Modeling metacognition in design thinking and design making

Kavousi, Shabnam; Miller, Patrick; Alexander, Patricia A.

doi:10.1007/s10798-019-09521-9

Cited by 44 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To study and characterize design thinking in engineering and other fields, various approaches and perspectives have been developed and used, including (1) modeling design process (e.g., Dym and Brown 2012;Schön 1983;Simon 1996), (2) comparing experts and novices (e.g., Ahmed et al 2003;Göker 1997;Kavakli and Gero 2002;Tang and Gero 2001), (3) identifying and specifying design thinking strategies, tactics and skills (e.g., Lawson 2006;Wendell et al 2017), (4) examining specific cognitive features, such as cognitive load (e.g., Sweller et al 2019) and metacognition (Desoete and Özsoy 2009;Kavousi et al 2019;McLaren and Stables 2008), and (5) examining action and thinking in design teams (Hu et al 2018;McNeill et al 1998;Stempfle and Badke-Schaube 2002). Previous studies on design thinking have been fruitful, and also diverse in terms of different aspects or dimensions being focused on.…”

Section: Design Thinking As a Model Of Thinking That Is Important To mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given the fact that previous studies mainly focused on professional designers and engineers' cognition, studies on students' design thinking and its development are still limited. Existing studies have illustrated that this is a rich and fruitful area for scholarly discussion and research (e.g., Kavousi et al 2019;Strimel et al 2019;Wind et al 2019). Systematic studies on students' design thinking and its development, especially in and through STEM education, would help provide important foundations for developing sound educational programs and instruction.…”

Section: Codamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Design and Design Thinking in STEM Education

Schoenfeld

diSessa

et al. 2019

Journal for STEM Educ Res

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design and design thinking are vital to creativity and innovation, and have become increasingly important in the current movement of developing and implementing integrated STEM education. In this editorial, we build on existing research on design and design thinking, and discuss how students' learning and design thinking can be developed through design activities in not only engineering and technology, but also other disciplines as well as integrated STEM education.

show abstract

Section: Design Thinking As a Model Of Thinking That Is Important To mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Codamentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and Design Thinking in STEM Education

Schoenfeld

diSessa

et al. 2019

Journal for STEM Educ Res

170

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, there is a huge, identified need for understanding the process of learning in the new era, so as to improve educational systems. Since the most desired contextual framework to architectural education appears as design, systems thinking, modelling, social interactions, and innovations with reflective practice, a need for establishing convergence and mutual action of pedagogical orientation and personal beliefs is detected [5]. Architecture students' design projects should reflect the intentions of the designers, human centredness, and learning orientation [6], in order to meet SDGs for competitive and sustainable architecture education [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, students need to be able to manage resources, demonstrate independence and use disciplined and critical thinking to solve problems. Self-directed learning can be developed during education, but the current state of selfdirected learning in higher education shows deficiencies in the role of metacognition in open and flexible learning environments [5]. Moreover, self-directed learning could play a key role in transdisciplinary learning, and also in non-formal learning environments [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, learning as a cyclic process can be done through acquisition, inquiry, discussion, collaboration, practice, and production [11], which aligns perfectly with the design thinking process developed by Stanford university [12]. Design science as a teaching approach to architecture education is already being employed, framed in the phases of conceive, design, implement and operate, which significantly improves student skills for collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving, and affects the reflective processes in students [5][6][7][13][14][15]. Design thinking is an approach to solving some of the most complex, open-ended, and ill-defined problems in the real world [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Investigating Possibilities of Developing Self-Directed Learning in Architecture Students Using Design Thinking

Avsec

Jagiełło-Kowalczyk

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Education systems are struggling to effectively integrate in their study programs the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which define the challenges we need to overcome as a society in the 21st century. This study revealed the special agency that architecture and built environment have in shaping our social, economic, and natural environment using system and design thinking. Despite the several studies on the metacognitive design process, several cognitive traps still exist when developing design thinking in architecture education. This study investigated design thinking and self-directed learning in undergraduate architecture students. Responses collected from a sample of 117 undergraduates were subjected to bootstrapping in structural equation modelling to find significant relationships of reversed action when design thinking is used for developing self-directed learning. The findings suggest that design thinking is strongly connected with self-directed learning, and as shown in the resulting model, all components of self-directed learning are strongly explained by design thinking variables. This can provide insights for curriculum designers and educators on how to shape effective design thinking processes in architecture education to overcome existing shortcomings while improving interpersonal skills, creativity and digital skills, make pedagogical changes, and enhance redesign of learning outcomes towards sustainable architecture.

show abstract

Comparing reflective and supportive scaffolding in 3D computer‐aided design course: Engineering students' metacognitive strategies, spatial ability self‐efficacy, and spatial anxiety

Uslu

Durak

2022

Comp Applic In Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three-dimensional (3D) modeling provides a suitable context for the improvement of students' higher order thinking skills as it involves challenging and complex learning tasks. For students to succeed in difficult learning tasks, it is necessary to determine the effects of the scaffolding type given to the students in the learning process. This study asserts that reflective and supportive scaffolding has a critical effect on the dependent variables. Reflective scaffolding enables students to explain their reflective processes and clarify their reflective behavior, using personal reflection as a learning tool. Supportive scaffolding provides a process to develop knowledge and guidance on what participants should consider. This study compares the effects of different scaffolding types (reflective or supportive), students' prior knowledge on students' use of metacognitive strategies, spatial ability self-efficacy, and spatial anxiety in the 3D computeraided design course. A pretest and posttest 2 x 2 x 2 factorial quasi-experimental model was used in the study. This study was carried out with 118 undergraduate mechanical engineering students. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used in the analysis of the data. The results showed that the supportive scaffolding group scored higher in the metacognitive strategies variable than the reflective scaffolding group. The supportive scaffolding group showed higher spatial ability than the reflective scaffolding group. This study provides engineering educators with an overview of the use of scaffolding types, their effects on the effectiveness of learning environments, and the design of these environments.

show abstract

Modeling metacognition in design thinking and design making

Cited by 44 publications

References 12 publications

Design and Design Thinking in STEM Education

Design and Design Thinking in STEM Education

Investigating Possibilities of Developing Self-Directed Learning in Architecture Students Using Design Thinking

Comparing reflective and supportive scaffolding in 3D computer‐aided design course: Engineering students' metacognitive strategies, spatial ability self‐efficacy, and spatial anxiety

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About