Communication with the digital population through the design thinking process

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 128-138
Author(s):  
Kyung ah Lee ◽  
Soo Jin Oh
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-185
Author(s):  
Ju Yeon Park, ◽  
Hye Young Chung, ◽  
Sung Hee Kim, ◽  
Young Mi Lee ◽  
Yoo Kyung Lee ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Hinck ◽  
Steven Davis ◽  
Justin Longmire ◽  
JB Byrnes

This paper examines how a U.S. Air Force (USAF) faculty team reimagined and redesigned an in-person Leader Development Course (LDC) to a virtual version (vLDC). Using the Design Thinking Process for Innovation (DTPI) and action research methods, a new, virtual course was imagined, designed, tested, and improved over a six-cycle-process. Data was collected via multiple sources from 121 participants (19 faculty/staff and 102 students) and analyzed using manual coding and NVivo Software. Results are organized into 22 categories under four themes (general course design, student experience, instructor experience and faculty development, and technology experience) showing a progressive refinement with key lessons learned that led to the final creation of the new virtual course. Of the five key features in action research (actions matter, context-specific research, multiple cycles and phases, inclusion of people as research target, and reflections), participants reported that multiple cycles and reflections were most important in relation to the DTPI so that change could be enacted that reflected participant voices in the design process of the virtual course. The application of the DTPI using action research methods produced results and lessons learned in the design process that contribute to the theory and practice on developing and teaching in a virtual learning environment. The study fills a gap in the scholarly field and informs other institutions on the process, failures, and successes of course redesign to a virtual version.Keywords: design thinking process for innovation, action research, USAF, leader development


建築學報 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 116 (116-1) ◽  
pp. 055-061
Author(s):  
江梓瑋 江梓瑋

<p>傳統的建築設計課程皆以每學期幾次不同題型的設定,期望在設計操作的反復練習中,幫助操作者探索合適的操作方法並從中建立設計邏輯。設計題目的設定規範了操作的方向與期望的成果,但因設計發展並沒有既定的步驟與方法,常因個人經驗與所選擇設計方式的不同,導致過於感性的思維模式,也造就了理性建築設計教學的挑戰。此研究針對題目設定與設計邏輯的關係,試圖避開操作者可預期的結果,並藉過程中不同階段性的操作設定,試圖建立一種設計邏輯發展的依據。</p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p>Traditionally, architecture design studio requires few exercises per semester for students to practice design method and develop design thinking. As design exercises often direct design approach and also establish expectation of outcome, there is no guaranty procedure or design method to follow in order to achieve the best outcome. Since design development heavily based on experience of operation and choice of approach, sensible thinking process is often involved and sets challenge for rational architectural pedagogy. This research aims to exam the design thinking process of students by setting up specific design exercise to avoid predictable operation process, in order to direct specific design approach according to established guidance for further development. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document