DESIGN THINKING FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES: COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DESIGN THINKING TECHNIQUE TO ENHANCE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS FOR STUDENTS OF ENGLISH AND TEACHERS OF VARIOUS ACADEMIC FIELDS

Ivana Pondelíková

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP230813049P
First page
633
Last page
650

Abstract


Design thinking is a dynamic approach and mindset employed to explore innovative and creative solutions to a wide range of challenges. At its core, design thinking places significant emphasis on the individual, their emotions and needs. Professionals who embrace design thinking actively seek out issues that impact people and offer appropriate solutions that will benefit users. Consequently, design thinking is an ongoing and iterative process, continuously researching and enhancing a product or service to the user’s satisfaction. This study aims to compare how English language and culture in specialized communication students and university teachers of various academic disciplines at the University of Ss. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava and the Faculty of Materials Science and Technology at Trnava, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, Slovakia, perceive the application of design thinking in the educational process. Two workshops were conducted to explore the application of design thinking in American literature seminars, with a total of 45 students who took part in the survey. The third workshop focused on enhancing intercultural awareness through online seminars and searching for the most appropriate methods of teaching intercultural communication in the online space. The workshop had a total of 25 students, with 21 participating in the research. A pilot workshop for teachers was organized in May 2023 within the project titled “Support of internal systems for ensuring the quality of higher education at the University of Ss. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava, Slovakia”, with 25 university teachers participating (21 of whom took part in the survey). The research results indicate that both students and teachers perceive design thinking as a suitable method for the current educational process. Students identified presentation skills as their biggest challenge, whereas teachers did not face significant issues in this area due to their profession. Conversely, teachers expressed difficulties with digital skills, which were less prevalent among the students. Design thinking offers numerous benefits to students by creating a supportive learning environment. Additionally, for teachers, this method can become a part of their lifelong learning, as innovation relies on their motivation and efforts to teach traditional content differently.


Keywords

design thinking, generation Z, students of English, teachers, digital identity, x-learning

Full Text:

PDF

References


“Council Resolution on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021-2030).” In Official Journal of the European Union (2021/C 66/01). Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32021G0226%2801%29

“Shape the future with Design Thinking.” Retrieved from https://hpi.de/en/school-of-design-thinking/design-thinking.html

“The Future of Jobs Report 2023.” In World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2023/

Badizadegan, D. 2019. “Design Thinking for Musicians: An Introduction.” Retrieved from https://medium.com/swlh/design-thinking-for-musicians-an-introduction-fe8451f6b8fe

Bohušová, Z. 2017. “The cognition of interpreting and neutralization.” In Voprosy kognitivnoj lingvistiki = Issues of Cognitive Linguistics. Vol. 13. No. 4. Tambov: Rossijskaja associacija lingvistov-kognitologov. 2017.

Brooks, Ch. 2022. “Incorporating Design Thinking in the Study of Literature.” In Edutopia. Retrieved from https://www.edutopia.org/article/incorporating-design-thinking-study-literature/

Calavia, M, et al. 2023. “Making design thinking for education sustainable: Training preservice teachers to address practice challenges.” In Thinking Skills and Creativity. Vol. 47. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101199

Carr, L. T. 1994. “The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research: What method for nursing?” In Journal of advanced nursing. Vol. 20/4. Pp. 716-721. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20040716.x

Chmelíková, G. – Hurajová, Ľ. 2019. “ESP teachers in the world of globalisation and higher education internationalisation.” In The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes. Vol. 7. No. 4. Pp. 443-452. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP1904443C

Dančišinová, L. – Kozárová, I. 2021. Globalizácia, kultúra, interkultúrna komunikácia a kultúrna inteligencia vo vzájomných súvislostiach: dosahy pre interkultúrny manažment. Prešov: Vydavateľstvo prešovskej univerzity.

Dančišinová, L. 2022. Culture c Intercultural Communication: ESP & Academic Discourse. Prešov: Vydavateľstvo prešovskej univerzity.

Driscoll, M. “Education in the 21st century.” In Think Strategic. Retrieved from https://thinkstrategicforschools.com/education-21st-century/

Henriksen, D. – Richardson, C. – Mehta, R. 2017. “Design thinking: A creative approach to educational problems of practice.” In Thinking Skills and Creativity. Vol. 26. Pp.140-153. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001

Horowitz, E. “What is Design Thinking anyways?” Retrieved from https://medium.com/wharton-innovation-design/what-is-design-thinking-anyways-c59428031331.

Hurajová, Ľ. – Chmelíková, G. – Luprichová, J. 2022. “Teachers’ interdisciplinary cooperation triggers students’ transferable competencies and intensifies the process of internationalisation of Higher Education.” In 20th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA). Starý Smokovec: Slovakia. Pp. 243 – 249. Retrieved from 10.1109/ICETA57911.2022.9974622

Javorčíková, J. – Badinská, M. 2021. “Reading and Critical Thinking Skills of Undergraduate Students: A Quantitative Analysis.” In The Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes. Vol. 9. No. 4. Niš: University of Niš.

Jordan, M. E. 2016. “Teaching as designing: Preparing pre-service teachers for adaptive teaching.” In Theory into Practice. Vol. 55/3. Pp. 197-206. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2016.1176812

Kolb, D. A. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. New Jersey: Pearson FT Press.

Laurillard, D. 2013. Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. New York – London: Routledge.

Lin, L. – Shadiev, R. et. al. 2020. “From knowledge and skills to digital works: An application of design thinking in the information technology course.” In Thinking Skills and Creativity. Vol. 36. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100646

Loizou, B. 2016. “A framework for innovation – design thinking.” Retrieved from https://www.billyloizou.com/blog/a-framework-for-innovation-designthinking.

Luprichová, J. – Hurajová, Ľ. – Kováčiková, E. 2020. CLIL – Obsahovo a jazykovo integrované vyučovanie na základných a stredných školách. Nitra: Univerzita Konštantína Filozofa v Nitre.

McKenney, S. et al. 2015. “Teacher design knowledge for technology enhanced learning: An ecological framework for investigating assets and needs.” In Instructional Science. Vol. 43/2. Pp. 181-202. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11251-014-9337-2

Michvocíková, V. 2022. Vybrané aspekty pedagogickej komunikácie v edukačnej realite. Trnava: Univerzita Sv. Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave. 2022.

Mishra, P. – Mehta, R. 2017. “What We Educators Get Wrong About 21st-Century Learning: Results of a Survey.” In Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33/1. Pp. 6-19. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2016.1242392

Miština, J. – Jurinová, J. 2022. “Development of a desktop application for a complex heterogeneous evaluation system.” 20th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA). Starý Smokovec: Slovakia. Pp. 294 – 299. Retrieved from doi: 10.1109/ICETA57911.2022.9974803.

Miština, J. et. al. 2021. “The Impact of the Pandemic Crisis on Technology Standard of Traditional University Education.” In Mobility for Smart Cities and Regional Development - Challenges for Higher Education. ICL 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Vol. 390. Cham: Springer. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93907-6_20

Ondrejkovič, P. 2007. Úvod do metodológie spoločenskovedného výskumu. Bratislava: Veda.

Pecníková, J. 2018. “Digital Identity in the Reflections of Cultural Values.” In Buduščee v nastojaščem: čelovečeskoje izmerenije cifrovoj epochi. Moskva: NIU.

Plattner, H. – Meinel, Ch, – Leiffel, L. 2011. Design Thinking. Understand – Improve – Apply. Heidelberg: Springer.

Plattner, H. 2010. An Introduction to Design Thinking. Process Guide. Retrieved from https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/ih-materials/uploads/Introduction-to-design-thinking.pdf

Pondelíková, I. 2022. “Design thinking ako moderný spôsob výučby interkultúrnej komunikácie.” In Interkultúrna komunikácia vo výučbe odborného cudzieho jazyka. Pp. 95-104. Prešov: Prešovská univerzita v Prešove. Retrieved from https://www.pulib.sk/web/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/web/kniznica/elpub/dokument/Dancisinova6/subor/9788055529752.pdf

Pondelíková, I. 2022. “Design Thinking as a “Good Practice” of X-learning.” In Edulearn22 : 14th annual International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, Palma de Mallorca, 4th – 6th of July, 2022. Pp. 739-748. Barcelona: IATED. Retrieved from doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2022

Pondelíková, I. 2020. Úvod do medzinárodných kultúrnych vzťahov a interkultúrnej komunikácie. Banská Bystrica: Dali-BB.

Rauth, I. – Köppen, E. et. al. 2010. Design Thinking: An Educational Model towards Creative Confidence. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268436912_Design_Thinking_An_Educational_Model_towards_Creative_Confidence

Robins, P. 2018. “From Design Thinking to Art Thinking with an Open Innovation Perspective—A Case Study of How Art Thinking Rescued a Cultural Institution in Dublin.” In Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. Vol. 4. Issue 4. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4040057

Robinson, K. 2011. Out of Our Minds: Learning to be Creative. Mankato: Capstone.

Pendleton-Jullian, A. – Brown, J. S. 2015. Pragmatic Imagination. Prequel to Design Unbound. San Francisco: Blurb.

Roy Glen, R. – Suciu, Ch. et. al. 2015. “Teaching design thinking in business schools.” In The International Journal of Management Education Vol. 13, Issue 2. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.05.001.

Sándorová, Z. 2018. “Applying the Method of Design Thinking in Teaching ESP in the Context of Creative Tourism.” In Innovation in Language Learning. pp. 297-300. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331496310_Applying_the_Method_of_Design_Thinking_in_Teaching_ESP_in_the_Context_of_Creative_Tourism

Šebeň Zaťková, T. 2022. Vyučovanie so štýlom” na vysokej škole. Trnava: Univerzita Sv. Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave.

Sirotová, M. 2022. Efektívne učenie vo vysokoškolskej edukácii. Trnava: Univerzita Sv. Cyrila a Metoda v Trnave.

Sperling, R. 2022. “Design Thinking in the Second Language Classroom.” In CASLT. Retrieved from https://www.caslt.org/en/blog-design-thinking/

Urbaniak, A. – Bielak, M. I. 2021. “Towards designing a Public Presentation Evaluation Tool (PPET): A pragma-rhetoric insight.” In New Themes and Dimensions in Applied Linguistics 59. Pp. 145 – 165. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kováč. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354473565_Towards_designing_a_Public_Presentation_Evaluation_Tool_PPET_A_pragma-rhetoric_insight

Welnitzová, K. 2023. Chybovosť strojového prekladu. Praha: Verbum.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/JTESAP230813049P

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)
ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)