Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process
Many teaching in higher education whose fields rely heavily on processes using technology can be overwhelmed by the pace of developments, and, in turn, have difficulties identifying those competencies necessary for their students to have mastered. These educators may feel as though they are aiming a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of technology and design education 2022-03, Vol.32 (1), p.447-477 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 477 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 447 |
container_title | International journal of technology and design education |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Huber, Amy M. Waxman, Lisa K. Dyar, Connie |
description | Many teaching in higher education whose fields rely heavily on processes using technology can be overwhelmed by the pace of developments, and, in turn, have difficulties identifying those competencies necessary for their students to have mastered. These educators may feel as though they are aiming at a moving target, and given the number of new platforms and communication tactics, this target could seem increasingly distant. One such field greatly impacted by rapidly developing technology is interior design, wherein practitioners are increasingly leveraging tactics that promise newfound fidelity, interoperability, and greater production speed. However, it is unclear how these advancements may influence the expectations for entry-level designers—and by extension—the curricula of design educators. The purpose of this research was to apply a
Systems Thinking
approach to determine technology’s influence on both the design process and the production of deliverables. Data was gathered from design practitioners surrounding the variety of software and technological applications used during four phases of the design process (e.g., schematic, design development, construction documents, and construction administration). To determine adoption trends, these responses were compared to previous data from Dyar and Huber (in: Sarawgi (ed) Interior design educators annual national council, Fort Worth, TX, Interior Design Educators Council, Chicago, 2015). Responses were analyzed with descriptive crosstabs and inferential statistics, including T-tests, Analysis of Variance, and posthoc Tukey’s Range Tests. The findings suggest that expectations for students, and consequently, their instructors, are evolving rapidly. While this study is rooted in interior design, its methodology and its implications may prove valuable to allied design fields. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2709203565</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1328179</ericid><sourcerecordid>2709203565</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-6afe05f536e80a29b54f853b3c3d0dd877679c504779d405f3a3b3141341b1c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE9LAzEUxIMoWKtfQBACnqMvyWazOUqp_yh4sRcvYZvNbrduk5psC_32pl3Rm6cH85t5A4PQNYU7CiDvIwWpCgIMCCihgNATNKJCckILyE7RKKmSSCHZObqIcQVAc1aIEfqYx9Y1OO5jb9cR98vWfR6E3uOtq2yIfemqJFtsd77bHVDwncW-xr01S-c73-xx646Wysa2cXgTvLExXqKzuuyivfq5YzR_nL5Pnsns7ell8jAjhme0J3lZWxC14LktoGRqIbK6EHzBDa-gqgopc6mMgExKVWXJycsEaUZTekFNwcfodviber-2NvZ65bfBpUrNJCgGXOQiudjgMsHHGGytN6Fdl2GvKejDhnrYUKcN9XFDTVPoZgjZ0JrfwPSVclZQqRLnA4-JucaGv-p_vn4D03l92A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2709203565</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process</title><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>EBSCOhost Education Source</source><creator>Huber, Amy M. ; Waxman, Lisa K. ; Dyar, Connie</creator><creatorcontrib>Huber, Amy M. ; Waxman, Lisa K. ; Dyar, Connie</creatorcontrib><description>Many teaching in higher education whose fields rely heavily on processes using technology can be overwhelmed by the pace of developments, and, in turn, have difficulties identifying those competencies necessary for their students to have mastered. These educators may feel as though they are aiming at a moving target, and given the number of new platforms and communication tactics, this target could seem increasingly distant. One such field greatly impacted by rapidly developing technology is interior design, wherein practitioners are increasingly leveraging tactics that promise newfound fidelity, interoperability, and greater production speed. However, it is unclear how these advancements may influence the expectations for entry-level designers—and by extension—the curricula of design educators. The purpose of this research was to apply a
Systems Thinking
approach to determine technology’s influence on both the design process and the production of deliverables. Data was gathered from design practitioners surrounding the variety of software and technological applications used during four phases of the design process (e.g., schematic, design development, construction documents, and construction administration). To determine adoption trends, these responses were compared to previous data from Dyar and Huber (in: Sarawgi (ed) Interior design educators annual national council, Fort Worth, TX, Interior Design Educators Council, Chicago, 2015). Responses were analyzed with descriptive crosstabs and inferential statistics, including T-tests, Analysis of Variance, and posthoc Tukey’s Range Tests. The findings suggest that expectations for students, and consequently, their instructors, are evolving rapidly. While this study is rooted in interior design, its methodology and its implications may prove valuable to allied design fields.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0957-7572</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-1804</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Applications programs ; Architecture ; Art education ; College Faculty ; College Students ; Creative process ; Design ; Education ; Educational Technology ; Higher Education ; Influence of Technology ; Interior Design ; Learning and Instruction ; Moving targets ; Science Education ; Statistical Analysis ; Statistical tests ; Students ; Systems Approach ; Tactics ; Teachers ; Variance analysis</subject><ispartof>International journal of technology and design education, 2022-03, Vol.32 (1), p.447-477</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2020</rights><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2020.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-6afe05f536e80a29b54f853b3c3d0dd877679c504779d405f3a3b3141341b1c83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-6afe05f536e80a29b54f853b3c3d0dd877679c504779d405f3a3b3141341b1c83</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7919-2890</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1328179$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Huber, Amy M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waxman, Lisa K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyar, Connie</creatorcontrib><title>Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process</title><title>International journal of technology and design education</title><addtitle>Int J Technol Des Educ</addtitle><description>Many teaching in higher education whose fields rely heavily on processes using technology can be overwhelmed by the pace of developments, and, in turn, have difficulties identifying those competencies necessary for their students to have mastered. These educators may feel as though they are aiming at a moving target, and given the number of new platforms and communication tactics, this target could seem increasingly distant. One such field greatly impacted by rapidly developing technology is interior design, wherein practitioners are increasingly leveraging tactics that promise newfound fidelity, interoperability, and greater production speed. However, it is unclear how these advancements may influence the expectations for entry-level designers—and by extension—the curricula of design educators. The purpose of this research was to apply a
Systems Thinking
approach to determine technology’s influence on both the design process and the production of deliverables. Data was gathered from design practitioners surrounding the variety of software and technological applications used during four phases of the design process (e.g., schematic, design development, construction documents, and construction administration). To determine adoption trends, these responses were compared to previous data from Dyar and Huber (in: Sarawgi (ed) Interior design educators annual national council, Fort Worth, TX, Interior Design Educators Council, Chicago, 2015). Responses were analyzed with descriptive crosstabs and inferential statistics, including T-tests, Analysis of Variance, and posthoc Tukey’s Range Tests. The findings suggest that expectations for students, and consequently, their instructors, are evolving rapidly. While this study is rooted in interior design, its methodology and its implications may prove valuable to allied design fields.</description><subject>Applications programs</subject><subject>Architecture</subject><subject>Art education</subject><subject>College Faculty</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Creative process</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Educational Technology</subject><subject>Higher Education</subject><subject>Influence of Technology</subject><subject>Interior Design</subject><subject>Learning and Instruction</subject><subject>Moving targets</subject><subject>Science Education</subject><subject>Statistical Analysis</subject><subject>Statistical tests</subject><subject>Students</subject><subject>Systems Approach</subject><subject>Tactics</subject><subject>Teachers</subject><subject>Variance analysis</subject><issn>0957-7572</issn><issn>1573-1804</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE9LAzEUxIMoWKtfQBACnqMvyWazOUqp_yh4sRcvYZvNbrduk5psC_32pl3Rm6cH85t5A4PQNYU7CiDvIwWpCgIMCCihgNATNKJCckILyE7RKKmSSCHZObqIcQVAc1aIEfqYx9Y1OO5jb9cR98vWfR6E3uOtq2yIfemqJFtsd77bHVDwncW-xr01S-c73-xx646Wysa2cXgTvLExXqKzuuyivfq5YzR_nL5Pnsns7ell8jAjhme0J3lZWxC14LktoGRqIbK6EHzBDa-gqgopc6mMgExKVWXJycsEaUZTekFNwcfodviber-2NvZ65bfBpUrNJCgGXOQiudjgMsHHGGytN6Fdl2GvKejDhnrYUKcN9XFDTVPoZgjZ0JrfwPSVclZQqRLnA4-JucaGv-p_vn4D03l92A</recordid><startdate>20220301</startdate><enddate>20220301</enddate><creator>Huber, Amy M.</creator><creator>Waxman, Lisa K.</creator><creator>Dyar, Connie</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F29</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7919-2890</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220301</creationdate><title>Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process</title><author>Huber, Amy M. ; Waxman, Lisa K. ; Dyar, Connie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c341t-6afe05f536e80a29b54f853b3c3d0dd877679c504779d405f3a3b3141341b1c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Applications programs</topic><topic>Architecture</topic><topic>Art education</topic><topic>College Faculty</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Creative process</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Educational Technology</topic><topic>Higher Education</topic><topic>Influence of Technology</topic><topic>Interior Design</topic><topic>Learning and Instruction</topic><topic>Moving targets</topic><topic>Science Education</topic><topic>Statistical Analysis</topic><topic>Statistical tests</topic><topic>Students</topic><topic>Systems Approach</topic><topic>Tactics</topic><topic>Teachers</topic><topic>Variance analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Huber, Amy M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waxman, Lisa K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dyar, Connie</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Design & Applied Arts Index (DAAI)</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>International journal of technology and design education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Huber, Amy M.</au><au>Waxman, Lisa K.</au><au>Dyar, Connie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1328179</ericid><atitle>Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process</atitle><jtitle>International journal of technology and design education</jtitle><stitle>Int J Technol Des Educ</stitle><date>2022-03-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>447</spage><epage>477</epage><pages>447-477</pages><issn>0957-7572</issn><eissn>1573-1804</eissn><abstract>Many teaching in higher education whose fields rely heavily on processes using technology can be overwhelmed by the pace of developments, and, in turn, have difficulties identifying those competencies necessary for their students to have mastered. These educators may feel as though they are aiming at a moving target, and given the number of new platforms and communication tactics, this target could seem increasingly distant. One such field greatly impacted by rapidly developing technology is interior design, wherein practitioners are increasingly leveraging tactics that promise newfound fidelity, interoperability, and greater production speed. However, it is unclear how these advancements may influence the expectations for entry-level designers—and by extension—the curricula of design educators. The purpose of this research was to apply a
Systems Thinking
approach to determine technology’s influence on both the design process and the production of deliverables. Data was gathered from design practitioners surrounding the variety of software and technological applications used during four phases of the design process (e.g., schematic, design development, construction documents, and construction administration). To determine adoption trends, these responses were compared to previous data from Dyar and Huber (in: Sarawgi (ed) Interior design educators annual national council, Fort Worth, TX, Interior Design Educators Council, Chicago, 2015). Responses were analyzed with descriptive crosstabs and inferential statistics, including T-tests, Analysis of Variance, and posthoc Tukey’s Range Tests. The findings suggest that expectations for students, and consequently, their instructors, are evolving rapidly. While this study is rooted in interior design, its methodology and its implications may prove valuable to allied design fields.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1</doi><tpages>31</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7919-2890</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0957-7572 |
ispartof | International journal of technology and design education, 2022-03, Vol.32 (1), p.447-477 |
issn | 0957-7572 1573-1804 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2709203565 |
source | SpringerNature Journals; EBSCOhost Education Source |
subjects | Applications programs Architecture Art education College Faculty College Students Creative process Design Education Educational Technology Higher Education Influence of Technology Interior Design Learning and Instruction Moving targets Science Education Statistical Analysis Statistical tests Students Systems Approach Tactics Teachers Variance analysis |
title | Using systems thinking to understand the evolving role of technology in the design process |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T10%3A43%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20systems%20thinking%20to%20understand%20the%20evolving%20role%20of%20technology%20in%20the%20design%20process&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20technology%20and%20design%20education&rft.au=Huber,%20Amy%20M.&rft.date=2022-03-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=447&rft.epage=477&rft.pages=447-477&rft.issn=0957-7572&rft.eissn=1573-1804&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10798-020-09590-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2709203565%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2709203565&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1328179&rfr_iscdi=true |