Design Thinking: Opinions and Experiences of Middle School Students

The aim of the present research is to examine the opinions and experiences of 7th grade students towards design thinking. In this context, activities for design thinking about energy transformations included in the science curriculum were conducted for four weeks. Phenomenology method, one of the qualitative research methods, was used in the study carried out with thirty-six 7th grade students. The students' opinions about design thinking were obtained through open-ended questions and their experiences through diaries. Content analysis method was used to analyse the data collected from the open-ended questionnaire and the student diaries. In line with the students' views on design thinking, 7 themes emerged: Contributions of design thinking, difficulties encountered in the implementation of design thinking, difficulty level of design thinking stages, getting support during the implementation of design thinking, degree of appreciation of design thinking stages, spending time for design thinking activities in the future and participating in design thinking activities outside of school. As a result of the analysis of the diaries, three themes emerged: learning, satisfaction and criticism. It is thought that the opinions and experiences of middle school students towards design thinking will contribute to the design of learning environments in a more qualified way.

Tasarım Odaklı Düşünme: Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Görüş ve Deneyimleri

Mevcut araştırmanın amacı, ortaokul 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin tasarım odaklı düşünmeye yönelik görüş ve deneyimlerini incelemektir. Bu kapsamda dört hafta boyunca fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programında yer alan enerji dönüşümleri konusunda tasarım odaklı düşünmeye yönelik etkinlikler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemlerinden fenomenoloji yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma, 36 ortaokul 7. sınıf öğrencisi ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Öğrencilerin tasarım odaklı düşünmeye yönelik görüşleri açık uçlu sorularla, deneyimleri günlüklerle ortaya çıkartılmaya çalışılmıştır. Açık uçlu soru formundan ve günlüklerden elde edilen verilerin analizinde içerik analizi yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerin tasarım odaklı düşünmeye yönelik görüşleri doğrultusunda 7 tema ortaya çıkmıştır: Tasarım odaklı düşünmenin katkıları, tasarım odaklı düşünmenin uygulanması sürecinde karşılaşılan zorluklar, tasarım odaklı düşünme aşamalarının zorluk derecesi, tasarım odaklı düşünmenin uygulanması sürecinde destek alma, tasarım odaklı düşünme aşamalarının beğenilme derecesi, ileride tasarım odaklı düşünme etkinliklerine zaman ayırma ve okul dışında tasarım odaklı düşünme etkinliklerine katılma. Günlüklerin analizi sonucunda ise öğrenme, memnuniyet ve eleştiriler olmak üzere üç tema ortaya çıkmıştır. Mevcut araştırma kapsamında ulaşılan sonuçlar, ‘Bulgular’ başlığı altında ayrıntılı bir şekilde açıklanmıştır. Ortaokul öğrencilerinin tasarım odaklı düşünmeye yönelik görüş ve deneyimlerinin, öğrenme ortamlarının bu doğrultuda daha nitelikli bir şekilde tasarlanmasına katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

Kaynakça

Aflatoony, L. (2015). Development, implementation, and evaluation of an interaction design thinking course in the context of secondary education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Simon Fraser University, Canada.

Aflatoony, L. & Wakkary, R. (2015). Thoughtful thinkers: secondary schoolers’ learning about design thinking., In R. VandeZande, E. Bohemia & I. Digranes [Eds] LearnxDesign: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference for Design Education Researchers, Chicago. Aaalto: Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture, Vol. II, pp. 563–74.

Aflatoony, L., Wakkary, R., & Neustaedter, C. (2018). Becoming a design thinker: assessing the learning process of students in a secondary level design thinking course. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 37(3), 438-453.

Anderson, N. (2012). Design thinking: Employing an effective multidisciplinary pedagogical framework to foster creativity and innovation in rural and remote education. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education, 22(2), 43–52.

Baş, T., & Akturan, U. (2013). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri: NVivo ile nitel veri analizi, örnekleme, analiz, yorum. Seçkin Yayıncılık.

Byun, T., Ha, S., & Lee, G. (2008, October). Identifying student difficulty in problem solving process via the framework of the House Model (HM). In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1064, No. 1, pp. 87-90). American Institute of Physics.

Canestraro, N. (2017). The impact of design thinking on education: The case of active learning lab. Unpublished master's thesis, Universita Ca' Foscari Venezia, Italy.

Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination, imagination and the fires within: Design thinking in a middle school classroom. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 37-53.

Carroll, M. (2014). Shoot for the moon! The mentors and the middle schoolers explore the intersection of design thinking and STEM. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 4(1), 14–30.

Carroll, M. (2015). Stretch, dream, and do: A 21st century design thinking & STEM journey. Journal of Research in STEM Education, 1(1), 59-70.

Chesson, D. (2017). Design thinker profile: Creating and validating a scale for measuring design thinking capabilities. Unpublished doctoral, Antioch University, USA.

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(3-4), 93-103.

Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521-532.

Felton, M. K. (2004). The development of discourse strategies in adolescent argumentation. Cognitive development, 19(1), 35-52.

Forbes, C. T., Zangori, L., & Schwarz, C. V. (2015). Empirical validation of integrated learning performances for hydrologic phenomena: 3rd‐grade students' model‐driven explanation‐ construction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 895-921.

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), 1081-1110.

Girgin, D. (2019). Öğretmenlerin tasarım odaklı düşünmeye ilişkin bilişsel yapıları ve kavramsal değişimleri. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 5(2), 459-482.

Henriksen, D. (2017). Creating STEAM with design thinking: Beyond STEM and arts integration. The STEAM Journal, 3(1), 1-11.

Kabilan, M. K. (2013). A phenomenological study of an international teaching practicum: Pre-service teachers' experiences of professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 198-209.

Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., & Ryan, M. (2003). Promoting deep science learning through case-based reasoning: Rituals and practices in learning by design classrooms. In N. M. Steel (Ed.), Instructional design: International perspectives (pp. 89 – 114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Kwek, S. H. (2011). Innovation in the classroom: Design thinking for 21st century learning (Master’s thesis). Retrieved March 1, 2020, from https://redlab.sites.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj7141/f/kwekinnovation_in_the_classroom.pdf

Lor, R. R. (2017). Design thinking in education: A critical review of literature. ACEP Asian Conference on Education and Psychology, May 24-26, Bangkok, Thailand.

Lugmayr, A. (2011, September). Applying" design thinking" as a method for teaching in media education. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 332-334).

Mentzer, N., Becker, K., & Suttona, M. (2015). Engineering design thinking: High school students’ performance and knowledge. Journal of Engineering Education, 104(4), 417–432.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage Publications.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). London, UK: SAGE.

Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). İlköğretim kurumları için fen bilimleri dersi öğretim programı [Primary education institutions science instruction program]. Ankara: Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.

Norton, P., & Hathaway, D. (2015). In search of a teacher education curriculum: Appropriating a design lens to solve problems of practice. Educational Technology, 55(6), 3-14.

Painter, D. (2018). Using design thinking in mathematics for middle school students: a multiple case study of teacher perspectives. Doctoral dissertation, Concordia University, Portland.

Philloton, E., & Miller, M. (2011). Design, build, transform. Retrieved February 20, 2019, from http://www.studio-h. org/about

Preciado-Babb, A. P., Metz, M., & Marcotte, C. (2013). A phenomenological study of teachers’ professional learning and their understanding of mathematics for-teaching. In A. P. Preciado-Babb, A. Solares Rojas, I. T. Sandoval Cáceres, & C. Butto Zarzar (Eds.), Proceedings of the First Meeting between the National Pedagogic University and the Faculty of Education of the University of Calgary (pp. 79–84). Calgary: Faculty of Education of the University of Calgary.

Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important?. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330-348.

Retna, K. S. (2016). Thinking about “design thinking”: A study of teacher experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(sup1), 5-19.

Rotherham, A. J., & Willingham, D. (2009). To work, the 21st century skills movement will require keen attention to curriculum, teacher quality, and assessment. Educational Leadership, 9 (1), 15-20.

Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Vest, C. M. (2006). Educating engineers for 2020 and beyond. In The bridge linking engineering and society (pp. 38–44). Washington, DC: National Academy of Engineering.

Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Publishing.

Yuksel-Arslan, P., Yildirim, S., & Robin, B. R. (2016). A phenomenological study: teachers’ experiences of using digital storytelling in early childhood education. Educational Studies, 42(5), 427-445.

Zangori, L., & Cole, L. (2019). Assessing the contributions of green building practices to ecological literacy in the elementary classroom: an exploratory study. Environmental Education Research, 1-23.

Kaynak Göster