T. Whitehead, L. Buck, Jon Hewitt
{"title":"BLENDED LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES IN PRODUCT DESIGN EDUCATION","authors":"T. Whitehead, L. Buck, Jon Hewitt","doi":"10.35199/epde.2021.70","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the notable consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic has been a radical shift to blended learning across education settings, including HE. Blended learning has risen to prominence in the last year as students and tutors have been forced to adopt and adapt to new ways of working. Creative subjects such as design which rely on studio practice, peer-peer learning, and hands-on material experimentation have been challenged through adoption of these changes. This paper explores the short-term changes which have been made and assesses the impact for the near and long term future of design pedagogy. The study focuses on three contrasting accredited UK BSc product design courses;(1) top 40 rank HEI (2) bottom 20 rank HEI (3) online HEI. The authors reviewed course materials, suitability and adaptability for online teaching and student outputs from the last 3 years, including the use of online environments and digital prototyping to try and establish virtual design studios. Feedback from students and tutors is included and evaluated. The contrast between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in students from the 3 different teaching institutions is discussed along with examples of learning and teaching activities and their efficacy. The findings conclude that while innovative teaching methods are evident, there is a lack of design iteration and innovation, peer-peer learning and practised understanding of form and proportion. While new teaching methods and techniques show promise, the present need to maintain physical studio and learning spaces and to enhance the culture of practical, physical working is noted. © PDE 2021.","PeriodicalId":374364,"journal":{"name":"DS 110: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (EPDE 2021)","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DS 110: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education (EPDE 2021)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35199/epde.2021.70","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
产品设计教育中的混合式学习技术
2019冠状病毒病大流行的一个显著后果是,包括高等教育在内的教育环境彻底转向混合学习。混合式学习在去年变得越来越突出,因为学生和导师都被迫采用和适应新的工作方式。创造性的科目,如设计,依赖于工作室实践,同侪学习,动手材料实验,通过采用这些变化受到挑战。本文探讨了已经发生的短期变化,并评估了设计教育学近期和长期未来的影响。这项研究的重点是三个对比鲜明的经过认证的英国理学士产品设计课程:(1)排名前40位的高等教育学院(2)排名后20位的高等教育学院(3)在线高等教育学院。作者回顾了过去3年的课程材料、在线教学的适用性和适应性以及学生的产出,包括使用在线环境和数字原型来尝试建立虚拟设计工作室。来自学生和导师的反馈包括在内并进行评估。讨论了三所不同教学机构学生的内在动机和外在动机的对比,并举例说明了学习和教学活动及其效果。研究结果表明,虽然创新的教学方法很明显,但缺乏设计迭代和创新,缺乏同侪学习以及对形式和比例的实践理解。虽然新的教学方法和技术显示出希望,但目前需要保持物理工作室和学习空间,并加强实际的物理工作文化。©pde 2021。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。