Advertisement

A Gamified Model of Design Thinking for Fostering Learning in Children

  • Rahul BhaumikEmail author
  • Apoorv Bhatt
  • M. C. Kumari
  • S. Raghu Menon
  • Amaresh Chakrabarti
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 135)

Abstract

Design thinking is a process that is used to systematically find goals, generate proposals to satisfy the goals, and develop these until satisfied; the areas of application are intended to be universal. This paper proposes a simplified model of design thinking called ‘IISC’ (Identify-Ideate-Select-Consolidate), a gamified version of the design thinking model called ‘IISC DBox’ for use by schoolchildren, and a generic framework for the assessment of gamified models of design thinking. The framework to assess the ‘gamified’ model, takes into account the nature of the constituent elements of the game, and also the outcomes and feedback of the players involved in the game. The assessment framework not only highlights the potential and effectiveness of the model but also throws light on the areas of its future improvement.

Keywords

Design thinking Children Gamification 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Authors acknowledge the support from the Design Innovation Centre, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.

References

  1. 1.
    Cross, N.: Design Thinking: Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Berg (2011). ISBN 9781847886361Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chakrabarti, A.: Creative engineering design, presentation slides. Lecture Notes for the National Programme on Technology Enhanced Learning (NPTEL), India. Available at http://nptel.ac.in/courses/107108010/ (2013)
  3. 3.
    Tekinbas, K.S., Zimmerman, E.: Rules of Play, pp. 1–90. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kapp, K.M., Blair, L., Mesch, R.: The Gamification of Learning and Instruction Fieldbook. Wiley, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    UNESCO: 47 million youth in India drop out of school by 10th standard (2016). Available at: https://casi.sas.upenn.edu/indusscitech/unesco-47-million-youth-india-drop-out-school-10th-standard
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Legault, L., Green-Demers, I., Pelletier, L.: Why do high school students lack motivation in the classroom? Toward an understanding of academic amotivation and the role of social support. J. Educ. Psychol. 98(3), 567 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holt, J.C., Fromme, A.: How Children Fail, vol. 5. Pitman, New York (1964)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Benson, C.: Design and technology: a ‘new’ subject for the English National Curriculum. In: International Handbook of Research and Development in Technology Education, pp. 17–30Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    About Doreen Nelson (2009). Available at: https://www.cpp.edu/~dnelson/aboutdoreen.html
  12. 12.
    Dunne, J.: Back to the rough ground: ‘Phronesis’ and ‘techne’ in modern philosophy and in Aristotle (1993)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Natarajan, C., Chunawala, S.: Technology and vocational education in India. In: International Handbook of Research and Development in Technology Education, pp. 105–116 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brown, T.: Change by Design—How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation. Harper Collins (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chakrabarti, A.: The future of product development in India. In: The Future of Product Development. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wölfel,C., Merritt,T.: Method card design dimensions: a survey of card-based design tools. In: 14th IFIP TC 13 International Conference Cape Town, South Africa, Proceedings, Part I (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pahl, G., Beitz, W.: Engineering Design, the Design Council, vol. 12, pp. 221–226. Springer, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roozenburg, N.F., Eekels, J.: Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods, vol. 2. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ulrich, K.T.: Product Design and Development. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gee, J.P.: Learning and games. Ecol Games Connect Youth Games Learn 3, 21–40 (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ertmer, P.A., Newby, T.J.: Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Perform. Improve. Q. 6 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Human Performance Research Group, N.A.S.A. NASA Task Load Index (TLX) v. 1.0: Paper and Pencil Package. Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center (1986)Google Scholar
  23. 23.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rahul Bhaumik
    • 1
    Email author
  • Apoorv Bhatt
    • 1
  • M. C. Kumari
    • 2
  • S. Raghu Menon
    • 2
  • Amaresh Chakrabarti
    • 1
  1. 1.IDeaS LabCentre for Product Design and Manufacturing, Indian Institute of ScienceBengaluruIndia
  2. 2.Design Innovation Center, IIScCentre for Product Design and Manufacturing, Indian Institute of ScienceBengaluruIndia

Personalised recommendations