Problem solving patterns in design science research - Learning from engineering

Inactivity is the most widespread health risk factor in modern societies today, causing not only individual health problems but also immense costs for the healthcare systems. This emphasizes the need for improving population-wide impact of activity interventions, with particular attention to costeffectiveness, scalability, and delivery channels. In this paper, we present the theory-motivated design (drawing on the transtheoretical model) and empirical test of an IT-based physical activity programme (Personal Health Manager, PHM). In order to be as cost-effective as possible, the PHM was designed to have only few face-to-face contacts and to deliver supervision through the internet. Our design and implementation proved to be successful in a pilot test with 88 employees of an automotive company. The PHM increased participants’ activity, motivational readiness for change, functional capacity and transported the feeling of being well taken care of. Enhanced supervision did not increase performance. The results are first evidence that internet-mediated supervision can be successful in promoting physical activity and provide a starting point for investigating the role of faceto-face-contact and service levels in physical activity programs. The PHM and similar designs are also relevant to practice as the semi-automation makes them eligible for large-scale corporate or public health programs

Elementary Pre-Service Teachers’ Reflections on Integrated Science/Engineering Design Lessons: Attending, Analyzing, and Responding to Students’ Thinking

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and recent efforts in STEM education have highlighted a multi-disciplinary vision of teachers’ integrating science education and engineering design problem-solving for student learning and critical thinking development. However, elementary pre-service teachers (PSTs) typically are unfamiliar with engineering design. Since research is limited on elementary PSTs’ ability to notice student thinking for engineering problem-solving, the purpose of this exploratory study was to identify patterns in PSTs’ written reflections from their fourth-grade practicum teaching experience with an integrated science/engineering STEM unit. We adapted Barnhart and van Es’s (2015) teacher noticing coding scheme to examine PSTs’ level of focus (low, basic, or strong) in their professional noticing (attending, analyzing, and responding) of students’ thinking and engineering disciplinary core ideas. The results indicated that PSTs’ reflections focused more on attending to students’ engineering ideas than on analyzing and responding to students’ thinking. For NGSS engineering disciplinary core ideas, the PSTs reflected the least on defining and delimiting the engineering problem, focusing more on students’ idea generation to solve the problem and students’ thinking to optimize their design with less emphasis on evaluating design ideas. These findings suggest possible areas of emphasis for teacher educators to prepare elementary PSTs in developing their ability to attend to, analyze, and respond to students’ engineering thinking when integrating engineering design with science education

Elementary Pre-Service Teachers’ Reflections on Integrated Science/Engineering Design Lessons: Attending, Analyzing, and Responding to Students’ Thinking

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and recent efforts in STEM education have highlighted a multi-disciplinary vision of teachers’ integrating science education and engineering design problem-solving for student learning and critical thinking development. However, elementary pre-service teachers (PSTs) typically are unfamiliar with engineering design. Since research is limited on elementary PSTs’ ability to notice student thinking for engineering problem-solving, the purpose of this exploratory study was to identify patterns in PSTs’ written reflections from their fourth-grade practicum teaching experience with an integrated science/engineering STEM unit. We adapted Barnhart and van Es’s (2015) teacher noticing coding scheme to examine PSTs’ level of focus (low, basic, or strong) in their professional noticing (attending, analyzing, and responding) of students’ thinking and engineering disciplinary core ideas. The results indicated that PSTs’ reflections focused more on attending to students’ engineering ideas than on analyzing and responding to students’ thinking. For NGSS engineering disciplinary core ideas, the PSTs reflected the least on defining and delimiting the engineering problem, focusing more on students’ idea generation to solve the problem and students’ thinking to optimize their design with less emphasis on evaluating design ideas. These findings suggest possible areas of emphasis for teacher educators to prepare elementary PSTs in developing their ability to attend to, analyze, and respond to students’ engineering thinking when integrating engineering design with science education

Disciplinary Learning From an Authentic Engineering Context

This small-scale design study describes disciplinary learning in mathematical modeling and science from an authentic engineeringthemed module. Current research in tissue engineering served as source material for the module, including science content for readings and a mathematical modeling activity in which students work in small teams to design a model in response to a problem from a client. The design of the module was guided by well-established principles of model-eliciting activities (a special class of problem-solving activities deeply studied in mathematics education) and recently published implementation design principles, which emphasize the portability of model-eliciting activities to many classroom settings. Two mathematical modeling research questions were addressed: 1. What mathematical approaches did student-teams take when they designed mathematical models to evaluate the quality of blood vessel networks? and 2. What attributes of mature mathematical models were captured in the mathematical models that the student-teams designed? One science content research question was addressed: 1. Before and after the module, what aspects of angiogenesis did students describe when they were asked what they knew about the process of blood vessel growth from existing vessels? Participants who field-tested the module included high school students in a summer enrichment program and early college students enrolled in four general-studies mathematics courses. Data collected from participants included mathematical models produced by small teams of students, as well as students’ individual responses before and after the module to a prompt asking them what they knew about the process of new blood vessel growth from existing vessels. The data were analyzed for mathematical model type and science content by adopting methods of grounded theory, in which researchers suspend expectations about what should be in the data and, instead, allow for the emergence of patterns and trends. The mathematical models were further analyzed for mathematical maturity using an a priori coding scheme of attributes of a mathematical model. Analyses showed that student-teams created mathematical models of varying maturity using four different mathematical approaches, and comparisons of students’ responses to the science prompt showed students knew essentially nothing about angiogenesis before the module but described important aspects of angiogenesis after the module. These findings were used to set up an agenda for future research about the design of the module and the relationship between disciplinary learning and authentic engineering problems

A case study of work-integrated learning (WIL) within Design Factory New Zealand

Design Factory New Zealand is a centre within the faculty of Waikato Institute of Technology and is a problem solving and learning space which brings together students, industry and community leaders who are facilitated as a team to co-create a solution to a complex challenge. Students working within Design Factory are placed into inter-disciplinary teams which will therefore have a diverse range of study backgrounds (such as Engineering, Business, Information Technology, Media Arts, and Sports Science). Students are able to learn from each other, challenge each other and see the value of co-creating on challenges beyond their own disciplines and thought patterns. Design Factory New Zealand provides students the opportunity to work in new ways; to develop creativity, empathy, and communication; which enables each participant to be more prepared for the workplace of the future. Work-integrated learning (WIL) is the intentional integration of theory and practice to help prepare graduates in securing work within industry. Feedback from approximately 150 students and 10 industry partners has been collected on different aspects of the project journey for each semester since the inception of Design Factory in 2017. This presentation will focus on the deliberate interactions the Design Factory New Zealand has provided between industry and students that have been implemented to benefit both groups. We will share the key findings (anecdotal in some parts) from the parties involved and discuss where our main findings are leading us for next research stages

Unplugged Coding Activities for Early Childhood Problem-Solving Skills

Problem solving skills are very important in supporting social development. Children with problem solving skills can build healthy relationships with their friends, understand the emotions of those around them, and see events with other people's perspectives. The purpose of this study was to determine the implementation of playing unplugged coding programs in improving early childhood problem solving skills. This study used a classroom action research design, using the Kemmis and Taggart cycle models. The subjects of this study were children aged 5-6 years in Shafa Marwah Kindergarten. Research can achieve the target results of increasing children's problem-solving abilities after going through two cycles. In the first cycle, the child's initial problem-solving skills was 67.5% and in the second cycle it increased to 80.5%. The initial skills of children's problem-solving increases because children tend to be enthusiastic and excited about the various play activities prepared by the teacher. The stimulation and motivation of the teacher enables children to find solutions to problems faced when carrying out play activities. So, it can be concluded that learning unplugged coding is an activity that can attract children's interest and become a solution to bring up children's initial problem-solving abilities. Keywords: Early Childhood, Unplugged Coding, Problem solving skills References: Akyol-Altun, C. (2018). Algorithm and coding education in pre-school teaching program integration the efectiveness of problem-solving skills in students. Angeli, C., Smith, J., Zagami, J., Cox, M., Webb, M., Fluck, A., & Voogt, J. (2016). A K-6 Computational Thinking Curriculum Framework: Implications for Teacher Knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 12. Anlıak, Ş., & Dinçer, Ç. (2005). Farklı eğitim yaklaşımları uygulayan okul öncesi eğitim kurumlarına devam eden çocukların kişilerarası problem çözme becerilerinin değerlendirilmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakülte Dergis. Aranda, G., & Ferguson, J. P. (2018). Unplugged Programming: The future of teaching computational thinking? Pedagogika, 68(3). https://doi.org/10.14712/23362189.2018.859 Arinchaya Threekunprapa. (2020). Patterns of Computational Thinking Development while Solving Unplugged Coding Activities Coupled with the 3S Approach for Self_Directed Learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 1025–1045. Arı, M. (2003). Türkiye’de erken çocukluk eğitimi ve kalitenin önemiNo Title. Erken Çocuklukta Gelişim ve Eğitimde Yeni Yaklaşımlar. Armoni, M. (2012). Teaching CS in kindergarten: How early can the pipeline begin? ACM Inroads, 3(4), 18–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/2381083.2381091 Aydoğan, Y. (2004). İlköğretim ikinci ve dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerine genel problem çözme becerilerinin kazandırılmasında eğitimin etkisinin incelenmesi. Bell, T., Alexander, J., Freeman, I., & Grimley, M. (2009). Computer Science Unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. 10. Berk, L. E. (2013). Bebekler ve çocuklar: Doğum öncesinden orta çocukluğa. N. Işıkoğlu Erdoğan, Çev. Bers, M. U. (2018). Coding, playgrounds, and literacy in early childhood education: The devel_opment of KIBO robotics and Scratch Jr. IEEE. Brackmann, C. P., Moreno-León, J., Román-González, M., Casali, A., Robles, G., & Barone, D. (2017). Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged activities in primary school. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1145/3137065.3137069 Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. 25. Deek, F. P. (1999). The software process: A parallel approach through problem solving and program development. Computer Science Education. Demi̇Rer, V., & Sak, N. (2016). Programming Education and New Approaches Around the World and in Turkey. 26. Dereli-İman. (2014). Değerler eğitimi programının 5-6 yaş çocukların sosyal gelişimine etkisi: Sosyal beceri, psiko-sosyal gelişim ve sosyal problem çözme becerisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri. Doğru, M., Arslan, A., & Şeker, F. (2011). Okul öncesinde uygulanan fen etkinliklerinin 5-6 yaş çocukların problem çözme becerilerine etkisi. Uluslararası Türkiye Eğiti Araştırmaları Kongresi. Erickson, A. S. G., Noonan, P., Zheng, C., & Brussow, J. A. (2015). The relationship between self-determination and academic achievement for adolescents with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 36, 45–54. Fee, S. B., & Holland-Minkley, A. M. (2010). Teaching computer science through problems, not solutions. Computer Science Education, 20(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2010.486271 Futschek, G., & Moschitz, J. (2010). Developing algorithmic thinking by inventing and playing algo_rithms. Gretter, S., & Yadav, A. (2016). Computational Thinking and Media & Information Literacy: An Integrated Approach to Teaching Twenty-First Century Skills. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in k-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher. Harrop, W. (2018). Coding for children and young adults in libraries: A practical guide for librarians. 45. Hazzan, O., Lapidot, T., & Ragonis, N. (2011). Guide to Teaching Computer Science. Springer London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-443-2 Horn, M. S., Crouser, R. J., & Bers, M. U. (2012). Tangible interaction and learning: The case for a hybrid approach. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(4), 379–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0404-2 Hsu, T.-C., Chang, S.-C., & Hung, Y.-T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004 Ismail, M. N., Ngah, N. A., & Umar, I. N. (2010). Instructional strategy in the teaching of computer programming: A need assessment analyses. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. Ismail, M. N., Ngah, N. A., & Umar, I. N. (2010). Instructional Strategy in The Teaching of Computer Programming: A Need Assessment Analyses. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 7. Jitendra, A. K., Petersen-Brown, S., Lein, A. E., Zaslofsky, A. F., Kunkel, A. K., Jung, P.-G., & Egan, A. M. (2013). Teaching Mathematical Word Problem Solving: The Quality of Evidence for Strategy Instruction Priming the Problem Structure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 51–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413487408 Joohi Lee. (2019). Coding in early childhood. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. Kalyuga, S., Renkl, A., & Paas, F. (2010). Facilitating flexible problem solving: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychology Review. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2 Kesicioğlu, O. S. (2015). Okul öncesi dönem çocukların kişilerarası problem çözme becerilerinin incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim. Koksal Akyol, A. ve Didin, E. (2016). Ahlak gelisimi [Moral development]. In Cocuk Gelisimi icinde [In Child Development]. Lazakidou, G., & Retalis, S. (2010). Using computer supported collaborative learning strategies for helping students acquire self-regulated problem-solving skills in mathematics. Computers & Education, 54(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.02.020 Looi, C.-K., How, M.-L., Longkai, W., Seow, P., & Liu, L. (2018). Analysis of linkages between an unplugged activity and the development of computational thinking. Computer Science Education, 28(3), 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2018.1533297 McClure, E. R., Guernsey, L., Clements, D. H., Bales, S. N., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. H. (2017). Grounding science, technology, engineering, and math education in early childhood. 68. McLennan, D. P. (2017). Creating coding stories and games. Teaching Young Children. McNerney, TimothyS. (2004). From turtles to Tangible Programming Bricks: Explorations in physical language design. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-004-0295-6 Mittermeir, R. T. (2013). Algorithmics for preschoolers—A contradiction? Montemayor, J., Druin, A., Chipman, G., Farber, A., & Guha, M. L. (2004). Tools for children to create physical interactive storyrooms. Computers in Entertainment, 2(1), 12–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/973801.973821 Pane, J. F. (2002). A Programming System for Children that is Designed for Usability. 204. Papanastasiou, G., Drigas, A., Skianis, C., Lytras, M., & Papanastasiou, E. (2018). Virtual and augmented reality effects on K-12, higher and tertiary education students’ twenty-29 first century skills. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Pila, S., Aladé, F., Sheehan, K. J., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. A. (2019). Learning to code via tablet applications: An evaluation of Daisy the Dinosaur and Kodable as learning tools for young children. Computers & Education, 128, 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.006 Root, J., Saunders, A., Spooner, F., & Brosh, C. (2017). Teaching Personal Finance Mathematical Problem Solving to Individuals with Moderate Intellectual Disability. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 40(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143416681288 Scanlan, D. A. (1989). Structured flowcharts outperform pseudocode: An experimental comparison. IEEE Software, 6(5), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.35587 Sheehan, K. J., Pila, S., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. A. (2019). Parent-child interaction and children’s learning from a coding application. Computers & Education, 140, 103601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103601 Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review. Sigelman, C. K., & Rider, E. A. (2012). Life-span Human Development (7th ed.). Cengage Learning. Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Tech_nology and Design Education, 26, 3–20. Sullivan, A. A., Bers, M. U., & Mihm, C. (2017). International conference on com_putational thinking education. Imagining, Playing, and Coding with KIBO: Using Robot_ics to Foster Computational Thinking in Young ChildreImagining, Playing, and Coding with KIBO: Using Robot_ics to Foster Computational Thinking in Young Children. Sullivan, A., Elkin, M., & Bers, M. U. (2015). KIBO robot demo: Engaging young children in programming and engineering. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, 418–421. https://doi.org/10.1145/2771839.2771868 Threekunprapa, A., & Yasri, P. (n. d.). (2020). The role of augmented reality based unplugged computer programming approach in the effectiveness of computational thinking. Uysal, A. & Kaya-Balkan, İ. (2015). Sosyal beceri eğitimi alan ve almayan okul öncesi çocukların, sosyal beceri ve benlik kavramı düzeyleri açısından karşılaştırılması. Psikoloji Çalışmaları. Vorderman, C. (2017). Computer coding for kids: A unique step-by-step visual guide, from binary code to building games. Voronina, L. V., Sergeeva, N. N., & Utyumova, E. A. (2016). Development of algorithm skills in preschool children. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 233, 155-159. Wang, D., Han, H., Zhan, Z., Xu, J., Liu, Q., & Ren, G. (2015). A problem solving oriented intelligent tutoring system to improve students’ acquisition of basic computer skills. Comput. Educ., 81, 102–112. Wang, D., Zhang, C., & Wang, H. (2010). Proceedings of the 10th international conference on interaction design and children. T-Maze: A Tangible Programming Tool for Children. Wang, Danli, Zhang, C., & Wang, H. (2011). T-Maze: A tangible programming tool for children. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children - IDC ’11, 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1145/1999030.1999045 Woods, D. R., Hrymak, A. N., Marshall, R. R., Wood, P. E., Crowe, C. M., Hoffman, T. W., Wright, J. D., Taylor, P. A., Woodhouse, K. A., & Bouchard, C. G. K. (1997). Developing Problem Solving Skills: The McMaster Problem Solving Program. Journal of Engineering Education, 86(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00270.x Yıldırım, A. (2014). Okul öncesinde yaratıcı problem çözme etkinliklerinin yaratıcılığa etkisi (5 yaş örneği). Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. Yohanes. (2018). Mengajarkan Computational Thinking dan Coding Pada Anak-Anak. Amazing Grace. https://blog.compactbyte.com/2018/05/26/mengajarkan-computational-thinking-dan-coding-pada-anak-anak/ Yu, K.-C., Fan, S.-C., & Lin, K.-Y. (2015). Enhancing Students’ Problem-Solving Skills Through Context-Based Learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1377–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9567-4 Yuksel, H. S. (2019). Experiences of Prospective Physical Education Teachers on Active Gaming within the Context of School-Based Physical Activity. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.199 Zvarych, I., Kalaur, S. M., Prymachenko, N. M., Romashchenko, I. V., & Romanyshyna, O. Ia. (2019). Gamification as a Tool for Stimulating the Educational Activity of Students of Higher Educational Institutions of Ukraine and the United States. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.875 &nbsp

Teaching programming with computational and informational thinking

Computers are the dominant technology of the early 21st century: pretty well all aspects of economic, social and personal life are now unthinkable without them. In turn, computer hardware is controlled by software, that is, codes written in programming languages. Programming, the construction of software, is thus a fundamental activity, in which millions of people are engaged worldwide, and the teaching of programming is long established in international secondary and higher education. Yet, going on 70 years after the first computers were built, there is no well-established pedagogy for teaching programming. There has certainly been no shortage of approaches. However, these have often been driven by fashion, an enthusiastic amateurism or a wish to follow best industrial practice, which, while appropriate for mature professionals, is poorly suited to novice programmers. Much of the difficulty lies in the very close relationship between problem solving and programming. Once a problem is well characterised it is relatively straightforward to realise a solution in software. However, teaching problem solving is, if anything, less well understood than teaching programming. Problem solving seems to be a creative, holistic, dialectical, multi-dimensional, iterative process. While there are well established techniques for analysing problems, arbitrary problems cannot be solved by rote, by mechanically applying techniques in some prescribed linear order. Furthermore, historically, approaches to teaching programming have failed to account for this complexity in problem solving, focusing strongly on programming itself and, if at all, only partially and superficially exploring problem solving. Recently, an integrated approach to problem solving and programming called Computational Thinking (CT) (Wing, 2006) has gained considerable currency. CT has the enormous advantage over prior approaches of strongly emphasising problem solving and of making explicit core techniques. Nonetheless, there is still a tendency to view CT as prescriptive rather than creative, engendering scholastic arguments about the nature and status of CT techniques. Programming at heart is concerned with processing information but many accounts of CT emphasise processing over information rather than seeing then as intimately related. In this paper, while acknowledging and building on the strengths of CT, I argue that understanding the form and structure of information should be primary in any pedagogy of programming

Design approaches in technology enhanced learning

Design is a critical to the successful development of any interactive learning environment (ILE). Moreover, in technology enhanced learning (TEL), the design process requires input from many diverse areas of expertise. As such, anyone undertaking tool development is required to directly address the design challenge from multiple perspectives. We provide a motivation and rationale for design approaches for learning technologies that draws upon Simon's seminal proposition of Design Science (Simon, 1969). We then review the application of Design Experiments (Brown, 1992) and Design Patterns (Alexander et al., 1977) and argue that a patterns approach has the potential to address many of the critical challenges faced by learning technologists

Unpacking capabilities underlying design (thinking) process

Engineering graduates must know how to frame and solve non-routine problems. While design classes explicitly teach problem framing and solving, it is lacking throughout much of the rest of the engineering curriculum and is often relegated to capstone classes at the end of the students’ educational experience. This paper explores problem framing and solving through the lens of experiential learning theory. It captures core problem framing and solving approaches from critical, design and systems thinking and concludes with a table of learning outcomes that might be drawn upon in designing an engineering curriculum that more fully develops the problem framing and solving capabilities of its students