Effects of Toy Crane Design-Based Learning on Simple Machines

Korur, Fikret; Efe, Gülfem; Erdogan, Fisun; Tunç, Berna

doi:10.1007/s10763-015-9688-4

Cited by 19 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study has implications for the implementation of design-based learning in science education. Most fundamentally, it confirms previous studies that conclude that design-based learning can facilitate students’ development of scientific understanding (Apedoe et al, 2008; Chusinkunawut et al, 2021; Fortus et al, 2004; Kolodner et al, 2003; Korur et al, 2017; Marulcu & Barnett, 2016; Mehalik et al, 2008; Schnittka & Bell, 2011). However, to what extent this is true depends on how the engineering design process and scientific investigation are structured.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…As design-based learning provides students direct experience with and opportunities to reflect on what they are learning (Ellefson et al, 2008), it can be considered a kind of experiential learning. Given its experiential dimension (Eyler, 2009; Hall & Miro, 2016), it is evident that design-based learning can promote students’ learning (Kolodner et al, 2003; Korur et al, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Particularly when the process of creating and testing things occurs in social contexts where students share and discuss various ideas with appropriate scaffolding provided by a teacher (Gomez Puente et al, 2013), this experience is likely to foster students’ meaningful learning. Research indicates that design-based learning can facilitate students’ conceptual learning of science (Kolodner et al, 2003; Korur et al, 2017) to an even greater extent than inquiry-based learning (Marulcu & Barnett, 2016; Mehalik et al, 2008). Given the positive outcomes of design approaches based on both design through science and science through design (Apedoe et al, 2008; Fortus et al, 2004), it is unclear which approach results in learning becoming more meaningful for students.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of Initial Design Experience on Students’ Development of Scientific Understanding

Ladachart

Radchanet²,

Phothong

2022

Journal of Experiential Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In countries that endorse science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education as an educational movement, design-based learning is deemed a pedagogical approach. Purpose: Because the integration of the engineering design process and scientific investigation has been an issue in science education, this study examined the effect of initial design experience on students’ understanding of pulleys. Methodology/Approach: We used quasi-experimental research, comparing two experimental groups with one control group in terms of their understanding of pulleys, measured by 10 multiple-choice conceptual questions. We used a one-way ANOVA and Tukey's HSD tests to compare the groups prior to and after design-based learning. Paired-sample t-tests were used to compare the pre- and postscores of each group. Findings/Conclusions: The results indicate that, while the experimental groups did not have a better understanding of pulleys than the control group did in the pretest, they outperformed the control group in the posttest. Moreover, although the control group did not demonstrate a significant improvement, the experimental groups did so with large effect size. Implications: Based on the premises of experiential education, it is suggested that, for design-based activities to be effective, students should design using their prior knowledge before engaging in scientific investigation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Initial Design Experience on Students’ Development of Scientific Understanding

Ladachart

Radchanet²,

Phothong

2022

Journal of Experiential Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reasons for the use of design-based learning in K-12 education are that design is the defining aspect of engineering (Pleasants & Olson, 2019) and that engineering can meaningfully connect mathematics, science, and technology to help students learn the nature of STEM (Quinn et al, 2020). Research has demonstrated that engineering design-based activities can promote students' learning of STEM in many respects-not only disciplinary knowledge (Fortus et al, 2004), skills (Kolodner et al, 2003), and attitudes (Wendell & Roger, 2013) but also application of knowledge (Wendell & Lee, 2010), learning skills (Kolodner et al, 2003), and creativity (Korur et al, 2017). Despite the variety of learning outcomes shown to result from engineering design-based learning, little attention has been paid to design thinking (Cook & Bush, 2018;Long, 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the fact that a number of pedagogical models of design-based learning have been developed and examined their effects on students' learning of various domains of specific STEM disciplines, such as knowledge, skills, and attitudes (e.g., Apedoe et al, 2008;Chusinkunawut et al, 2020;Cotabish et al, 2013;Fortus et al, 2004;Kolodner et al, 2003;Korur et al, 2017;Mehalik et al, 2008), little attention has been paid to investigating whether, and what aspects of, such design-based learning can promote students' design thinking. Moreover, these models of design-based learning focus on forward engineering, in that students are challenged to solve engineering problems whose possible solutions, to some extent, are unknown to them.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ninth-grade students’ perceptions on the design-thinking mindset in the context of reverse engineering

Ladachart

Cholsin

Kwanpet

et al. 2021

Int J Technol Des Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, design thinking has become recognized as a necessity for every student, especially when they engage in design-based learning, as a pedagogical approach to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. However, design-based learning is mostly based on forward engineering, in which students' design thinking can be nurtured by designing unknown solutions. Little is known about whether design thinking can be facilitated in the context of reverse engineering, when students learn from already designed products. This study therefore seeks to explore the perceptions of 38 ninth-grade students on the characteristics of design thinking before and after a four-week reverse engineering project, using Likert scales to measure six aspects of design thinking, namely (a) being comfortable with uncertainty and risks, (b) human-centeredness, (c) mindfulness to the process and impacts on others, (d) collaboratively working with diversity, (e) orientation to learning by making and testing, and (f) being confident and optimistic to use creativity. The data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including means, standard deviations, paired-samples t-tests, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. The results indicate that two aspects, human-centeredness and being confident and optimistic to use creativity, were significant (p = 0.008 and p = 0.043, respectively), with size effects of 0.43 and 0.34, respectively. Based on this potential, reverse engineering can be a design-based learning approach to facilitate students' design thinking. It is recommended that instructional activities involving reverse engineering maintain some degree of ambiguity and risk to prevent design fixation among students.

show abstract

Effect of design‐based learning on achievement in K‐12 education: A meta‐analysis

Şen

2022

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design-based learning (DBL) offers opportunities to support students' content understanding. Previous DBL studies reported different effect sizes by using the data from one participant group. The goal of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis that would give a comprehensive picture of how DBL is connected to student achievement in different disciplines. In addition, we explored the moderators influencing achievement in DBL for K-12 education. After investigating contentrelated gains in our meta-analysis on 37 individual articles with 52 effect sizes, we found that DBL had a positive and large effect (g = 0.602) on achievement in K-12 education, and the effect size for science (g = 0.703) was higher than mathematics (g = 0.418) education. When considering the strong emphasis on science education in different DBL related frameworks and STEM (science, engineering, technology, and mathematics) education studies, this cumulative understanding could play an important role in the difference between science and mathematics. Studies that had control groups in the same school (g = 0.703) had statistically significantly higher effect sizes compared to studies that included control groups from different schools (g = 0.447). Studies with random assignment (g = 0.258) had statistically significantly smaller effect sizes compared to studies with non-random assignment (g = 0.623). In addition, the effect of DBL on

show abstract

Effects of Toy Crane Design-Based Learning on Simple Machines

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

Effect of Initial Design Experience on Students’ Development of Scientific Understanding

Effect of Initial Design Experience on Students’ Development of Scientific Understanding

Ninth-grade students’ perceptions on the design-thinking mindset in the context of reverse engineering

Effect of design‐based learning on achievement in K‐12 education: A meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About