The Effectiveness of The Design Thinking Teaching Strategy on The Problem Solving Style Ability of Elementary School Students In The Course of Thinking And Research

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Depaetment of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Arak University, Arak, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Arak University, Arak, Iran

Abstract

Problem-based learning (PBL) is an active and immersive learning approach that equips individuals with the skills to tackle real-world challenges. By fostering problem-solving abilities in students, educational systems can undoubtedly achieve their goals. As learners' decision-making and optimal solution-selection abilities improve, they can effortlessly meet their daily needs and achieve greater success (Yeung, Yuen, Chen & Lam, 2023). However, considering the current state of students' critical thinking skills, it seems that educational systems have not been entirely successful in fulfilling this mission. Existing educational and pedagogical approaches, particularly in developing countries, emphasize eclectic, unidirectional methods, and prioritize teacher and curriculum authority. This approach stifles students' focus on problem-solving, creative thinking, and independent learning, creating significant obstacles to the development of problem-solving skills. On the other hand, advanced educational systems, particularly in developed nations, emphasize the importance of strengthening problem-solving approaches to enable students to generalize their knowledge and learning to new situations (Gaulton, Crowe, & Sherman, 2023). It seems that one of the educational methods in this field is the instructional strategy of design thinking. Design thinking, as a novel approach for innovation and problem-solving, has attracted the attention of many researchers. Given the integrative capabilities of design thinking, the present study aims to investigate the effectiveness of integrating the design thinking instructional strategy in enhancing the quality of learning and problem-solving in the elementary-level "Thinking and Research" course. Since one of the fundamental objectives of this course is the growth and development of problem-solving skills in students, integrating the design thinking strategy into this course seems to be a promising avenue. Design thinking, as a model for restructuring methods and results, assists students in achieving creativity towards becoming deep thinkers. According to Renard (2014), design thinking is described as a cycle of (1) empathy and observation, (2) defining the problem, (3) ideation, (4) prototyping, and (5) testing. Design thinking, defined here as a learning strategy, helps in dealing with complex problems by maintaining deep learning processes in understanding the problem and various solutions (Kröper, Fay, Lindberg, & Meinel, 2010). In their study, Gaulton et al. (2023) demonstrated that design thinking serves as an effective method for fostering creative thinking environments and enhancing problem-solving learning among students. Given the points raised and the necessity to investigate research evidence regarding support for this educational approach, the present study seeks to address the question of whether integrating the design thinking instructional strategy into the "Thinking and Research" course is effective in improving the problem-solving abilities of elementary-level students.
This research employed a quasi-experimental method with a pre-test-post-test design involving a control group. The statistical population of the study consisted of all sixth-grade male students in Region 1 of Karaj city during the academic year 1401-1402. The sampling method for this research was accessible, and participants in the experimental group (19 individuals) and control group (19 individuals) were randomly selected. The experimental group received eight sessions of face-to-face training in design thinking, while the control group underwent the same number of sessions (eight) without this training. The data collection tool was the Problem Solving Questionnaire (Cassidy & Long, 1996). Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (analysis of covariance for hypothesis testing) were employed for data analysis.
Based on the results of the repeated measures t-test, the difference in means between the two measurement stages in both groups for both variables was statistically significant at the 0.001 level of significance (p < 0.001). Since the mean score of constructive problem-solving style in the post-test stage was higher than the pre-test stage in both groups, and the mean score of non-constructive problem-solving style in the post-test stage was lower than the pre-test stage in both groups, it can be concluded that both instructional methods, namely design thinking and traditional methods, have a positive effect on improving constructive problem-solving and reducing non-constructive problem-solving skills in elementary-level students. To determine which method had a greater effect, analysis of covariance was used.
Before conducting this test, the assumptions of the test were examined, and all were confirmed at a significance level greater than 0.05. The results of the multivariate analysis of covariance indicated a significant difference in the linear combination of constructive and non-constructive problem-solving between the two study groups. Based on the results, the difference between the two study groups in the constructive problem-solving style variable (F= 9.42, p < 0.001) and the non-constructive problem-solving style variable (F = 7.22, p < 0.001) was statistically significant. According to the adjusted means, the mean adjusted score of the constructive problem-solving style in the group receiving design thinking instruction was higher compared to the traditional method, and in the non-constructive problem-solving style variable, it was lower in the group receiving design thinking instruction compared to the traditional method, indicating that the difference in the effect of design thinking instruction compared to traditional method on both constructive and non-constructive problem-solving was significant. Based on the research findings, it is recommended to plan empowerment courses for teachers in higher education centers to familiarize them with design thinking patterns. This is important because teachers are the main drivers of design thinking in schools. Additionally, to enhance the effectiveness of the design thinking strategy, it is suggested to consider technological infrastructure, human resources infrastructure, and cultural infrastructure.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Cassidy, T., & Long, C. (1996). Problem Solving Style. Stress and Psychological Illness: Development of a Multi Factorial Measure. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 3, 265-277. 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1996.tb01181.x .
Cui, R., & Teo, P. (2023). Thinking through talk: Using dialogue to develop students’ critical thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 125, 104068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104068.
Deitte, L. A., & Omary, R. A. (2019). The Power of Design Thinking in Medical Education. Academic Radiology. 26(10), 1417-1420. 10.1016/j.acra.2019.02.012 .
Foster, M. K. (2021). Design thinking: A creative approach to problem solving. Management Teaching Review, 6(2), 123-140. 10.1177/2379298119871468.
García-Manilla, H. D. (2023). Application of Design Thinking and TRIZ Theory to Assist a User in the Formulation of an Innovation Project. In TRIZ in Latin America: Case Studies (pp. 57-79). Cham: Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-031-20561-3_3
Gaulton, J., Crowe, B., & Sherman, J. (2023). How Design Thinking and Quality Improvement Can Be Integrated into a “Human-Centered Quality Improvement” Approach to Solve Problems in Perinatology. Clinics in Perinatology. 10.1016/j.clp.2023.01.006 .
Guaman-Quintanilla, S., Everaert, P., Chiluiza, K., & Valcke, M. (2023). Impact of design thinking in higher education: a multi-actor perspective on problem solving and creativity. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 33(1), 217-240. 10.1007/s10798-021-09724-z.
Kamali Ardakani, F. (2011). design thinking; An effective way to creatively solve the problem. 4th National Conference on Engineering and Innovation Management, Industrial Organizational Creativity, TRIZ, Bionics and Innovation Engineering, Tehran. (in persian).
Kröper, M., Fay, D., Lindberg, T., & Meinel, C. (2011). Interrelations between motivation, creativity and emotions in design thinking processes–an empirical study based on regulatory focus theory. In Design creativity 2010 (pp. 97-104). Springer London.
Lynch, M., Kamovich, U., Longva, K. K., & Steinert, M. (2021). Combining technology and entrepreneurial education through design thinking: Students' reflections on the learning process. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 164, 119689. 10.1016/j.techfore.2019.06.015
Panke, S. (2019). Design thinking in education: Perspectives, opportunities and challenges. Open Education Studies, 1(1), 281-306. 10.1515/edu-2019-0022
Pourmahammadghoochani, K., ghadampour, E., Yousefvand, M., Padervand, P., & Aj, A. (2019). The Effectiveness of Cognitive – metacognitive strategies training the difference of Problem solving styles and referential thinking in high school female students. The Journal of New Thoughts on Education, 15(2), 203-216. doi: 10.22051/jontoe.2019.12602.1541. (in persian).
Ranger, B. J., & Mantzavinou, A. (2018). Design thinking in development engineering education: A case study on creating prosthetic and assistive technologies for the developing world. Development Engineering, 3, 166-174. 10.1016/j.deveng.2018.06.001
Renard, H. (2014). Cultivating design thinking in students through material inquiry. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(3), 414-424. 10.4236/ce.2014.56047
 Uslu, M., & Girgin, Ç. (2010). The effects of residential conditions on the problem solving skils of university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3031-3035. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.459
Wagner, T. (2010). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don't teach the new survival skills our children need-and what we can do about it. ReadHowYouWant. com.
Wolcott, M. D., McLaughlin, J. E., Hubbard, D. K., Rider, T. R., & Umstead, K. (2021). Twelve tips to stimulate creative problem-solving with design thinking. Medical teacher, 43(5), 501-508. 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1807483
Wrigley, C., Mosely, G., & Tomitsch, M. (2018). Design Thinking Education: A Comparison of Massive Open Online Courses. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 4(3), 275-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2018.06.002.
Yeung, M. M. Y., Yuen, J. W. M., Chen, J. M. T., & Lam, K. K. L. (2023). The efficacy of team-based learning in developing the generic capability of problem-solving ability and critical thinking skills in nursing education: A systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 105704. 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105704 .