Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modelling as a Form of Critique

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Critique in Design and Technology Education

Part of the book series: Contemporary Issues in Technology Education ((CITE))

Abstract

This chapter is concerned with the cognitive and related physical manifestations utilised to further insight and refine cognitive processes. Modelling in all its forms is considered as a support for critique. Therefore modelling and models are seen as a critical aspect of the external and internal dialectic that supports new and better capacities to create and synthesise knowledge and meaning.

Regardless of trying to understand the world as it is or as it could be, navigating the unknown is variable. Modelling is a generative process that functions as a means of making explicit or externalising the variability in thinking. Directly associated with this capacity to make thinking visible (inside or outside the head) is the opportunity to critique and reason.

The relationship between modelling and behaviour is discussed, and as a result some of the key issues associated with the cognitive processes that support modelling as a form of critique are highlighted. Seeing in the mind’s eye is a natural human capacity that describes a broad cognitive skill that in general includes imagination, memory and visualisation. The capacity to utilise this skill as the basis for meaningful learning in Design and Technology is considered.

This chapter considers modelling in all its forms and discusses the speculative and enquiring nature of modelling as a critical feature of critique.

The chapter concludes by considering some of the implications for practice and highlights the need to consider the role of modelling within contemporary understandings of teaching and learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alibali, M., Phillips, K., & Fischer, A. (2009). Learning new problem-solving strategies leads to changes in problem representation. Cognitive Development, 24(2), 89–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, B. (1992a). A definition of cognitive modelling in relation to design activity. In P. Roberts, B. Archer, & K. Baynes (Eds.), Modelling: The language of design, Design: Occasional paper No. 1 (pp. 5–6). Loughborough: Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, B. (1992b). As Complex as ABC. In P. Roberts, B. Archer, & K. Baynes (Eds.), Modelling: The language of design, Design: Occasional paper No. 1 (pp. 7–11). Loughborough: Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, B., & Roberts, P. (1992). Design and Technological awareness in education. In P. Roberts, B. Archer, & K. Baynes (Eds.), Modelling: The language of design, Design: Occasional paper No. 1 (pp. 3–4). Loughborough: Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. California: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63(3), 575–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. (1963). Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(1), 3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, K. (1992a). Research into primary design and technology. In B. Archer, K. Baynes, & P. Roberts (Eds.), The nature of research into design and technology education, Design curriculum matters: Occasional paper No. 1 (pp. 15–21). Leicestershire: Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, K. (1992b). The ethics of representation. In P. Roberts, B. Archer, & K. Baynes (Eds.), Modelling: The language of design, Design: Occasional paper No. 1 (pp. 12–17). Loughborough: Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, K. (2014). Design: Models of change: the impact of designerly thinking on people’s lives and the environment. Loughborough: Loughborough Design Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borst, G., & Kosslyn, S. (2008). Visual mental imagery and visual perception: Structural equivalence revealed by scanning processes. Memory & Cognition, 36(4), 849–862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brousseau, G. (1980). Les Échecs Électifs dans l’Enseignement des MathĂ©matiques Ă  l’École ÉlĂ©mentaire. Revue Di Laryngology Otology Rhinology, 101(3–4), 107–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christodoulou, D. (2014). Minding the knowledge gap: The importance of content in student learning. American Educator, 38(1), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claxton, G. (2008). What’s the point of school? rediscovering the heart of education. London: Onework Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dave, R. (1970). Psychomotor levels. In R. Armstrong (Ed.), Developing and writing behavioral objectives (pp. 33–34). Arizona: Educational Innovators Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, W. R. (1998). Extensions to bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Sydney: Putney Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delahunty, T. (2014). Investigating conceptualisation and the approach taken to solving convergent problems: Implications for instructional task design, PhD thesis, University of Limerick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., & Treagust, D. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science, 25(6), 671–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish, J., & Scrivener, S. (1990). Amplifying the mind’s eye: Sketching and visual cognition. Leonardo, 23(1), 117–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaughran, W. (2002). Cognitive modelling for engineers. In 2002 American society for engineering education annual conference and exposition. MontrĂ©al, Canada, 15–19 June: American Society for Engineering Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Why heuristics work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(1), 20–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P., & ABC Research Group (Eds.). (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Osborne, J., & Wild, A. (2015). Beyond construction: Five arguments for the role and value of critique in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1668–1697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston-Wilder, S., & Mason, J. (2005). Developing thinking in geometry. London/California/New Delhi: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S., & Burnett, G. (2008). Spatial ability and learning to program. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 4(1), 47–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kell, H., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C., & Steiger, J. (2013). Creativity and technical innovation: Spatial ability’s unique role. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1831–1836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, A. V., Kimbell, R., Patterson, V. J., Saxton, J., & Stables, K. (1987). Design and technology: A framework for assessment. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempton, W. (1986). Two theories of home heat control*. Cognitive Science, 10(1), 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R. (2007). E-assessment in project e-scape. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 12(2), 66–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R. (2011). Wrong... But Right Enough. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 16(2), 6–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koen, B. V. (1985). Defintion of the engineering method. Washington, D.C.: American Society for Engineering Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosslyn, S., Ganis, G., & Thompson, W. (2001). Neural foundations of imagery. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(9), 635–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kounios, J., & Beeman, M. (2009). The aha! moment: The cognitive neuroscience of insight. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(4), 210–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Spatial visualization in physics problem solving. Cognitive Science, 31(4), 549–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D. (2011). Developing sketching expertise within technology education, PhD thesis, University of Limerick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D., Seery, N., & Gordon, S. (2009). The understated value of freehand sketching in technology education. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 73(3), 13–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D., Seery, N., & Gordon, S. (2010). A paradigm for promoting visual synthesis through freehand sketching. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 15(3), 68–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lohman, D. (1979). Spatial ability: A review and reanalysis of the correlational literature. Stanford: California.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarr, O., & McCormack, O. (2014). Reflecting to conform? Exploring Irish student teachers’ discourses in reflective practice. The Journal of Educational Research, 107(4), 267–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norström, P. (2013). Engineers’ non-scientific models in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 377–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novick, L., & Bassok, M. (2005). Problem Solving. In The cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 321–369). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohlsson, S. (2011). Deep learning: How the mind overrides experience. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ă–llinger, M., Jones, G., Faber, A., & Knoblich, G. (2013). Cognitive mechanisms of insight: The role of heuristics and representational change in solving the eight-coin problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 931–939.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, D. (2007). Mental imagery and creative thought. Proceedings of the British Academy, 147(1), 187–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, S., & Kosslyn, S. (1978). The representation and manipulation of three-dimensional space in mental images. Journal of Mental Imagery, 2(1), 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Scientific Education, 66(2), 211–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. (1992). Of models, modelling, and design: An applied philosophical enquiry. In P. Roberts, B. Archer, & K. Baynes (Eds.), Modelling: The language of design, Design: Occasional paper No. 1 (pp. 32–42). Loughborough: Loughborough University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, J., & McGrew, K. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In D. Flanagan & P. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 99–144). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholl, H., & Phelan, S. (2004). Using integrated top-down and bottom-up dynamic modeling for triangulation and interdisciplinary theory integration: The case of long-term firm performance and survival. In M. Kennedy, G. Winch, R. Langer, J. Rowe, & J. Yanni (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd international conference of the System Dynamics Society (pp. 1–20). Oxford: System Dynamics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, D., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectully talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 604–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63(2), 129–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, I. M. (1964). Spatial ability: Its educational and social significance. Michigan: R.R. Knapp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorby, S., Nevin, E., Mageean, E., Sheridan, S., & Behan, A. (2014). Initial investigation into spatial skills as predictors of success in first-year STEM programmes. In SEFI 2014 42nd annual conference european society for engineering education. Birmingham: SEFI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uttal, D., Meadow, N., Tipton, E., Hand, L., Alden, A., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817–835.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Design and Manufacturing Technology, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

    Niall Seery

Authors
  1. Niall Seery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niall Seery .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Science and Maths Education Centre (SMEC), Curtin University, Perth, West Australia, Australia

    P John Williams

  2. Goldsmiths, University of London, London, United Kingdom

    Kay Stables

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Seery, N. (2017). Modelling as a Form of Critique. In: Williams, P., Stables, K. (eds) Critique in Design and Technology Education. Contemporary Issues in Technology Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3106-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3106-9_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3104-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3106-9

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation