nach oben

International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Erschienen in:

23.01.2019

Comparing the dialogue of experts and novices in interdisciplinary teams to inform design education

verfasst von: Louise Kiernan, Ann Ledwith, Ray Lynch

Erschienen in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education | Ausgabe 1/2020

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Design education has moved towards a collaborative practice where designers work in teams and with other disciplines to solve unstructured problems. Along with the cognitive skills involved in the execution of the design process, designers also need skills to work in teams, share information, negotiate common ground and reach consensus. Conversation is core to establishing successful collaborations and learning for students. In order to assess and facilitate collaboration skills, it will become necessary to understand what constitutes constructive and effective dialogue amongst students. The aim of this research is to compare expert versus novice interdisciplinary teams to understand how to better support teams to engage in constructive dialogue during educational design projects. Two cases were studied across different design domains during the problem definition, ideation and concept development phases of the design process. The cases involved a bio-medical fellowship project and an undergraduate product design project. The teams’ conversations were recorded and qualitative content analysis was applied to reveal the cognitive processing and conversation activity that enabled the teams to progress during team collaborations. The findings show that during team interactions design teams alternate between four main cognitive processes, supported by a further six conversation activities to execute the design task. Experts were found to use these cognitive processes and conversation activities more effectively than novices. Recommendations are proposed that can guide design educators to support students during team interactions when solving design problems. The findings have implications for how team work is facilitated and assessed in education.

Vorheriger Artikel Experienced technology teachers’ teaching practices

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

An ileostomy is an opening in the abdominal wall that's made during surgery. The end of the ileum (the lowest part of the small intestine) is brought through this opening to form a stoma.

Ahmed, S., Wallace, K. M., & Blessing, L. T. (2003). Understanding the differences between how novice and experienced designers approach design tasks. Research in Engineering Design,14(1), 1–11.

Andres, H. P. (2013). Team cognition using collaborative technology: A behavioral analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology,28(1), 38–54.

Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education,96(4), 359–379.

Badke Schaub, P., Goldschmidt, G., & Meijer, M. (2010). How does cognitive conflict in design teams support the development of creative ideas? Creativity and Innovation Management,19(2), 119–133.

Baker, M. (2009). Argumentative interactions and the social construction of knowledge. In N. M. M. A.-N. Perret-Clermont (Ed.), Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices (pp. 127–144). Berlin: Springer.

Björklund, T. A. (2013). Initial mental representations of design problems: Differences between experts and novices. Design Studies,34(2), 135–160.

Bolton, M. K. (1999). The role of coaching in student teams: A “just-in-time” approach to learning. Journal of Management Education,23(3), 233–250.

Brand-Gruwel, S., Wopereis, I., & Vermetten, Y. (2005). Information problem solving by experts and novices: Analysis of a complex cognitive skill. Computers in Human Behavior,21(3), 487–508.

Bublitz, W. (1988). Supportive fellow speakers and cooperative conversations. Cambridge: University Press.

Budd, R. W., Thorp, R. K., & Donohew, L. (1967). Content analysis of communications. New York: Macmillan.

Casakin, H., Davidovitch, N., & Milgram, R. M. (2010). Creative thinking as a predictor of creative problem solving in architectural design students. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,4(1), 31.

Chiu, M.-L. (2002). An organizational view of design communication in design collaboration. Design Studies,23(2), 187–210.

Choi, I., & Lee, K. (2009). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for enhancing ill-structured problem solving: Classroom management problems for prospective teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development,57(1), 99–129.

Chou, W. H., & Wong, J. J. (2015). From a disciplinary to an interdisciplinary design research: Developing an integrative approach for design. International Journal of Art & Design Education,34(2), 206–223.

Christensen, B. T., & Ball, L. J. (2016). Creative analogy use in a heterogeneous design team: The pervasive role of background domain knowledge. Design Studies,46, 38–58.

Christiaans, H. (1992). Creativity in design. Delft: Delft University of Technology.

Cross, N. (1990). The nature and nurture of design ability. Design Studies,11(3), 127–140.

Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: Results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In M. M. W. N. C. Eastman (Ed.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (pp. 79–103). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies,25(5), 427–441.

Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. London: Springer.

De Vere, I., Melles, G., & Kapoor, A. (2010). Product design engineering—A global education trend in multidisciplinary training for creative product design. European Journal of Engineering Education,35(1), 33–43.

Defazio, J. (2008). The identification of design experts. Journal of Design Research,7(1), 84–96.

Deken, F., Kleinsmann, M., Aurisicchio, M., Lauche, K., & Bracewell, R. (2012). Tapping into past design experiences: Knowledge sharing and creation during novice–expert design consultations. Research in Engineering Design,23(3), 203–218.

Détienne, F., Baker, M., & Burkhardt, J.-M. (2012). Quality of collaboration in design meetings: Methodological reflexions. CoDesign,8(4), 247–261.

Dong, A. (2007). The enactment of design through language. Design Studies, 28(1), 5–21.

Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’and its application. Design Studies,32(6), 521–532.

Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: Co-evolution of problem–solution. Design Studies,22(5), 425–437.

Facione, P. A. (1998). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press.

Ferreira, D. J., & Lacerda dos Santos, G. (2009). Scaffolding online discourse in collaborative ill-structured problem-solving for innovation. Informatics in Education-An International Journal,8_2, 173–190.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. American Psychologist,34(10), 906–911.

Fredrick, T. A. (2008). Facilitating better teamwork: Analyzing the challenges and strategies of classroom-based collaboration. Business Communication Quarterly,71(4), 439–455.

Garbuio, M., Dong, A., Lin, N., Tschang, T., & Lovallo, D. (2018). Demystifying the genius of entrepreneurship: How design cognition can help create the next generation of entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Learning & Education,17(1), 41–61.

Goel, V., & Pirolli, P. (1989). Motivating the notion of generic design within information-processing theory: The design problem space. AI Magazine,10(1), 19.

Goldschmidt, G. (2016). Linkographic evidence for concurrent divergent and convergent thinking in creative design. Creativity Research Journal,28(2), 115–122.

Goldschmidt, G., & Rodgers, P. A. (2013). The design thinking approaches of three different groups of designers based on self-reports. Design Studies,34(4), 454–471.

Goldschmidt, G., & Tatsa, D. (2005). How good are good ideas? Correlates of design creativity. Design Studies,26(6), 593–611.

Haupt, G. (2015). Learning from experts: Fostering extended thinking in the early phases of the design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,25(4), 483–520.

Hong, Y.-C., & Choi, I. (2011). Three dimensions of reflective thinking in solving design problems: A conceptual model. Educational Technology Research and Development,59(5), 687–710.

Hung, W., Jonassen, D. H., & Liu, R. (2008). Problem-based learning. In J Gv J M Spector, M. D. Merrill, & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., Vol. 3, pp. 485–506). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Jain, V. K., & Sobek, D. K., II. (2006). Linking design process to customer satisfaction through virtual design of experiments. Research in Engineering Design,17(2), 59–71.

Jakobsson, A. (2006). Students’ self-confidence and learning through dialogues in a net-based environment. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education,14(2), 387.

Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development,45(1), 65–94.

Jonassen, D. H. (2003). Using cognitive tools to represent problems. Journal of research on Technology in Education,35(3), 362–381.

Jonassen, D. H. (2008). Instructional design as design problem solving: An iterative process. Educational Technology,48(3), 21–26.

Jonassen, D. H., & Hung, W. (2008). All problems are not equal: Implications for problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning,2(2), 4.

Jones, J. (1992). Design methods (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

Kiernan, L., & Ledwith, A. (2014). Is design education preparing product designers for the real world? A study of product design graduates in Ireland. The Design Journal,17(2), 218–237.

Kim, K., Kim, N., Jung, S., Kim, D.-Y., Kwak, Y., & Kyung, G. (2012). A radically assembled design-engineering education program with a selection and combination of multiple disciplines. International Journal of Engineering Education,28(4), 904–919.

Kleinsmann, M., Deken, F., Dong, A., & Lauche, K. (2012). Development of design collaboration skills. Journal of Engineering Design,23(7), 485–506.

Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2013). Design expertise (2nd ed.). Oxford: Architectural Press.

Lee, J. (2014). The integrated design process from the facilitator’s perspective. International Journal of Art & Design Education,33(1), 141–156.

Lynch, R., & Hennessy, J. (2017). Learning to earn? The role of performance grades in higher education. Studies in Higher Education,42(9), 1750–1763.

Mansilla, V. B., & Duraising, E. D. (2007). Targeted assessment of students’ interdisciplinary work: An empirically grounded framework proposed. The Journal of Higher Education,78(2), 215–237.

McTavish, D. G., & Pirro, E. B. (1990). Contextual content analysis. Quality & Quantity,24(3), 245–265.

Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. London: Routledge.

Mol, E., Khapova, S. N., & Elfring, T. (2015). Entrepreneurial team cognition: A review. International Journal of Management Reviews,17(2), 232–255.

Mosely, G., Wright, N., & Wrigley, C. (2018). Facilitating design thinking: A comparison of design expertise. Thinking Skills and Creativity,27, 177–189.

Nae, H.-J. (2017). An interdisciplinary design education framework. The Design Journal,20(sup1), S835–S847.

Paton, B., & Dorst, K. (2011). Briefing and reframing: A situated practice. Design Studies,32(6), 573–587.

Paulus, P. (2000). Groups, teams, and creativity: The creative potential of idea-generating groups. Applied Psychology,49(2), 237–262.

Popovic, V. (2003). General strategic knowledge models connections and expertise development in product design. In N. Cross & E. Edmonds (Eds.), Expertise in design: Proceedings of DTRS'6 (pp. 251–270). Sydney: Creativity and Cognition Studios.

Riebe, L., Girardi, A., & Whitsed, C. (2016). A systematic literature review of teamwork pedagogy in higher education. Small Group Research,47(6), 619–664.

Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal,24(1), 66–75.

Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal,24(1), 92–96.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review,7(4), 351–371.

Seidel, V. P., & Fixson, S. K. (2013). Adopting design thinking in novice multidisciplinary teams: The application and limits of design methods and reflexive practices. Journal of Product Innovation Management,30(S1), 19–33.

Self, J. A., & Baek, J. S. (2017). Interdisciplinarity in design education: Understanding the undergraduate student experience. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,27(3), 459–480.

Smith, K. M. (2015). Conditions influencing the development of design expertise: As identified in interior design student accounts. Design Studies,36, 77–98.

Stempfle, J., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2002). Thinking in design teams-an analysis of team communication. Design Studies,23(5), 473–496.

van Ginkel, W., Tindale, R. S., & van Knippenberg, D. (2009). Team reflexivity, development of shared task representations, and the use of distributed information in group decision making. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice,13(4), 265.

van Ginkel, W., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008). Group information elaboration and group decision making: The role of shared task representations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,105(1), 82–97.

Xun, G., & Land, S. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development,52(2), 5–22.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research design and methods (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Yule, G., & Brown, G. R. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: University Press.

Titel: Comparing the dialogue of experts and novices in interdisciplinary teams to inform design education
verfasst von: Louise Kiernan
Ann Ledwith
Ray Lynch
Publikationsdatum: 23.01.2019
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education / Ausgabe 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0957-7572
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1804
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09495-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Beyond ‘chalk and talk’: educator perspectives on design immersion programs for rural and regional schools

Experienced technology teachers’ teaching practices

“This angle that we talked about”: learning how to weld in interaction

A future-focused approach to the technology education curriculum: the disparity between intent and practice

Effects of web-based versus classroom-based STEM learning environments on the development of collaborative problem-solving skills in junior high school students

The effects of engineering design processes on spatial abilities of middle school students

Premium Partner