Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A pedagogic approach to enhance creative Ideation in classroom practice

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The real intent for technology education is to prepare young people so that they may fully participate and function in human society. To achieve this aim, learners are guided towards the development of attributes that include perceptive, critical, creative and informed decision making. Although effective teaching strives to inspire the creative spark in every learner, there is little guidance to inform actual classroom practice. The selection of strategies and implementation methods that engender creative responses in students, is usually left to an individual teacher’s interpretation. A working knowledge of design processing provides a most advantageous methodology to guide teaching and learning as students develop ways “of knowing through thinking and doing,” Sharma and Poole (Des Manag Inst 20(4):64–74, 2010) within classroom design and technological practice. This article looks at the broad stage of Ideation in creative design practice, where designers instigate and generate ideas within their own practice. Insight and transferable skills are observed to inform classroom practice. One event from the ideation stage of design practice processing is selected to enhance student visual communication skills. A pedagogic approach is then shared to inform the implimentation of a teaching and learning strategy that has been trialled with design (aged from 12 to 18 years) and Initial Teacher Education adult students.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Communities of Practice seen by Wenger (1998) as having three key dimensions of mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoire present.

References

  • Archer, L. B. (1979). Whatever became of design methodology. Design Studies, 1(1), 17–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arends, R. (2014). Learning to teach. McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

  • Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1999). Creating contexts for learning and self-authorship: Constructive-developmental pedagogy. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, K. (1992). The nature of research into design and technology education design curriculum matters: Loughborough University of Technology. http://www.lboro.ac.uk/idater/downloads_orange/Nature%20of%20Research.PDF. Accessed 22 April 2008.

  • Baynes, K. (2009). Models of change: The impact on designerly thinking on people’s lives and the environment. Design and Technology Education An International Journal, 14(2), 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookfield, S. D. (2006). Authenticity and power. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 111, 5–16. doi:10.1002/ace.223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2008). Brown, T. (2008). Tim Brown: Tales of creativity and play [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/tim_brown_on_creativity_and_play.

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (1982). Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies, 3(4), 221–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2001). Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N., Dorst, K., & Christiaans, H. (Eds.). (1996). Analysing design activity. Wiley.

  • Eissen, K., & Steur, R. (2011). Sketching: the basics (ed. 2012) Amsterdam.

  • Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (2008). Five minds for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goel, V. (1995). Sketches of thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldschmidt, G. (1994). On visual design thinking: The vis kids of architecture. Design Studies, 15(2), 158–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, S. A. (1966). Design and the design method. In S. A. Gregory (Ed.), The design method. London: Butterworth.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Herrington, J., Reeves, T. C., & Oliver, R. (2014). Authentic learning environments. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 401–412). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life contexts: An alternative for design in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(3), 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hope, G. (2009). Beyond knowing how to make it work: The conceptual foundations of designing. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 14(1), 49–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illeris, K. (2003). Towards a contemporary and comprehensive theory of learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(4), 396–406. doi:10.1080/02601370304837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, J. C. (1977). How my thoughts about design methods have changed during the years. Design Methods and Theories, 11(1), 48–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T. (2001). The art of innovation: Lessons in creativity from IDEO, America’s leading design firm. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T., & Kelley, D. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreber, C., Klampfleitner, M., McCune, V., Bayne, S., & Knottenbelt, M. (2007). What do you mean by “authentic”? A comparative review of the literature on conceptions of authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, 58(1), 22–43. doi:10.1177/0741713607305939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B. (1997). How designers think: The design process demystified (completely rev) (3rd ed.). Oxford: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B. (2006). How designers think: The design process demystified. Routledge.

  • Lewis, T. (2005). Creativity—A framework for the design/problem solving discourse in technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 17(1). doi:10.21061/jte.v17i1.a.3.

  • Lucas, B., & Claxton, G. (2010). New kinds of smart: Teaching young people to be intelligent for today’s world: How the science of learnable intelligence is changing education. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mawson, B., & Maor, D. (2001). Beyond design: A new paradigm for technology education. Retrieved from: http://researchrepository.murdoch.edu.au/id/eprint/8683/1/BEYOND_DESIGN__A_NEW_PARADIGM_FOR_TECHNOLOGY_EDUCATION_2001_AARE.pdf

  • Mc Glashan, A. A. (2011). Designer stories: A commentary on the community of design practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(2), 235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mc Glashan, A. A., & Wells, A. W. J. (2013). The road less travelled: A pre-service approach towards the technology teaching profession. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(4), 939–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicolaides, K. (1990). The natural way to draw: A working plan for art study. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, P. (1998). The courage to teach. Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prats, M., Lim, S., Jowers, I., Garner, S. W., & Chase, S. (2009). Transforming shape in design: Observations from studies of sketching. Design Studies, 30, 503–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, P., & Aydede, M. (Eds.). (2009). A short primer on situated cognition. In The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 3–10).

  • Rogoff, B. (1984). Introduction: Thinking and learning in social context. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 1–8). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutland, M. (2009). Art and design and design and technology: Is there creativity in the designing?. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 14(1).

  • Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. A., & Wiggins, G. (1992). Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design Studies, 13(2), 135–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scrivener, S. (2000). Reflection in and on action and practice in creative- production doctoral projects in art and design: The foundations of practice-based research. Working Papers in Art and Design: An International Refereed Journal for Research in Art and Design, 1, 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., & Poole, D. (2010). It’s not what design is, it’s what design does. The Design Management Institute, 20(4), 64–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. F. (1998). Idea-generation techniques: A formulary of active ingredients. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 32(2), 107–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spendlove, D. (2008). 100 ideas for teaching design and technology. London: Continuum Intl Pub Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K. (2008). Designing matters; designing minds: The importance of nurturing the designerly in young people. Design and Technology Education An International Journal, 13(3), 8–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K. (2013). Designerly Well-being: Implications for pedagogy that develops design capability (pp. 1111–1126). Design Learning for Tomorrow: Design Education from Kindergarten to PhD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suwa, M., & Tversky, B. (1997). What do architects and students perceive in their design sketches? A protocol analysis. Design Studies, 18(4), 385–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suwa, M., Tversky, B., Gero, J., & Purcell, T. (2001). Seeing into sketches: Regrouping parts encourages new interpretations. In Visual and spatial reasoning in design (pp. 207–219).

  • Taylor, C. (1991). The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. J. (2000). Design: The only methodology of technology? Downloaded http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v11n2/williams doi:10.21061/jte.v11i2.a.4

Download references

Acknowledgements

This topic was initially introduced in the conference proceedings at the Technology Education New Zealand (TENZ) research conference in October 2015.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Curriculum and Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, University of Auckland, Symonds Street, Private Bag 92601, Auckland, 1150, New Zealand

    Ann McGlashan

Authors
  1. Ann McGlashan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ann McGlashan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McGlashan, A. A pedagogic approach to enhance creative Ideation in classroom practice. Int J Technol Des Educ 28, 377–393 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9404-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9404-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation