Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:53:20.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Future Learning and Design Creativity Competency

Part of: Design Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2019

Yukari Nagai ,
Akio Shimogoori ,
Minatsu Ariga  and
Georgi V. Georgiev
Yukari Nagai*
Affiliation:
Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Japan;
Akio Shimogoori
Affiliation:
National Institute of Technology, Hakodate College, Japan;
Minatsu Ariga
Affiliation:
Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Japan;
Georgi V. Georgiev
Affiliation:
University of Oulu, Finland
*
Contact: Nagai, Yukari, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST), Graduate School of Advanced Science and Technology, Japan, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this study, we discuss a structure for developing the skills and competencies required by the learning framework of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for future education. Given the broad range of skills and the numerous competencies required to meet the demands of future society, the proposed wider and higher-level framework is based on STEAM (science, technology, engineering, art and design, and mathematics) and addresses the limitations of conventional computational thinking by tackling some of the skills and competencies. This is done by proposing the enrichment of STEAM educational approach with art thinking, which may be defined as a creative human-centred discovery process. To explore such enrichment, we conducted a workshop on art thinking. The motivation of the workshop was to explore whether art thinking can overcome some of the limitations of computational thinking regarding future education in the OECD learning framework. We discuss STEAM as focusing on design creativity competency, and we outline the development of educational activities such as workshops to promote competencies in the perspective of OECD framework.

Keywords

Design educationDesign processCreativitySTEAM educationDesign creativity
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , July 2019 , pp. 499 - 508
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2019

References

Acuna, A. and Sosa, R. (2010), “The complementary role of representations in design creativity: Sketches and models”, in Taura, T. and Nagai, Y. eds., Design Creativity, Springer Science & Business Media, pp. 265–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-224-7Google Scholar
Akiyama, Y., Ariga, M. and Sakai, K. (2015), “Create New Business by Art Thinking” (in Japanese), in Japan Association for Communication 12th Annual Meeting, pp. 60–69.Google Scholar
Armstrong, T. (2009), “Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom”. Third Edition, AECD, Alexandria, VA.Google Scholar
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Lucas, W. A. and Brodeur, D. R. (2011), “The CDIO syllabus v2.0. An updated statement of goals for engineering education”, In Proceedings of 7th International CDIO Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, June p. 20–23.Google Scholar
Editorial Board of IJDCI (2013), “Perspectives on design creativity and innovation research”, International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2013.754657Google Scholar
Gaidi, K. E. (2003). “Reforming engineering education: The CDIO initiative”. Industry and Higher Education, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 431–434.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (2008), Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons in Theory and Practice. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1983), Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Georgiev, G.V. (2012), “Design Thinking: An overview”, Design Thinking - Special Issue of Japanese Society for the Science of Design, Vol. 20-1 No. 77, pp. 70–77.Google Scholar
Istance, D. and Kools, M. (2013), “OECD work on technology and education: Innovative learning environments as an integrating framework”, European Journal of Education, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 43–57.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. (2018), “Intersections in Design Thinking and Art Thinking: Towards Interdisciplinary Innovation”. Creativity. Theories–Research-Applications, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 4–25. https://doi.org/10.1515/ctra-2018-0001Google Scholar
Kärkkäinen, K. and Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013), “Sparking Innovation in STEM Education with Technology and Collaboration a case study of the HP catalyst initiative” http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/OECD_EDU-WKP%282013%29_%20Sparking%20Innovation%20in%20STEM%20education.pdf accessed 07 Dec 2018Google Scholar
Kim, Y. and Park, N. (2012), “The effect of STEAM education on elementary school student's creativity improvement”. In Computer applications for security, control and system engineering. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, (pp. 115–121).Google Scholar
Land, M.H. (2013), “Full STEAM ahead: The benefits of integrating the arts into STEM”, Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 20, pp. 547–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.317Google Scholar
Murayama, M., Ariga, M. and Sakai, K. (2015), “Zest for living: Art thinking” (in Japanese), in Japan Association for Communication 15th Annual Meeting, pp. 17–20.Google Scholar
Nagai, Y. (2015), “A sense of design: The embedded motives of nature, culture, and future”, In Principia Designae—Pre-Design, Design, and Post-Design. Springer, Tokyo, (pp. 43–59). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54403-6_4Google Scholar
Nagai, Y. and Taura, T. (2016), “Studies of design creativity: A review and its prospects”, Journal of the Indian Institute of Science, Vol. 95, No. 4, pp. 341–351.Google Scholar
OECD (2018), “Learning Framework for 2030: The future of education and skills”, In Education 2030—The Future We Want. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Indicators, Paris https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf accessed 07 Dec 2018Google Scholar
Sánchez Milara, I., Georgiev, G.V., Riekki, J., Ylioja, J. and Pyykkönen, M. (2017), “Human and technological dimensions of making in FabLab”, The Design Journal, Vol. 20 No. sup 1, pp. S1080–S1092. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1353052Google Scholar
Sousa, D.A. and Pilecki, T. (2013), From STEM to STEAM: Using Brain-compatible Strategies to Integrate the Arts. Corwin Press, SAGE Publications.Google Scholar