Thinking in design teams - an analysis of team communication

Stempfle, Joachim; Badke-Schaub, Petra

doi:10.1016/s0142-694x(02)00004-2

Cited by 389 publications

(333 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

305

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While research on 'how designers think' has been substantial (e.g. Cross, 1982;Dorst & Cross, 2001;Stempfle & Badke-Schaub, 2002) the attempt to unpack design thinking as well as explicated reasoning in teacher team design talk is fairly novel. Prior studies on the design processes that teachers conduct in design teams have focused on outcome variables and tend to be very abstract.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches

Boschman

McKenney

Voogt

2014

Education Tech Research Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this study was to reach a better understanding of the intuitive decisions teachers make when designing a technology-rich learning environment. A multiple case-study design was employed to examine what kinds of factors (external priorities, existing orientations or practical concerns) influence design interactions of teams of kindergarten teachers. This study combines semi-structured interview data on teachers' existing orientations with analysis of teachers' design discussions during the design of learning material for a technology-rich learning environment. Three teams of teachers voluntarily participated. Findings on the existing orientations suggest that knowledge and beliefs about teaching and learning related to knowledge and beliefs on technology and early literacy. The analysis of teachers' discussions revealed that the process could be characterized to a large extent as brainstorms; and that problems are not addressed in depth. Rather they are resolved through brainstorming, and most argumentation falls in the realm of practical concerns: how to organize learning activities and how to respond to contingencies. The findings of this study suggest that teachers' explicated design reasoning is mostly influenced by practical concerns, yet their own knowledge and beliefs play an important role at the start of the design process. However, these existing orientations as well as the practical concerns that emerge during the conversation tend to be narrow in scope. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed in light of how this study provides understanding of how to support these teachers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches

Boschman

McKenney

Voogt

2014

Education Tech Research Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Engineers, working in teams, collaborate to optimize their solution by integrating team members' ideas and expertise (Stempfle & Badke-Schaub, 2002) and making decisions informed by those diverse viewpoints (Bucciarelli, 1994). Engineering requires negotiating between team members' differing viewpoints regarding the tradeoffs that emerge between design features and constraints.…”

Section: Engineering With Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Those who study collaboration and group work of engineering teams highlight how important interpersonal and social dynamics are to the process (Hacker & Kleiner, 1996;Hammond, Koubek, & Harvey, 2001;Stempfle & BadkeSchaub, 2002) and that the form of communication (inperson or virtually) within a design group matters (Harvey & Koubek, 1998). Stempfle and Badke-Schaub (2002) found that approximately 1/3 of the communication within a group designing collaboratively was aimed at structuring the group's process. Research comparing professional engineers to engineering students found that practiced professionals organized themselves as a group much more effectively than did the students (Smith & Leong, 1998).…”

Section: Engineering With Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research comparing professional engineers to engineering students found that practiced professionals organized themselves as a group much more effectively than did the students (Smith & Leong, 1998). Professional engineers also communicated with each other throughout the process to ''stay on the same page,'' understand their failures, resolve disagreements and challenges, and reflect on their process (Hacker & Kleiner, 1996;Harvey & Koubek, 1998;Smith & Leong, 1998;Stempfle & Badke-Schaub, 2002). All of which takes some social skill.…”

Section: Engineering With Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to the benefits of having multiple people with diverse perspectives working toward a solution, research highlights how important interpersonal and social dynamics are to engineering (Hacker & Kleiner, 1996;Hammond et al, 2001;Stempfle & Badke-Schaub, 2002) and that engineers' communication, in varying forms (Harvey & Koubek, 1998), and organization are important for effective engineering (Smith & Leong, 1998). Professional engineers communicate with each other throughout the process to ''stay on the same page,'' understand their failures, resolve disagreements and challenges, and reflect on their process (Smith & Leong, 1998;Stempfle & Badke-Schaub, 2002).…”

Section: Engineering With Classmatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Humanistic Side of Engineering: Considering Social Science and Humanities Dimensions of Engineering in Education and Research

Hynes¹,

Swenson²

2013

Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mathematics and science knowledge/skills are most commonly associated with engineering's pre-requisite knowledge. Our goals in this paper are to argue for a more systematic inclusion of social science and humanities knowledge in the introduction of engineering to K-12 students. As part of this argument, we present a construct for framing the humanistic side of engineering with illustrative examples of what appealing to the humanistic side of engineering can look like in a classroom setting, and opportunities for research that examines the dynamics that the humanistic side of engineering introduces into engineering learning and teaching. The illustrative examples are drawn from interactions among student-teams from elementary classrooms engaged in engineering activities that appeal to the humanistic side of engineering. Referencing these examples as well as other established engineering education programs, we will discuss opportunities for research in the education of K-16 students. These opportunities span understanding how students' attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions shift, particularly among traditionally underrepresented populations, to how students' engineering knowledge and practices develop in the context of a humanistic approach to engineering.

show abstract

Design and Construction for Performance

2018

Building Performance Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thinking in design teams - an analysis of team communication

Cited by 389 publications

References 10 publications

Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches

Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches

The Humanistic Side of Engineering: Considering Social Science and Humanities Dimensions of Engineering in Education and Research

Design and Construction for Performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About