Design thinking and inquiry behaviours are co-constituted in a community of inquiry middle years’ science classroom context: Empirical evidence for design thinking and pragmatist inquiry interconnections
Tóm tắt
Design thinking has been propositioned to be interconnected to Dewey’s notion of pragmatist inquiry and aesthetic experience. To address the need for empirical studies on design thinking in the classroom and add to our understanding of its characteristics, this study explored middle years’ students’ discourse as they worked through a design challenge. Design thinking has been proposed to rely on inquiry as well as language in the form of specialised vocabulary and representations but how these intersect has not been studied. In this study, discourse analysis of inquiry and design behaviours during a design task and pre- post-testing of scientific language and representations is compared across two groups, one that engage in a design task embedded in an inquiry science unit, and one that also engage in a community of inquiry (CoI). The two groups are referred to as Non-CoI and CoI groups respectively. The hypothesis that CoI can enhance both the design process as well as accurate use of scientific language and representation in a design context was shown by contrasting CoI and non-CoI group test outcomes and small group design task discourse analysis. In this study, design and inquiry processes were synergistic, mutually reinforced each other, and were co-constituted through imbrication. The findings of this study have implications for science teaching using design thinking in a middle years’ classroom.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aulia, E. V., Poedjiastoeti, S., & Agustini, R. (2018). The effectiveness of guided inquiry-based learning material on students’ science literacy skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 947, 012049.
Barrett, T. J. (2011). Computations using analysis of covariance. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 447(3), 260–268.
Bate, P. (2007). Bringing the design sciences to organization development and change management: Introduction to the special issue. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 43(1), 8–11.
Boland, R. J., & Collopy, F. (2004). Managing as design. Stanford University Press.
Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84.
Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. HarperCollins.
Bruce, M., & Bessant, J. R. (2002). Design in business: Strategic innovation through design. Pearson Education.
Bucciarelli, L. (2002). Between thought and object in engineering design. Design Practice, 23(3), 219–231.
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.
Burgh, G., & Nichols, K. (2012). The parallels between philosophical inquiry and scientific inquiry: Implications for science education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(10), 1045–1059.
Bybee, R. (2014). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Personal reflections and contemporary implications. Science and Children, 51(8), 10–13.
Camillus, J. C. (2008). Strategy as a wicked problem. Harvard Business Review, 86(5), 98.
Chiasson, P. (2005). Peirce’s design for thinking: An embedded philosophy of education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(2), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2005.00110.x
Christensen, K. S., Hjorth, M., Iversen, O. S., & Smith, R. C. (2019). Understanding design literacy in middle-school education: Assessing students’ stances towards inquiry. International Journal of Technology and Education, 29, 633–654.
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149–210.
Cooper, R., Junginger, S., & Lockwood, T. (2009). Design thinking and design management: A research and practice perspective. Design Management Review, 20(2), 46–55.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.
Cross, N. (2007). From a design science to a design discipline: Understanding designerly ways of knowing and thinking. In M. Ralf (Ed.), Design research now: Essays and selected projects (pp. 41–54). Birkhäuser Verlag AG.
Dalsgaard, P. (2014). Pragmatism and design thinking. International Journal of Design, 8(1), 143–155.
Dewey, J. (1916). The pragmatism of Peirce. The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, 13(26), 709–715.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Henry Regnery Company.
Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(01)00009-6
Dunbar, R. L., & Starbuck, W. H. (2006). Learning to design organizations and learning from designing them. Organization Science, 17(2), 171–178.
Dunne, D., & Martin, R. (2006). Design thinking and how it will change management education: An interview and discussion. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(4), 512–523.
Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.
Fraser, H. (2007). The practice of breakthrough strategies by design. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(4), 66–74.
Gregory, M., & Granger, D. (2012). Introduction: John Dewey on philosophy and childhood. Education and Culture, 28(2), 1–25.
Huppatz, D. J. (2015). Revisiting Herbert Simon’s “science of design.” Design Issues, 31(2), 29–40.
Jelinek, M., Romme, A. G. L., & Boland, R. J. (2008). Introduction to the special issue: Organization studies as a science for design: Creating collaborative artifacts and research. Organization Studies, 29(3), 317–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607088016
Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: Past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.
Johnstone, B. (2007). Discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Blackwell Publishers.
Kennedy, D. (2012). Lipman, Dewey, and the community of philosophical inquiry. Education and Culture, 28(2), 36–53. https://doi.org/10.1353/eac.2012.0009
Krippendorff, K. (2005). The semantic turn: A new foundation for design (1st ed.). CRC Press.
Lawson, B. (2005). How designers think (4th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080454979
Lay Hoon, S. (2016). The rationale and conditions for teaching disciplinary literacy in science: A brief introduction. In the National Institute of Education symposium, A dialogue on the nexus of learning sciences research and practice. Retrieved May 14, 2017, from https://www.nie.edu.sg/event-detail/a-dialogue-on-the-nexus-of-learning-sciences-research-and-practice.
Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press.
Lipman, M. (2008). A life teaching thinking. The institute for advancement of philosophy for children.
McKenna, A. F. (2014). Adaptive expertise and knowledge fluency in design and innovation. In A. Johri & B. M. Olds (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of engineering education research (pp. 227–242). Cambridge University Press.
Millett, S., & Tapper, A. (2012). Benefits of collaborative philosophical inquiry in schools. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(5), 546–567.
Mosely, G., Harris, J., & Grushka, K. (2021). Design education in schools: An investigation of the Australian Curriculum: Technologies. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31, 677–695.
Nichols, K., Burgh, G., & Kennedy, C. (2017). Comparing two inquiry professional development interventions in science on primary students' questioning and other inquiry behaviours. Research in Science Education, 47, 1–24.
Peirce, C. S. (1887). Logical machines. The American Journal of Psychology, 1(1), 165–170.
Putnam, L. L. (2015). Unpacking the dialectic: Alternative views on the discourse-materiality relationship. Journal of Management Studies, 52(5), 706–716. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12115
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1974). Wicked problems. Man-made. Futures, 26(1), 272–280.
Romme, A. G. L. (2003). Making a difference: Organization as design. Organization Science, 14(5), 558–573.
Rylander, A. (2012). Pragmatism and design research—An overview. Retrieved April 15, 2017, from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6186/39e15ebf06faa0c0cda92aaf81f8e429b95d.pdf.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Sharp, A. M. (2017). The other dimension of caring thinking. In M. R. Gregory & M. J. Laverty (Eds.), Community of inquiry with ann margaret sharp: Childhood, philosophy, and education (pp. 209–214). New York.
Spee, J. and Basaiawmoit, R. V. (2016). Design thinking and the hype cycle in management education and in engineering education. In DS 84: Proceedings of the design 2016 14th international design conference, Dubrovnik (pp. 2111–2124).
Topping, K. J., & Trickey, S. (2007). Collaborative philosophical enquiry for school children: Cognitive effects at 10–12 years. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(2), 271–288.
Verganti, R. (2006). Innovating through Design. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 114–122.
Waks, L. J. (2001). Donald Schon’s philosophy of design and design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11, 37–51.