deeper understanding of my institutional network and an understanding of multiple roles of design as a driver of research