Framing a holistic model of reasoning in the design process in technology education

Author:

Hultmark EllinorORCID,Engström SusanneORCID,Gullberg AnnicaORCID

Abstract

AbstractUnderstanding the reasoning in the design process is essential to comprehend design practice and promote students’ learning. Followingly, to effectively support students through the design process, it is crucial to pay attention to their reasoning. Therefore, in this study, we have built a model for students’ reasoning in the design process in technology education to be used as a utility in further research. Here, reasoning is viewed as the process of using premises to reach a conclusion. Drawing from philosophy of technology and philosophy of technology education, the model introduces relevant concepts that are particularly useful in technology education. The model incorporates two types of reasoning: means-end reasoning and cause-effect reasoning. Means-end reasoning involves identifying actions to achieve a desired end. While cause-effect reasoning leads to conclusions in the form of beliefs about causes, effects, consequences, and side-effects, which is important when predicting and evaluating in the design process. The model highlights the interplay between these two types of reasoning, where students would constantly move between them in the design process. The model involves a holistic view of the reasoning and the design process, rather than taking a purely instrumental approach. That the model fuse two types of reasoning, makes it applicable at any point in the design process and across different contexts in technology education. Overall, the model provides a comprehensive view of reasoning in the design process in technology education.

Funder

Royal Institute of Technology

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference50 articles.

1. Alamäki, A. (2000). Technological reasoning as a human side of technological innovation. In Innovation and Diffusion in Technology Education: Proceedings of PATT-10 Conference (pp. 9–15). PATT.

2. Ankiewicz, P. J. (2019). Andrew Feenberg: Implications of critical theory for technology education. In J. R. Dakers, J. Hallström, & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), Reflections on Technology for Educational Practitioners (pp. 115–130). Brill Sense.

3. Autio, O., & Soobik, M. (2017). Technological knowledge and reasoning in Finnish and Estonian technology education. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 3(1), 193–202.

4. Buckley, J., Seery, N., Canty, D., & Gumaelius, L. (2018). Visualization, inductive reasoning, and memory span as components of fluid intelligence: Implications for technology education. International Journal of Educational Research, 90, 64–77.

5. Citrohn, B., Stolpe, K., Svensson, M., & Bernard, J. (2022). Affordances of models and modelling: A study of four technology design projects in the Swedish secondary school. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 27(3), 58–75.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Pedagogical infrastructures in multidisciplinary technology education;International Journal of Technology and Design Education;2024-07-31

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3