Design thinking: Opinions and experiences of middle school students

Çiftçi, Ayşe; Topçu, Mustafa Sami

doi:10.14527/pegegog.2020.030

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(79 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Certainly, there must be the perception that Design Thinking is no longer an uncommon practice in education and that everyone is used to employing it as a problem-solving strategy. Nonetheless, Çiftçi & Topçu (2020) remarked that there are limited studies on the implementation of Design Thinking in education. This suggests that educators are still hesitant to apply Design Thinking despite findings from literature reviews by Panke (2019) showing how infrequently bad results are reported in Design Thinking case studies.…”

Section: Design Thinking: a Privileged Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Implementation of Design Thinking in Education: Will It Serve the Purpose?

Sulfan Syah,

Mohamad Nasri

2023

IJARPED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The swift advancement of technology makes the challenges we face more difficult daily. Design Thinking or DT is the most efficient approach for tackling these wicked problems. DT has been identified by industries as an indispensable skill in the twenty-first century. Even though DT has been utilized broadly in industries, there is still an inadequate number of DT implementations in education, particularly in Malaysia. One of the explanations is because of stakeholder impressions. Stakeholders continue to have reservations and negative attitudes toward DT. This concept paper will explore the implementation of DT in education and the factors affecting the stakeholders' refusal to implement it. The main argument for opposition to bringing DT into education is the convenience of utilizing the traditional problem-solving method rather than this novel approach, which is viewed as difficult to implement. Although DT is resource-intensive, it has its own sustainability because the approach is more flexible and can be revised based on the user's requirements. Hence, DT is more resource-economical than the traditional method. Confusion and misunderstanding about the execution of DT also contribute to educators' passive attitudes. DT is believed to be a privileged approach, yet the truth is it belongs to everyone. There is also the query of whether the local culture affects the implementation of DT. While the practice of DT is flexible and adaptable, it is crucial to consider Malaysia's cultural context while incorporating it into the education system so that it is effectively assimilated and resonates with students' diverse cultural backgrounds. DT is a theory that must be actively reinforced in schools to develop an empowered youth in the 21st century. DT is far greater than merely an approach to solving problems; it is a mentality that ought to be embraced in every aspect of life.Design Thinking: The Prelude "Everyone is a designer if they devise courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones "-Herbert Simon (1996).It has been embedded as humans in our nature to seek something new and keep changing our preferences. Since ancient times, humans evolved with the aim to have better living conditions in every aspect from accommodation to economic activities and lifestyle. The Fourth Industrial Revolution (IR 4.0) is the perfect example of how humankind strives constantly to have a bright future and even proves that the sky is not a limit. In recent decades, we have seen a breakthrough in the economic field due to the rapid development of technology, engineering, and communication resulting from the basic instinct of humans

show abstract

Section: Design Thinking: a Privileged Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Implementation of Design Thinking in Education: Will It Serve the Purpose?

Sulfan Syah,

Mohamad Nasri

2023

IJARPED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a differentiation strategy, design thinking can be applied in different contexts such as science education (Atacan, 2020;Çiftçi & Topçu, 2020;Lee, Yoon & Kang, 2014), graphic design (Duman & Kayalı, 2017), social studies education (Aydemir & Çetin, 2021;Koh et al, 2015), teacher education (Carroll, 2014;2015;Odabaşı et al, 2018;Öztürk, 2020), programming education (Avcu & Er, 2020), STEM education (Arifin & Mahmud, 2021;Avcu & Ayverdi, 2021;Hsiao et al, 2017;Li et al, 2019;Sarıkoç & Ersoy, 2022;Simeon, Samsudin & Yakob, 2022), educational game design (Caferoğlu, 2021), drama education (Polat &Bayram, 2021). Design thinking has been used in many studies concerning the education of gifted students.…”

Section: Figure 1 Differentiation Concept Mapmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of design thinking as a differentiation strategy for the education of gifted students: “City X”

Avcu¹,

AYVERDİ>²

2022

Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research aims to apply the City X Project as a 6-hour workshop for gifted students and evaluate the workshop. The study group consists of 25 gifted secondary school students (13 Female, 12 Male) who continue their education at the Science and Art Center (SAC) in a city center. During the application process, gifted students were introduced to the City X project, and information regarding the design thinking method was presented. The story of City X was provided to the students via a digital presentation. The given information was as follows: in the recent past, 40 people from the world were sent to a distant planet to form a colony and these people started to found City X city. City X citizens illustrate the specifics of the issues they face through "citizen cards" in many fields such as health, transportation, safety, and communication to the students and ask them for assistance in addressing the problems. The students are divided into 9 groups that have 2 to 3 participants using the game "Team Meter" during the execution of the workshop. Worksheets, a laptop or desktop computer with an internet connection, citizenship cards, a pen and paper were provided to each group to be used at each stage of the design thinking process. Students selected one of the citizenship cards and used the design thinking method to solve the problem written by the owner of the citizenship card. At the stage of empathy, they evaluated the emotions of the person they selected, and in the definition stage, they defined the social area of the problem raised by the City X citizen. The students later generated ideas for the solution of the specified problem, wrote their ideas on the worksheet, and picked an idea to prototype by group decision. The students prototyped their ideas during the prototyping and testing stages by drawing on the worksheet and completed their creations in various versions by providing feedback to each other. In the sharing stage, 2-dimensional drawings are transformed into 3-dimensional forms via Tinkercad and SketchUp programs. The 3D drawings were saved and submitted to the e-mail address of the City X administrator to be printed on the City X 3D printer. The worksheets used in the design thinking process, three-dimensional models, and the working dynamics of the groups were evaluated by students via Kahoot! web 2.0 tool. The criteria stated in the Kahoot! digital evaluation tools were scored in the range of 1-4 points. The views of students about the workshop were also collected verbally. The students reported that they enjoyed the process of design thinking, that they were pleased to do 3D drawings, that they wished to specialize in 3D design, and that they had several problems with teammates occasionally. One can suggest that the methods applied in the City X workshop can also be included in the course designs within the scope of STEM courses and design thinking methods can be adopted in SAC framework programs.

show abstract