|
| |
The
Role of KBEs in Design Education: Supporting Reflection
Colleen M. Kehoe
GVU Center, Georgia Tech
| Read and Write
Comments |
My interests lie in the area of design education, particularly
the role that dialog plays in shaping and evaluating design ideas. Presently,
I am working with graduate and undergraduate students in Architecture and
Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) to investigate this issue.
Given the importance of dialog in design, we originally
thought that supporting online dialog would be a primary role for computers
in design education. But doing this well is more difficult than it seems,
because dialog is more than mere words. Critically important are the design
representations (physical, sharable artifacts that capture some
aspect of the design: models, drawings, graphs, etc.) which support and
guide the discussion. Even with scanners, digital cameras, etc. is difficult
to get representations into the online environment in a way that can support
the dialog. This is not to say that online dialog about design is impossible
or useless, but currently the costs of supporting dialog well are high
when compared to the benefits in many cases.
Instead, it is my position that a more promising role
for KBEs in design education is in supporting reflection. By reflection,
I mean "thinking about doing"--either what has been done in the past or
what needs to be done in the future. A few examples of this in projects
I'm currently involved with:
 |
In the "2CoOL Studio" (Collaborative On-Line Studio, iteration
2), 160+ freshman architecture/industrial design students are preparing
for a large design project by filling out a research matrix (questions
X methods) which will serve as a reference next semester. Each team chooses
a "cell" and investigates a particular question using a particular research
method. Students will post their individual reports and then be asked to
integrate and link them with other reports (perhaps other reports answering
the same question or using the same method). Students will be asked to
justify their designs next semester based on the findings in the research
matrix. |
http://magritte.cc.gatech.edu:8080/2cool/
|
In an undergraduate HCI class, students began by individually
conducting evaluations of an interface. They shared their findings in class
and, with the teacher's help, began to develop a set of categories for
aspects of the interface that could be evaluated. This was followed up
with an online activity that used the categories developed in class and
asked students to decide which category(ies) their evaluation fell into
and to summarize and try to generalize their findings. Students could also
add new categories and further develop any category definition (although
few did). |
http://magritte.cc.gatech.edu:8080/cs4750/
|
In an activity planned for the same HCI class, students will
report on their experiences in using different representations to explore
and explain their designs. They will be building a resource for future
students by explaining why they chose a certain representation, what they
learned from it, and how well it served their purpose. They will also be
asked to link and integrate these with entries from other students. |
My approach to this is very much inspired by case-based reasoning
(Kolodner), a model of cognition which emphasizes learning from experience
and the importance of reflection in this process. The Learning-By-Design
project (Kolodner, et al.) relies on this same model and has also influenced
my approach. In general, I would describe these activities as having three
phases: select, articulate, and connect. First, students must select what
they are going to put online and how they will present it. Then, they actually
develop the content they want to put online. Finally, they must connect
it to a larger picture, either an existing framework or the work of other
students. These reflective activities are the kind that we believe promote
deep learning, but can be overlooked with the focus on the "doing" of the
design. This is the situation that I am interested in addressing with KBEs.
My main interest is in the theme of KBE pedagogy, but
I am also very much concerned with evaluation. My role in the projects
mentioned varies from technical support to designer to evaluator, so I
believe I can bring some insight to these discussions on many different
levels. Also, I am currently working on my thesis proposal and would welcome
the opportunity to exchange ideas with others working in this area. I am
in my 6th year in the Ph.D. program at Georgia Tech and my advisor is Mark
Guzdial.
|
