Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic performance and gender in design education

Demirbaş, Özgen Osman; Demirkan, Halime

doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.007

Cited by 153 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Learning styles have been theorized in several different ways (Peterson, Stephen, & Armstrong, 2009;Richardson, 2011). Although variations exist in the learning style definitions and models, the intentions and approaches of researchers seem similar (Demirbas & Demirkan, 2007). Among learning style models, this study chose Kolb's (1984) experiential learning theory.…”

Section: Learning Style and Experiential Learning Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning Style Differences between Undergraduates, MBAs, Nonmanagement Workers, and Managers in Japan

Yamazaki¹,

Umemura²

2017

JBAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using Kolb's experiential learning theory, this study aimed to explore how learning style differed among four cohorts: undergraduate management majors, master's of business administration (MBA) students, nonmanagement workers, and managers. The research context was Japan, with 1080 participants from two universities, one business school, and two different firms focused on sales and production. To compare the four cohors, this study applied a cross-sectional study. Results indicated that managers showed the strongest preference for active over reflective learning, followed by MBA students, nonmanagement workers, and undergraduates. Managers' active learning orientation did not statistically differ from that of MBA students, but did statistically differ from the groups of nonmanagement employees and undergraduates. With regard to the learning dimension of thinking versus feeling, MBA students were the most abstract learners, while the other three groups exhibited concrete learning orientations. The present research was the first to empirically compare groups according to career transitions from undergraduates towards management positions. This study provides insight on how individuals differ in learning styles as their careers develop.

show abstract

Section: Learning Style and Experiential Learning Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning Style Differences between Undergraduates, MBAs, Nonmanagement Workers, and Managers in Japan

Yamazaki¹,

Umemura²

2017

JBAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to the majority of subjects delivered on the PDT programmes, Mechanics and Electronics subjects have operated (mostly) using a traditional lecture-based teaching and learning style, supported with appropriate laboratory activities to reinforce key theoretical aspects. While this is generally an accepted method of delivery to engineering students, design students have a bias towards convergent and assimilation learning styles with obvious characteristics of diverges (Demirbas andDemirkan 2007, Kolb 1984), and therefore benefit from applied learning through application (active experimentation).…”

Section: Engineering-based Curriculum Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meeting the expectation of industry: an integrated approach for the teaching of mechanics and electronics to design students

Bingham

Southee

Page

2015

European Journal of Engineering Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…; • To experiment with creative designs, and geometrical and structural forms with colour and texture, and to engage in imaginative and innovative technologies and materials; and • To design spaces, perspectives and environments whose purpose is to enhance the intuition, imagination and creativity of children along with development of their aesthetic and scientific thoughts (Berthelsen et al, 2009;Demirbas & Demirkan, 2007;Uluoğlu, 2000).…”

Section: Basic Design Instruments and Preschool Curriculummentioning

confidence: 99%

FORMakademisk 8-1 2015 THE WHOLE ISSUE

Reitan¹

2015

FormAkademisk

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

in Oslo. The conference was a cooperative event between the Design Research Society (DRS) and the International Association of Universities and Schools of Design, Art and Media (CUMULUS), and hosted by the Faculty of Technology, Art and Design at HIOA. The theme for the conference was Design Learning for Tomorrow -Design Education from Kindergarten to PhD. The conference received an overwhelming response both ahead of the conference, with 225 admitted papers, and during the conference with 280 delegates from 43 countries listening to 165 presentations and having a good time in Oslo. The last day of the conference was the 17 th of May, Norway National Day, with traditional songs and a children's parade in the centre of Oslo.We see this positive response to the conference as a growing awareness of perceiving design in a broad interdisciplinary perspective in support for a better tomorrow. For years the Design Literacy Research Group, with a base at HIOA in Oslo, has promoted the idea that sustainable design solutions should include more than 'professional' designers; they should also include the general public as 'conscious' consumers and decision makers with responsibility for quality and longevity, as opposed to a 'throw-away' society. This is also the reason why the conference focused on design education from Kindergarten to PhD. This perspective was put forward as a contrast to most design education conferences where there is either a focus on design education for professionals or general education for children and non-designers. In the call for conference papers, we argued for a longitudinal perspective on design education where the education of professional designers is seen in relation to the general education of the public. This is becoming increasingly relevant as more decisions are being made on the basis of visual representations. We regard education at many different levels as important in securing a sustainable future for the design of everyday life solutions. For that, we need qualified and reflective decision makers with a consciousness for quality of design and solutions.Why have these issues of concern been so important for Norwegian researchers within this field? The answer goes back to the 1960 National Curriculum for primary and lower secondary schools in Norway, when art and crafts were merged into one subject. Currently, this subject includes art, architecture, design and visual communication. No other Nordic-or European-country seems to have developed a model similar to this. Today, we see the benefit of this merger where design is at the core of the subject for youngsters-building upon the best from art and the best from craft to become creative problem solvers and critical consumers. Hopefully we will soon see UNESCO or other organizations with responsibility for funding research recognize that we need more research and knowledge on what impacts design education from Kindergarten to PhD have on consumer habits and sustainable development at large. We hope that such projects are not far off...

show abstract

Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic performance and gender in design education

Cited by 153 publications

References 30 publications

Learning Style Differences between Undergraduates, MBAs, Nonmanagement Workers, and Managers in Japan

Learning Style Differences between Undergraduates, MBAs, Nonmanagement Workers, and Managers in Japan

Meeting the expectation of industry: an integrated approach for the teaching of mechanics and electronics to design students

FORMakademisk 8-1 2015 THE WHOLE ISSUE

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About