Advertisement

Design Cognition: Strategies for Teachers in Practice

  • Michael E. GrubbsEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Technology Education book series (CITE)

Abstract

Developing students’ higher-order thinking capability is a fundamental goal of education. Thus, design cognition has been recommended as a viable approach to address this need. Yet, current research findings primarily illustrate how students think, not pedagogical strategies for enhancing students’ design thinking. Thus, the purpose of this chapter is to bridge research and practice, by presenting strategies and heuristics, for instructors, on how to provide feedback through assessments (pre, formative, and summative) and how design challenges can be used to situate students within a context that intentionally and appropriately develops their cognitive abilities.

References

  1. Barak, M., & Hacker, M. (2011). Learning theories for engineering and technology education. In M. Barak & M. Hacker (Eds.), Fostering human development through engineering and technology education (pp. vii–vxi). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bransford, J. D., & Vye, N. J. (1989). A perspective on cognitive research and its implications for instruction. In L. Resnick & L. E. Klopfer (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 173–205). Alexandria: ASCD.Google Scholar
  3. Brookhart, S. M. (2014). How to design questions and tasks to assess student thinking. Alexandria: ASCD.Google Scholar
  4. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Crismond, D. P., & Adams, R. S. (2012). The informed design teaching & learning matrix. Journal of Engineering Education, 101(4), 738–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Grubbs, M. E. (2016). Further characterization of high school pre- and non-engineering students’ cognitive activity during engineering design. Doctoral dissertation. ProQuest dissertations and theses database. (UMI No. 3662376).Google Scholar
  7. Hynes, M. M. (2012). Middle-school teachers’ understanding and teaching of the engineering design process: A look at subject matter and pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(3), 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lammi, M., & Becker, K. (2013). Engineering design thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 24(2), 55–77.Google Scholar
  9. Mentzer, N. (2014). High school student information access and engineering design performance. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 4(1), 4.Google Scholar
  10. Mentzer, N., Becker, K., & Sutton, M. (2015). Engineering design thinking: High school students’ performance and knowledge. Journal of Engineering Education, 104(4), 417–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. NAE (National Academy of Engineering) & NRC (National Research Council). (2009). Engineering in K–12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  12. National Science Foundation. [NSF]. (2012). Collaborative research: Understanding high school pre-engineering student design cognition, comparisons with engineering students. (Award No. 1160345). Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1160345&HistoricalAwards=false
  13. Petrina, S. (2010). Cognitive science. In P. A. Reed & J. E. LaPorte (Eds.), Research in technology education (pp. 136–151). Reston: Council on Technology Teacher Education.Google Scholar
  14. Purcell, A. T., Gero, J. S., Edwards, H., & McNeill, T. (1996). The data in design protocols: The issue of data coding, data analysis in the development of models of the design process. In N. Cross, H. Christiaans, & K. Dorst (Eds.), Analysing design activity (pp. 225–252). Chichester: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ritz, J., & Martin, G. (2012). Research needs for technology education: An international perspective. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 767–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Strimel, G. J. (2014). Engineering design: A cognitive process approach. Doctoral dissertation. Retrieved from Proquest. (3662376).Google Scholar
  18. Wells, J., Lammi, M., Grubbs, M., Gero, J., Paretti, M., & Williams, C. (2014). Design cognition of high school students: Initial comparison of those with and without pre-engineering experiences. Paper presented at the Eighth Biennial international technology education research conference, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  19. Wells, J., Lammi, M., Grubbs, M., Gero, J., Paretti, M., & Williams, C. (2016). Design cognition of high school students: Initial comparison of those with and without pre-engineering experiences. Journal of Technology Education, 27, 78.Google Scholar
  20. Zuga, K. (2004). Improving technology education research on cognition. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 14(1), 79–87.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Baltimore County Public SchoolsTowsonUSA

Personalised recommendations