Design Thinking For Educational Technology
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•358 views
The document provides an overview of design thinking. It discusses what design thinking is, how it can be used to solve "wicked problems", and some related approaches like LEGO Serious Play and participatory design. It also shares examples of design thinking workshops conducted at universities in Germany to redesign websites and develop curricula. Participants provided positive feedback on the creativity and cross-disciplinary nature of design thinking, though some noted it lacks ways to further develop ideas.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Design Thinking For Educational Technology
Similar to Design Thinking For Educational Technology (20)
More from Stefanie Panke
More from Stefanie Panke (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Design Thinking For Educational Technology
- 2. Where I am from, and what I do The Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), founded in 1981, serves the edtech community with international conferences, journals, digital library and social media channels (AACE Review). As the largest university-based local government training, advisory, and research organization in the United States, the School of Government serves more than 12,000 public officials each year.
- 3. Overview o Design Thinking Background o Workshop Examples & Methods o Discussion & Ideas
- 4. What’s the idea? Design Thinking Design Thinking is problem solving method geared to overcome wicked problems. o Transcend the immediate boundaries of the problem to ensure that the right questions are being addressed o Analyze, synthesize, diverge, generate insights from different domains o Drawing, prototyping and storytelling (Brown, 2009) o Constraints as inspiration (Brown, 2009) o Not directed toward a technological "quick fix” but toward new integrations of signs, things, actions, and environments (Buchanan, 1992) o Fosters civic literacy, empathy, cultural awareness and risk taking (Sharples at al., 2016) Design Thinking
- 5. Design Thinking and Cognitive Bias (Liedtka, 2015) Projection bias: People have a tendency to project their past experiences and thus over-estimate the extent to which the future will resemble the present. Hot/cold gap: People’s emotional state, whether emotion- laden (hot) or not (cold), unduly influences their assessment of the potential value of an idea. Egocentric empathy gap: People consistently overestimate the similarity between what they value and what others value. Focusing illusion: People tend to over-estimate the effect of one factor at the expense of others, overreacting to specific stimuli, and ignoring others.
- 6. “Even on a cursory inspection, just what design thinking is supposed to be is not well understood, either by the public or those who claim to practice it”. Kimbell, 2011 Design Thinking
- 7. http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/ 80 minute, interactive video with individual and partner activities, more at https://goo.gl/LU8q8 F Design Thinking: Resources
- 8. Related Approaches: LEGO Serious Play Lego Serious Play is a collaborative, creative method that uses Lego blocks and figures to develop scenarios for organizational development, conflict resolution or web design. Characteristics: • Strategic planning tools and systems • Improve group problem solving • Learning, listening and collaborating by making and creating • Building solutions and prototypes using bricks • Creating flow experience for participants
- 9. Related Approaches: Participatory Design Participatory Design is an approach that involves the users of a product early on in the development process. Characteristics: • Paradigm shift from ‘users as subjects’ to ‘users as partners’ • Based on participatory action research - empowerment Barriers: • Difficulties in organizing and expressing ideas • Difficulties in harmonizing implicit design goals • Difficulties in maintaining openness
- 10. Design Thinking is for YOU What’s on your plate right now? Take 2 minutes to note down what’s on your plate right now.
- 12. Design Thinking Use Cases Website Redesign Workshops o School of Government (2013/14) o Carolina MPA Website Redesign (2016) o Center for Faculty Excellence (2017) o Center for Public Leadership and Governance (2018) o Development Finance Initiative (current) Designing Web Apps / Tools Designing Courses / Curricula/ … o Public Executive Leadership Academy course design workshop series (2017) o Inclusive Community Engagement & Development (2018)
- 13. Design Thinking Examples: Website Strucure with LEGOs Content Sections Annotate Groups structure the main areas of the website / navigation / homepage
- 14. Please think about the website as a museum. What are 10 things you want to point visitors to? (Really useful resources, interesting events, services, downloads, projects…) Design Thinking Examples: Website as Museum (Flyer)
- 15. Design Thinking Examples: Content Types ‘Information Curators’ describe the content using visual building blocks provided
- 16. Design Thinking Examples: Website Categories
- 17. Design Thinking Examples: Website Strucure with LEGOs
- 18. Audience: Pwebsite ersonas Personas are fictional, yet data-driven, user biographies that allow design teams to relate to the users’ point of view instead of focusing on personal experiences and anecdotes. Understanding Website Audiences: Personas
- 19. Collaboration / Consulting Work at FH Münster, Germany https://www.fh-muenster.de/wandelwerk/index.php
- 20. o February 2018: Design thinking workshop at Muenster University of Applied Sciences (Germany) o Workshop theme: Inclusive community development - designing neighborhoods for engagement, social cohesion and inclusion o Part of the research cluster ‘participation and well-being’ o Participants: Faculty from different disciplines, city planners, architects and students Case Study A: Inclusive Community Development
- 21. Ice Breaker: Tell Me About Your Neighborhood – Who / What Is Not On the Map? o Draw a map of your own neighborhood. o What are some barriers to inclusiveness and social activities that you experience? o Who do you never meet in your neighborhood? Why do you think that is?
- 22. ‘I do not interact with the people in my neighborhood. Everyone has a house with garden, every yard is fenced in. And everyone gets home from work to do their own thing. Results: Unexpected Barriers
- 23. (1) DEFINE & FOCUS: Specify which social inclusion problem you want to solve. (2) GENERATE & DEBATE Generate 3-5 ideas to address the problem with novel solutions or disruptive technologies. (3) SELECT & SKETCH Choose one of your ideas and sketch it out in more detail (literally). (4) BUILD & PRESENT: Design a prototype or three-dimensional representation of your solution with the materials in the room (card board, paper, tape, clay). Design Thinking Cycle
- 25. o February 2018: Design thinking workshop at Muenster University of Applied Sciences (Germany) o Workshop theme: Pedagogical Planning for Engineers – training engineering students to become vocational school teachers o Participants: 10 Students o Location: Innovation Lab Case Study: Engineering Students As Teacher Candidates
- 26. Students worked in groups on lesson planning. Students identified threshold concepts. Curricular Planning & Lesson Planning
- 27. Design Thinking • We randomly assigned threshhold concepts. • Students develop a pedagogical approach using design thinking as a technique.
- 28. Evaluation o Qualtrics survey o Total of 18 responses (both groups): 11 (15) + 7 (8) o One binary, three Likert, four open ended questions o distributed by email with a personalized invitation link o Design Thinking book prize
- 29. Evaluation Results How effective is design thinking….. (n=18, participants from both workshops)
- 30. Evaluation Results – Positive Aspects o To receive impulses to think in other directions. o Interdisciplinary approach o The open approach and the integration of different perspectives. o Creativity, possibility to think through unconventional ideas. o Personas allowed me to see my students as actual people for the very first time.
- 31. Evaluation Results – Negative Aspects o It is unclear how to move from first ideas to further development of innovative, marketable products / services. o It lacks the opportunity to research whether the imagined solution already exists, and whether it makes any sense. o Realistic assessments of models and ideas: all comments and ideas were treated equal (both strength and weakness), missing data (ideas arise from a ‘gut feeling’)
- 32. o Encourage participants to build upon each others ideas o Make sure that participants tackle wicked problems o Structured Follow-up: Allow to further develop / research ideas, share back with the group o Time delayed two-day format, blended approach, flipgrid? Lessons Learned: Design Thinking Cycle
- 33. (How) Will You Use Design Thinking? Adapted from Sanders, Brandt & Binder, 2011 Panke & Harth (2018) / Harth & Panke (2018) https://goo.gl/QyCQVP https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326331098 Handout Planning Special Issue Forthcoming
Editor's Notes
- This presentation gives a detailed overview of workshop concept and results – and is intended to inspire others who are planning creative, collaborative formats and events.
- Design thinking is a problem solving method geared to overcome wicked problems, that have no right or wrong solution and resist traditional scientific and engineering approaches, as “the information needed to understand the problem depends upon one's idea for solving it” (Rittel & Webber, 1973, 161). Design thinking aims at transcending the immediate boundaries of the problem to ensure that the right questions are being addressed. The process foresees steps that allow participants to analyze, synthesize, diverge and generate insights from different domains through drawing, prototyping and storytelling (Brown, 2009). During the design thinking process, the facilitator encourages learners to see constraints as inspiration (Brown & Wyatt, 2010). The results are typically not directed toward a technological "quick fix” but toward new integrations of signs, things, actions, and environments (Buchanan, 1992). The essence of design thinking is to put learners into contexts that make them think and work like an expert designer, and thereby foster civic literacy, empathy, cultural awareness and risk taking (Sharples et al., 2016).
- Liedtka (2015) discussed design thinking as a method to reduce cognitive bias. According to her analysis, design-thinking practices carry the potential for improving innovation outcomes by mitigating an established set of cognitive flaws: people often project their own world view onto others, limit the options considered, and ignore disconfirming data.
- In 2005, the Hasso-Plattner-Institute of Design at Stanford University in California began to teach Design Thinking to engineering students. The philosophy behind this venture was the conviction that it is possible to train engineers and scientists to become innovators.
- We used the personas approach as a narrative tool to give workshop participants an authentic glimpse into the everyday life of people living in a prototypical neighborhood. Personas are an immersive way for bringing abstract target group information to life through the presence of a specific, fictional personality (Junior & Filgueiras, 2005). Acting as a “projection screen”, personas aid in identifying needs and possible behavioral patterns (Panke, Gaiser & Werner, 2007). After a brief overview of statistical data on typical demographics in a German neighborhood, participants worked in teams of 3, and designed 1-2 portraits, that outlined characteristics of each persona.
- In February 2018 the authors of this article were involved in a design thinking workshop at Muenster University of Applied Sciences (Germany) in the roles of facilitator and participant. Our case study analysis reflects both perspectives, and uses evaluation results to further illuminate how the workshop structure fostered creativity and empathy. A central aspect of the research cluster 'participation and well-being' at the Münster University of Applied Sciences is to seek ideas of how to develop the living quarters and neighborhoods in Germany cities. Despite the predominantly excellent digital infrastructure, the excellent health care and manifold assisted living offers in Germany, the potential of inclusion, equal co-existence and social coherence are not sufficiently supported.
- Since design thinking is a visual and haptic approach, we started the workshop with an exercise that tapped into the visualization and spatial thinking skills of the participants by asking them to draw a map of their quarter. Specifically, the task was to map out barriers to inclusion and participation.
- The personas and their legends delivered the necessary context for design decisions and priorities in the next step of the creative process, the design thinking cycle. During the design thinking process participants cycle rapidly through a series of tasks that prompt them to observe, brainstorm, synthesize, prototype and discuss. Each participant worked in a dyadic team. The partners went through four design sheets with structured prompts: DEFINE & FOCUS: Pick one of the personas and specify which social inclusion problem you want to solve for this person. Remember that how you describe the problem affects the solution, so pay attention to precise, concise and action-oriented language. Present to your partner. GENERATE & DEBATE Generate 3-5 ideas to address the problem with novel solutions or disruptive technologies. Aim for a large effect, broad reach and replicable results. Present to your partner. SELECT & SKETCH Choose one of your ideas and sketch it out in more detail (literally). Select the best-received, the most interesting to you, the most likely to be implemented, the most unusual or the solution with the most options for collaborating with others. Present to your partner. BUILD & PRESENT: Design a prototype or three-dimensional representation of your solution with the materials in the room (card board, paper, tape, clay). Let your partner / the gropup react to the prototype. Both express and receive positive and negative feedback, ideas for improvement or extension, and open questions.
- We went through two cycles of the design thinking process so that each participant developed, discussed, sketched, and built out two ideas. After the first round, we re-formed the teams, so that everyone worked with two different people, ideally each from a different context. While the conceptual idea stages where developed in a dyadic setting, each participant presented their prototypes to the whole group and got feedback from the plenum. Community Engagement can happen in different spaces and places, through events or programs, facilitated by technology and public infrastructure, comprising public, commercial and private spheres. The workshop participants developed 28 different design ideas.
- Seven weeks after the workshop, the participants received a result summary of the personas and the design ideas, together with a short online survey that comprised one binary, three Likert, and four open ended questions. The survey was distributed by email with a personalized invitation link. With two reminders, 11 out of 15 participants answered the questionnaire. As an incentive, we raffled off a recent design thinking book title among respondents.
- In retrospect, the personas method could have been used more effectively by giving more specific prompts to target diversity, e.g.: Create a persona that significantly differs from your own background. What feels difficult about telling this person’s story? What assumptions are you making? How can you learn more?