Ravishankar Chatta Subramaniam, Nikhil Borse, Amir Bralin, Jason W. Morphew, Carina M. Rebello, N. Sanjay Rebello
{"title":"在为期多周的基于工程设计(ED)的物理入门实验任务中调查设计与科学的联系","authors":"Ravishankar Chatta Subramaniam, Nikhil Borse, Amir Bralin, Jason W. Morphew, Carina M. Rebello, N. Sanjay Rebello","doi":"arxiv-2409.08224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reform documents advocate for innovative pedagogical strategies to enhance\nstudent learning. A key innovation is the integration of science and\nengineering practices through Engineering Design (ED)-based physics laboratory\ntasks, where students tackle engineering design problems by applying physics\nprinciples. While this approach has its benefits, research shows that students\ndo not always effectively apply scientific concepts, but instead rely on\ntrial-and-error approaches, and end up gadgeteering their way to a solution.\nThis leads to what is commonly referred to as the \"design-science gap\" -- that\nstudents do not always consciously apply science concepts while solving a\ndesign problem. However, as obvious as the notion of a `gap' may appear, there\nseems to exist no consensus on the definitions of `design' and `science',\nfurther complicating the understanding of this `gap'. This qualitative study\naddresses the notion of the design-science gap by examining student-groups'\ndiscussions and written lab reports from a multi-week ED-based undergraduate\nintroductory physics laboratory task. Building on our earlier studies, we\ndeveloped and employed a nuanced, multi-layered coding scheme inspired by the\nGioia Framework to characterize `design thinking' and `science thinking'. We\ndiscuss how student-groups engage in various aspects of design and how they\napply concepts physics principles to solve the problem. In the process, we\ndemonstrate the interconnectedness of students' design thinking and science\nthinking. We advocate for the usage of the term ``design--science connection''\nas opposed to ``design--science gap'' to deepen both design and scientific\nthinking. Our findings offer valuable insights for educators in design-based\nscience education.","PeriodicalId":501565,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - PHYS - Physics Education","volume":"54 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the Design--Science Connection in a multi-week Engineering Design (ED)-based introductory physics laboratory task\",\"authors\":\"Ravishankar Chatta Subramaniam, Nikhil Borse, Amir Bralin, Jason W. Morphew, Carina M. Rebello, N. Sanjay Rebello\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2409.08224\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reform documents advocate for innovative pedagogical strategies to enhance\\nstudent learning. A key innovation is the integration of science and\\nengineering practices through Engineering Design (ED)-based physics laboratory\\ntasks, where students tackle engineering design problems by applying physics\\nprinciples. While this approach has its benefits, research shows that students\\ndo not always effectively apply scientific concepts, but instead rely on\\ntrial-and-error approaches, and end up gadgeteering their way to a solution.\\nThis leads to what is commonly referred to as the \\\"design-science gap\\\" -- that\\nstudents do not always consciously apply science concepts while solving a\\ndesign problem. However, as obvious as the notion of a `gap' may appear, there\\nseems to exist no consensus on the definitions of `design' and `science',\\nfurther complicating the understanding of this `gap'. This qualitative study\\naddresses the notion of the design-science gap by examining student-groups'\\ndiscussions and written lab reports from a multi-week ED-based undergraduate\\nintroductory physics laboratory task. Building on our earlier studies, we\\ndeveloped and employed a nuanced, multi-layered coding scheme inspired by the\\nGioia Framework to characterize `design thinking' and `science thinking'. We\\ndiscuss how student-groups engage in various aspects of design and how they\\napply concepts physics principles to solve the problem. In the process, we\\ndemonstrate the interconnectedness of students' design thinking and science\\nthinking. We advocate for the usage of the term ``design--science connection''\\nas opposed to ``design--science gap'' to deepen both design and scientific\\nthinking. Our findings offer valuable insights for educators in design-based\\nscience education.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - PHYS - Physics Education\",\"volume\":\"54 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - PHYS - Physics Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.08224\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - PHYS - Physics Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.08224","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Investigating the Design--Science Connection in a multi-week Engineering Design (ED)-based introductory physics laboratory task
Reform documents advocate for innovative pedagogical strategies to enhance
student learning. A key innovation is the integration of science and
engineering practices through Engineering Design (ED)-based physics laboratory
tasks, where students tackle engineering design problems by applying physics
principles. While this approach has its benefits, research shows that students
do not always effectively apply scientific concepts, but instead rely on
trial-and-error approaches, and end up gadgeteering their way to a solution.
This leads to what is commonly referred to as the "design-science gap" -- that
students do not always consciously apply science concepts while solving a
design problem. However, as obvious as the notion of a `gap' may appear, there
seems to exist no consensus on the definitions of `design' and `science',
further complicating the understanding of this `gap'. This qualitative study
addresses the notion of the design-science gap by examining student-groups'
discussions and written lab reports from a multi-week ED-based undergraduate
introductory physics laboratory task. Building on our earlier studies, we
developed and employed a nuanced, multi-layered coding scheme inspired by the
Gioia Framework to characterize `design thinking' and `science thinking'. We
discuss how student-groups engage in various aspects of design and how they
apply concepts physics principles to solve the problem. In the process, we
demonstrate the interconnectedness of students' design thinking and science
thinking. We advocate for the usage of the term ``design--science connection''
as opposed to ``design--science gap'' to deepen both design and scientific
thinking. Our findings offer valuable insights for educators in design-based
science education.