Three dimensions of reflective thinking in solving design problems: a conceptual model

Abstract

Design tasks are omnipresent in our everyday lives. Previous research shows that reflective thinking is one of the critical factors in solving design problems. Related research has attempted to capture designers' reflective thinking process. Yet a close inspection of designers' reflective thinking taking place during their design process demands further effort. To understand designer's reflective practice and to find better ways to promote novices' reflective thinking in solving real-world design problems, a comprehensive model was developed. This model identified three dimensions to guide the understanding of designers' reflective thinking during a design process: (1) the timing of reflection, indicating the points in the process where reflective thinking occurs, (2) the objects of reflection, showing the different types of objects that designers may reflect upon, and (3) the levels of reflection, referring to the different levels of designers' reflection. This model provides for meaningful aspects of reflective thinking to be situated in a design process, which can guide educators and instructional designers in developing appropriate learning environments for facilitating novice and practicing designers' reflective thinking. Moreover, the model can serve as a stepping stone for further research.

Exploring teachers' use of TPACK in design talk: The collaborative design of technology-rich early literacy activities

“…The findings of this study suggest that design is an iterative process. This is not surprising, given that design is a reflective activity in which actions are taken and often designers 'step-back' to evaluate the actions taken (Hong & Choi, 2011;Schön, 1983). In this study the findings show a pattern that is similar: teachers share knowledge and information by proposing what the learning activity could look like, this process is repeated until one teacher either expresses doubt or makes an evaluative comment about the learning activity, which is then followed by action.…”

Understanding decision making in teachers’ curriculum design approaches

“…The approach to collaborative curriculum design resembles a solution-driven approach to solving design problems (Hong & Choi, 2011), in which designers quickly generate solutions. The problem does not get analyzed in depth before generating these solutions.…”

Systematizing Scaffolding for Problem-Based Learning: A View from Case-Based Reasoning

“…The result is that many implementers de-emphasize or skip the reflection pieces of the cycle because it takes so much time (Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2008). In other implementations of PBL, so much time is spent on a first attempt toward a solution that there is not time for the iterative cycling that PBL calls for (Dolmans, De Grave, Wolfhagen, & Van Der Vleuten, 2005;Hmelo, Holton, & Kolodner, 2000;Hong & Choi, 2011). And in other situations, the facilitator fails to provide students the scaffolding they need along the way to focus their activity and to express themselves in rigorous ways.…”