Design-Thinking Mindsets Facilitating Students’ Learning of Scientific Concepts in Design-Based Activities
Research Article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.106Keywords:
Conceptual learning, Design-based learning, Design thinking, Pulleys, STEM EducationAbstract
Design-based learning has been internationally recognized as a key approach to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education at K-12 levels, where students are encouraged to learn STEM through the engineering design process. In this regard, it is argued that design-thinking mindsets play a crucial role in facilitating students’ learning of STEM when engaging in design-based activities. While research has indicated that design-based learning can facilitate students’ learning of scientific concepts, it is unclear whether, and which dimensions of, design-thinking mindsets support the conceptual learning of science. This study aims to explore 37 eighth-grade students’ conceptual learning and design-thinking mindsets in the context of design-based learning on pulleys. The students completed two instruments, namely a conceptual test on pulleys and a Likert-scale questionnaire measuring design-thinking mindsets, before and after the design-based learning. In a comparison between two classes of students, using the non-parametric method of Mann-Whitney U tests in each measurement, some dimensions of design-thinking mindsets that facilitate conceptual learning on pulleys were identified. These dimensions included: (a) mindfulness to the process and impacts on others; and (b) orientation to learning by making and testing. Based on these results, recommendations for the effective enactment of design-based learning in order to develop students’ scientific understanding are provided.
Downloads
References
Apedoe, X. S., Ellefson, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2012). Learning together while designing: does group size make a difference? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9284-5
Apedoe, X. S., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: the heating/cooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454-465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9114-6
Apedoe, X. S. & Schunn, C. D. (2013). Strategies for success: uncovering what makes students successful in design and learning. Instructional Science, 41(4), 773-791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9251-4
Anderson, D. & Nashon, S. (2007). Predators of knowledge construction: Interpreting students’ metacognition in an amusement park physics program. Science Education, 91(2), 298-320. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20176
Antonio, R. P. & Prudente, M. S. (2021). Metacognitive argument-driven inquiry in teaching antimicrobial resistance: effects on students’ conceptual understanding and argumentation skills. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(2), 192-217. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.60
Blizzard, J., Klotz, L., Potvin, G., Hazari, Z., Cribbs, J., & Godwin, A. (2015). Using survey questions to identify and learn more about those who exhibit design thinking traits. Design Studies, 38, 92110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2015.02.002
Capobianco, B. M., DeLisi, J., & Radloff, J. (2018). Characterizing elementary teachers’ enactment of high-leverage practices through engineering design-based science instruction. Science Education, 102(2), 342-376. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21325
Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination, imagination and the fires within: design thinking in a middle school classroom. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 29(1), 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2010.01632.x
Chiang, I-C. A., Jhangiani, R. S., & Price, P. C. (2015). Research methods in psychology (2nd Canadian edition). Victoria, B.C.: BCcampus. https://opentextbc.ca/researchmethods
Chini, J. J. (2006). Comparing the scaffolding provided by physical and virtual manipulatives for students’ understanding of simple machines. Kansas: Kansas State University. https://krex.kstate.edu/dspace/handle/2097/6391
Chusinkunawut, K., Henderson, C., Nugultham, K., Wannagatesiri, T., & Fakcharoenphol, W. (2021). Design-based science with communication scaffolding results in productive conversations and improved learning for secondary students. Research in Science Education, 51(4), 1123-1140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09926-w
Cook, K. L. & Bush, S. B. (2018). Design thinking in integrated STEAM learning: Surveying the landscape and exploring exemplars in elementary grades. School Science and Mathematics, 118(34), 93-103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12268
Dankenbring, C. & Capobianco, B. M. (2016). Examining elementary school students’ mental models of Sun-Earth relationships as a result of engaging in engineering design. International Journal of
Science and Mathematics Education, 14(5), 825-845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9626-5
Demirbas, O. O. & Demirkan, H. (2007). Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic performance and gender in design education. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 345-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.007
Dosi, C., Rosati, F., & Vignoli, M. (2018). Measuring design mindset. [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 15th International Design Conference - Design 2018 (pp. 1991-2002). (21-24 May 2018). Dubrovnik, Croatia. https://doi.org/10.21278/idc.2018.0493
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. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.x
Ellefson, M. R., Brinker, R. A., Vernacchio, V. J., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Design-based learning for biology: genetic engineering experience improves understanding of gene expression.
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 36(4), 292-298. https://doi.org/10.1002/10.1002/bmb.20203.
Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1018-1110. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20040
Hess, J. L., & Fila, N. D. (2016). The manifestation of empathy with design: Finding from a servicelearning course. CoDesign, 12(1-2), 93-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1135243
Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. (2015). Basic knowledge about STEM education. http://www.stemedthailand.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/newIntro-to-STEM.pdf.
Institute of Design at Stanford. (2019). An introduction to design thinking process guide. https://dschoolold.stanford.edu/sandbox/groups/designresources/wiki/36873/attachments/74b3d/ModeGuide BOOTCAMP2010L.pdf.
Kavousi, S., Miller, P. A., & Alexander, P. A. (2020a). Modelling metacognition in design thinking and design making. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(4), 709-735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09521-9
Kavousi, S., Miller, P. A., & Alexander, P. A. (2020b). The role of metacognition in the first-year design lab. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 3471-3494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09848-4
Kelly, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework of integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.
Kolb, A. Y. & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experimental learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(2), 193-212. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2005.17268566
Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, C. D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., Puntambekar, S., & Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: putting learning by designTM into practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495-547. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1204_2
Laeser, M., Moskal, B. M., Knecht, R., & Lasich, D. (2003). Engineering design: examining the impact of gender and the team’s gender composition. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(1), 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00737.x
Lau, K. Y., Beckman, S. L., & Agogino, A. M. (2012). Diversity in design teams: an investigation of learning styles and their impact on team performance and innovation. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28(2), 293-301. https://www.ijee.ie/latestissues/Vol28-2/11_ijee2541ns.pdf
Lawanto, O. (2010). Students’ metacognition during an engineering design project. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 23(2), 117-136. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.20084
Lewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: bases for an accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255-281.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20111
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A.
(2019). Design and design thinking in STEM education. Journal of STEM Education Research, 2(2), 93-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z
Mayer, R. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 49-63. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003088013286
Morgan, G. A., Leech, N. L., Gloeckner, G. W., & Barrett, K. C. (2013). IBM SPSS for introductory statistics: Use and interpretation. New York: Routledge.
Myneni, L. S. & Narayanan, N. H. (2012). ViPS: an intelligent tutoring system for exploring and learning physics through simple machines. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on
Computer Supported Education. (pp.73-82). Porto: SCITEPRESS. https://doi.org/10.5220/0003924700730082
Paparo, M., Dosi, C., & Vignoli, M. (2017). Towards a DT mindset tool evaluation: factors identification from theory and practice. [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design. (pp. 367-376). 21-25 August 2017, Vancouver, Canada. https://www.designsociety.org/downloadpublication/39591/Towards+a+DT+mindset+tool+evaluation%3A+factors+identification+from+t heory+and+practice
Schauble, L., Klopfer, L. E., & Raghavan, K. (1991). Students’ transition from an engineering model to a science model of experimentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 859-882. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660280910
Schnittka, C. & Bell, R. (2011). Engineering design and conceptual change in science: addressing thermal energy and heat transfer in eighth grade. International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), 1861-1887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.529177
Schweitzer, J., Groeger, L., & Sobel, L. (2016). The design thinking mindset: an assessment of what we know and what we see in practice. Journal of Design, Business and Society, 2(2), 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs.2.1.71_1
Sullivan, S., Gnesdilow, D., Puntambekar, S., & Kim, J-S. (2017). Middle school students’ learning of mechanics concepts through engagement in different sequences of physical and virtual experiments. International Journal of Science Education, 39(12), 1573-1600. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1341668
Sung, E. & Kelly, T. R. (2019). Identifying design process patterns: a sequential analysis study of design thinking. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(2), 283-302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9448-1
Tas, Y., Aksoy, G., & Cengiz, E. (2019). Effectiveness of design-based science on students’ learning in electrical energy and metacognitive self-regulation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(6), 1109-1128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9923-x
Wendell, K. B. & Rogers, C. (2013). Engineering design-based science, science content performance, and scientific attitudes in elementary school. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 513-540.
https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20026
Yamane, T. (1970). Statistics – An introductory analysis (Second edition). Tokyo: John Weather Hill, Inc.
Yu, C-H. (2021). Threats to validity of research design. http://www.creative-wisdom.com/teaching/WBI/ threat.shtml.
Zohar, A. & Barzilai, S. (2013). A review of research on metacognition in science education: current and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 121-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2013.847261
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Journal of Turkish Science Education
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This license enables reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. CC BY-NC-ND includes the following elements: Credit must be given to the creator; only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted; no derivatives or adaptations of the work are permitted.
