An ISMP Approach for Promoting Design Innovation Capability and Its Interaction With Personal Characters

Abstract

This paper develops an instruction method for promoting design innovation capability through a design-based program with identification, modeling, simulation, and prototyping (IMSP). The computational thinking and conceptualization of sustainability were incorporated. The interaction between instruction treatment and participants' personality was investigated. Eighty-six engineering undergraduates participated in this experimental study for exploring the effectiveness of the IMSP program. The findings indicate that 1) the IMSP program promoted undergraduates' computational thinking, and further enhanced their design innovation ability; 2) the program that integrated the conceptualization of sustainability has better teaching effects than that without the conceptual integration; 3) the personal characters of innovation proaction and emotional intelligence acted as moderators in the ISMP program. This study presents a practical method for improving design innovation capability, and supports the feasibility and necessity of emphasizing computational thinking and sustainability in the innovation training program for engineering education.

Computational Thinking Through an Empirical Lens: A Systematic Review of Literature

“…Conceptual consistency denoted alignment with computer science concepts and practices; not to be misconstrued or translated into accuracy of implementation in the studies. A notable exception to the conceptual consistency was a study that explored the effects of an identification, modelling, simulation, and prototyping teaching model in a college design course (Chen et al., 2020). CT was operationalised in the assessment as a composite value reflecting creativity, valuableness, simplification, embedding, simulation, and transformation.…”

The transfer effects of computational thinking: A systematic review with meta‐analysis and qualitative synthesis

“…In the engineering and technology field, studies covered skills in the domains of engineering design (Ehsan et al, 2020; Hsiao et al, 2022; Litts et al, 2017; Sen et al, 2021; Yin et al, 2020, 2022), engineering innovation (Chen et al, 2020), technical engineering (Pérez & López, 2019), and computing (Tsai & Tsai, 2018). In the humanities, we identified three studies focusing on language learning (Hsu & Liang, 2021; Parsazadeh et al, 2021; Ragonis & Shilo, 2018), three studies in the context of social science and culture (Manfra et al, 2021; Merino‐Armero et al, 2022; Zha et al, 2020), and one study in the context of music (Petrie, 2021).…”

“…First, students can actively engage in learning activities by peer collaboration and discussion (e.g., Bortz et al, 2020; Chongo et al, 2021; Irgens et al, 2020; Rodríguez‐Martínez et al, 2020). Second, immediately using and applying the information in the intervention activities can also facilitate a deeper understanding and help students to solve real‐life problems (e.g., Aksit & Wiebe, 2020; Arık & Topçu, 2022; Chen et al, 2020; Città et al, 2019; Lin et al, 2021; Orban et al, 2018). Third, effective and meaningful engagement is more likely to occur when learning activities involve more than one sense, and therefore incorporating audio materials and kinesics embodied activities contributes to the effective learning and understanding of CT skills (e.g., Cui & Ng, 2021; Fanchamps et al, 2021; Hsiao et al, 2022; Hsu & Liang, 2021; Litts et al, 2017; Shumway et al, 2021; Sung et al, 2017; Yin et al, 2020).…”

“…First, students can actively engage in learning activities by peer collaboration and discussion (e.g., Bortz et al, 2020;Chongo et al, 2021;Irgens et al, 2020;Rodríguez-Martínez et al, 2020). Second, immediately using and applying the information in the intervention activities can also facilitate a deeper understanding and help students to solve reallife problems (e.g., Aksit & Wiebe, 2020;Arık & Topçu, 2022;Chen et al, 2020;Città et al, 2019;Lin et al, 2021;Orban et al, 2018).…”