Transdisciplinary Learning Based on Problem Identification of Design Computational Thinking - A Case Study of the Topic of Marine Debris
Keywords:
Transdisciplinary learning, Marine debris, Design thinking, Computational thinking, Problem identification
Abstract
Aim: The purpose of this study is to explore how design students can identify marine debris problems and generate insights through the computational thinking learning process to better develop design students’ ability to learn across domains.
Methodology: We have set up a transdisciplinary learning course of "Design Computational Thinking", trying to introduce the knowledge of marine debris in the humanities and environmental sustainability into the course, combining design thinking and computational thinking processes, and guiding students to think about and evaluate problems in stages and complete thematic design. Finally, through the achievement report, Expert assessment, and semi-structured interviews with students, analyze and evaluate their learning effect.
Findings: It was found that students were creative in the way to deal with marine debris problems. Computational thinking can have an impact on the design process. In the process of design decision-making, students can think and express hierarchically, and use core strategies to solve problems.
Implications/Novel Contribution: This study provides a knowledge base for problem-solving through transdisciplinary and metacognitive learning. The combination of design thinking and computational thinking provides different levels of thinking models for problem-solving and generates insights.
References
Agamuthu, P., Mehran, S., Norkhairah, A., & Norkhairiyah, A. (2019). Marine debris: A review of impacts and global initiatives. Waste Management & Research, 37(10), 987–1002. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X19845041
Allsop, Y. (2019). Assessing computational thinking process using a multiple evaluation approach. International Journal of Child-computer Interaction, 19, 30–55. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.10.004
Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23.
Beckman, S. L. (2020). To frame or reframe: Where might design thinking research go next? California Management Review, 62(2), 144–162. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620906620
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.131
De Jesús, Á. M., & Silveira, I. F. (2021). Game-based collaborative learning framework for computational thinking development. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia(99), 113–123. doi:https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.redin.20200690
Díaz-Lauzurica, B., & Moreno-Salinas, D. (2019). Computational thinking and robotics: A teaching experience in compulsory secondary education with students with high degree of apathy and demotivation. Sustainability, 11(18), 5109.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The Nature of Intelligence.
Gravel, B. E., Millner, A., Tucker-Raymond, E., Olivares, M. C., & Wagh, A. (2022). “weebles wobble but they also commit to lifelong relationships”: Teachers’ transdisciplinary learning in computational play. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00373-9
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in k-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
Haq, I. U., Ramay, M. I., Rehman, M. A. U., & Jam, F. A. (2010). Big five personality and perceived customer relationship management. Research Journal of International Studies, 15, 37-45.
Helmane, I., & Briška, I. (2017). What is developing integrated or interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary education in school? Signum Temporis, 9(1), 7.
Hepburn, L.-A. (2022). Transdisciplinary learning in a design collaboration. The Design Journal, 25(3), 299–316. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2022.2048986
Hoebeke, S., Strand, I., & Haakonsen, P. (2021). Programming as a new creative material in art and design education. Techne serien-Forskning i slöjdpedagogik och slöjdvetenskap, 28(2), 233–240.
Holmén, J., Adawi, T., & Holmberg, J. (2021). Student-led sustainability transformations: employing realist evaluation to open the black box of learning in a challenge lab curriculum. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22(8), 1-24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-06-2020-0230
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., Hong, H.-Y., Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., . . . Hong, H.-Y. (2015). Design thinking and education. Singapore: Springer. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-444-3
Kuiphuis-Aagten, D., Slotman, K. M., & MacLeod, M. A. (2019). Interdisciplinary education: A case study at the university of twente. In 47th SEFI Annual Conference 2019-Varietas Delectat: Complexity is the New Normality, Budapest, Hungary.
Lee, H.-K., & Park, J. E. (2022). Digital responsibility insights from a cross-cultural design thinking workshop for creativity. Creativity Studies, 15(2), 451–466. doi:https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2022.14063
Lewrick, M., Link, P., & Leifer, L. (2018). The design thinking playbook: Mindful digital transformation of teams, products, services, businesses and ecosystems. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Mi-Youn, C. (2019). The effects of nursing college student’s mentoring activity on their college life adaptability and learning attitude. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 1(2), 70-74. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.5.10004-1
Owens, K. A. (2018). Using experiential marine debris education to make an impact: Collecting debris, informing policy makers, and influencing students. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 127, 804–810. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.10.004
Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2015). Design thinking research: Making design thinking foundational. New York, NY: Springer.
Rich, P. J., Egan, G., & Ellsworth, J. (2019). A framework for decomposition in computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, new york, ny. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/3304221.3319793
Rienties, B., & Héliot, Y. (2018). Enhancing (in) formal learning ties in interdisciplinary management courses: A quasi-experimental social network study. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 437–451. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1174986
Schon, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2013). Computational thinking: The developing definition. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3BkLhrB
Sharma, K., Mangaroska, K., van Berkel, N., Giannakos, M., & Kostakos, V. (2021). Information flow and cognition affect each other: Evidence from digital learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 146, 1-20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102549
So, W. W. M., Lee, J. C. K., & Chow, C. F. (2019). Environmental sustainability and education for waste management. In W. So, C. Chow, & J. Lee (Eds.), Environmental sustainability and education for waste management. education for sustainability. Singapore: Springer. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9173-6_1
Stefaniak, J. (2020). The utility of design thinking to promote systemic instructional design practices in the workplace. TechTrends, 64(2), 202–210. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00453-8
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20, 715–728. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6
Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725.
Allsop, Y. (2019). Assessing computational thinking process using a multiple evaluation approach. International Journal of Child-computer Interaction, 19, 30–55. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.10.004
Barr, D., Harrison, J., & Conery, L. (2011). Computational thinking: A digital age skill for everyone. Learning & Leading with Technology, 38(6), 20–23.
Beckman, S. L. (2020). To frame or reframe: Where might design thinking research go next? California Management Review, 62(2), 144–162. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620906620
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.131
De Jesús, Á. M., & Silveira, I. F. (2021). Game-based collaborative learning framework for computational thinking development. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia(99), 113–123. doi:https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.redin.20200690
Díaz-Lauzurica, B., & Moreno-Salinas, D. (2019). Computational thinking and robotics: A teaching experience in compulsory secondary education with students with high degree of apathy and demotivation. Sustainability, 11(18), 5109.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The Nature of Intelligence.
Gravel, B. E., Millner, A., Tucker-Raymond, E., Olivares, M. C., & Wagh, A. (2022). “weebles wobble but they also commit to lifelong relationships”: Teachers’ transdisciplinary learning in computational play. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00373-9
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in k-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
Haq, I. U., Ramay, M. I., Rehman, M. A. U., & Jam, F. A. (2010). Big five personality and perceived customer relationship management. Research Journal of International Studies, 15, 37-45.
Helmane, I., & Briška, I. (2017). What is developing integrated or interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary education in school? Signum Temporis, 9(1), 7.
Hepburn, L.-A. (2022). Transdisciplinary learning in a design collaboration. The Design Journal, 25(3), 299–316. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2022.2048986
Hoebeke, S., Strand, I., & Haakonsen, P. (2021). Programming as a new creative material in art and design education. Techne serien-Forskning i slöjdpedagogik och slöjdvetenskap, 28(2), 233–240.
Holmén, J., Adawi, T., & Holmberg, J. (2021). Student-led sustainability transformations: employing realist evaluation to open the black box of learning in a challenge lab curriculum. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 22(8), 1-24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-06-2020-0230
Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., Hong, H.-Y., Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., . . . Hong, H.-Y. (2015). Design thinking and education. Singapore: Springer. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-444-3
Kuiphuis-Aagten, D., Slotman, K. M., & MacLeod, M. A. (2019). Interdisciplinary education: A case study at the university of twente. In 47th SEFI Annual Conference 2019-Varietas Delectat: Complexity is the New Normality, Budapest, Hungary.
Lee, H.-K., & Park, J. E. (2022). Digital responsibility insights from a cross-cultural design thinking workshop for creativity. Creativity Studies, 15(2), 451–466. doi:https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2022.14063
Lewrick, M., Link, P., & Leifer, L. (2018). The design thinking playbook: Mindful digital transformation of teams, products, services, businesses and ecosystems. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Mi-Youn, C. (2019). The effects of nursing college student’s mentoring activity on their college life adaptability and learning attitude. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 1(2), 70-74. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.5.10004-1
Owens, K. A. (2018). Using experiential marine debris education to make an impact: Collecting debris, informing policy makers, and influencing students. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 127, 804–810. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.10.004
Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Leifer, L. (2015). Design thinking research: Making design thinking foundational. New York, NY: Springer.
Rich, P. J., Egan, G., & Ellsworth, J. (2019). A framework for decomposition in computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, new york, ny. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/3304221.3319793
Rienties, B., & Héliot, Y. (2018). Enhancing (in) formal learning ties in interdisciplinary management courses: A quasi-experimental social network study. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 437–451. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1174986
Schon, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2013). Computational thinking: The developing definition. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3BkLhrB
Sharma, K., Mangaroska, K., van Berkel, N., Giannakos, M., & Kostakos, V. (2021). Information flow and cognition affect each other: Evidence from digital learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 146, 1-20. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102549
So, W. W. M., Lee, J. C. K., & Chow, C. F. (2019). Environmental sustainability and education for waste management. In W. So, C. Chow, & J. Lee (Eds.), Environmental sustainability and education for waste management. education for sustainability. Singapore: Springer. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9173-6_1
Stefaniak, J. (2020). The utility of design thinking to promote systemic instructional design practices in the workplace. TechTrends, 64(2), 202–210. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00453-8
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20, 715–728. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6
Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725.
Published
2023-03-17
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
.png)
