Journal of Food Science Education, v19 n4 p292-307 Oct 2020. 16 pp.
Food, Innovation, Cultural Influences, Story Telling, Indigenous Knowledge, Cultural Relevance, Reservation American Indians, Preferences, Student Attitudes, Knowledge Level, Empowerment, Partnerships in Education, Teaching Methods, and Montana
At most institutions, food innovation courses do not highlight the role of community culture, a blind spot that otherwise could connect the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals. This study presents a unique approach to teaching food product innovation, incorporating community culture in ideation, prototyping, and storytelling. Through participatory action research, NUTR 435 Experimental Foods at Montana State University partnered with the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes to teach culturally appropriate product innovation. The class visited the food system stakeholders at the Flathead Reservation and conducted focus groups to gather food memories, understand culinary practices, and recognize product preference of the tribal members. Based on the cultural experiences obtained from the community, the students created smoked trout prototypes and developed recommended recipes for using the smoked trout. The recommended recipes used Native ingredients to tell the tribes' food stories. The students were affirmative on the importance of incorporating culture in food innovations in both the pre- and post-semester learning assessments. Yet, after the semester, the students' attitude and knowledge on this topic became more positive and dynamic, focusing on empowering the community in story and identity telling. Future improvements include recommending a preparatory course in Native American food systems, collaborating with a tribal class, encouraging engagement with the tribal partners beyond the class, and implementing policies to guard the cultural property of the tribal communities. This study presents pilot results for food science educators to consider incorporating community culture in their instructions to address food system challenges.
Yrjönsuuri, Varpu, Kangas, Kaiju, Hakkarainen, Kai, and Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, Pirita
Design and Technology Education, v24 n2 2019. 22 pp.
Design, Elementary School Students, Student Projects, Teaching Methods, Cooperative Learning, Video Technology, Models, Foreign Countries, Active Learning, Workshops, Technology Education, Teamwork, Thinking Skills, and Finland (Helsinki)
Co-invention projects in elementary school engage pupils in complex, open-ended design tasks in a practical, hands-on way. Physical materials are an intrinsic part of design, involving trasformation of conceptual ideas into material forms, such as prototypes. These tangible objects mediate embodied thinking and act as material-social mediators of knowledge creation processes. However, the material properties of the designed artifact and pupils' varying skills and levels of material knowledge constrain the design process. While previous studies of materiality in design have mainly focused on adults, this study aims to analyze and describe the different roles of material prototyping in an elementary school collaborative design process. A co-invention process was conducted in a Finnish elementary school during spring 2017, with the task of designing solutions for everyday problems. The data consisted of six video recorded design sessions, where small teams of 5th graders prototyped their inventions. We analyzed the video data across macro-, intermediate-, and micro-levels. The results revealed that pupils used prototypes as mediators for ideation and collaboration. They tested their ideas with prototyping, and material manipulation occurred during collaborative ideation. Material representations supported the verbalization and demonstration of ideas. Some challenges also emerged; prototype construction was a slow and laborious process, the division of labor tended to be unevenly distributed, and the model took a dominant role over the designed artifact. We conclude that support from the teacher and the learning environment is critical for utilizing the full potential of material manipulation in an elementary school setting.
International Journal of Instruction, v12 n3 p271-288 Jul 2019. 18 pp.
English for Academic Purposes, Student Attitudes, Learning Experience, Academic Achievement, Student Needs, Engineering Education, Industrial Education, Learning Motivation, Student Educational Objectives, Foreign Countries, Needs Assessment, Psychological Needs, English Instruction, Instructional Design, College Students, and Indonesia
There are two prominent constraints of students' needs analysis; first, the identification of needs in teaching English for Academic Purposes (EAP) merely focuses on two main dimensions, namely target needs and learning needs, and less to involve affective factors as the basis of all (including learning experience and achievement motivation). Second, there is a common notion that EAP learning is considered the same as general English so that the development of learning design often leads to English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP). This study aims to identify students' perception of learning experience and motivation for the prototype of learners' needs of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in Industrial engineering. Data were collected from 40 students using three types of questionnaires, namely about learning experiences, learning motivation, and learners' needs. The data of learners' needs was also taken from 8 lecturers as well as program managers. By using quantitative and descriptive analysis, this study showed that first, the students had reasonable learning experience, by being able to participate in the EAP program. Second, the students had strong motivation in achieving their goals. Third, the relationship between learning experience and achievement motivation was not significant and was not quite strong, implying that learning experiences were predicted not to affect students' learning motivation. Fourth, the students' needs lead to English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) which is thus contradictory with the previous notion.
Journal of Information Systems Education, v31 n3 p179-186 Sum 2020. 8 pp.
Computer Science Education, Information Systems, Teaching Methods, Computer Interfaces, Man Machine Systems, Computer System Design, Active Learning, Learning Activities, and Constructivism (Learning)
Given the ubiquity of interfaces on computing devices, it is essential for future Information Systems (IS) professionals to understand the ramifications of good user interface (UI) design. This article provides instructions on how to efficiently and effectively teach IS students about "fit," a Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) concept, through a paper prototyping activity. Although easy to explain, the concept of "fit" can be difficult to understand without repeated practice. Practically, designing "fit" into UIs can be cost-prohibitive because working prototypes are often beyond students' technical skillset. Accordingly, based on principles of active learning, we show how to use paper prototyping to demonstrate "fit" in a hands-on class exercise. We provide detailed step-by-step instructions to plan, setup, and present the exercise to guide students through the process of "fit" in UI design. As a result of this activity, students are better able to employ both theoretical and practical applications of "fit" in UI design and implementation. This exercise is applicable in any course that includes UI design, such as principles of HCI, systems analysis and design, software engineering, and project management.
Background: Design thinking, with its emphasis on iterative prototyping and mantra of "fail early and often," stands in stark contrast to the typical one-and-done, failure-averse culture of the classroom. Iterative prototyping and fail-forward mindsets could promote valuable iterative practices and positive reactions to failure, but little research has examined their impact in K-12 contexts. Purpose: In two studies, we investigated the effect of a brief prototyping intervention on students' iterative knowledge, desires, and behaviors; self-reported reactions to failure; and performance on a design challenge. Design/Method: Study participants included 78 and 89 students in grades five and six, respectively. Students in an iterative prototyping condition (Prototype) were taught the process and fail-forward mindset of iterative prototyping. In a comparative, content-focused condition (Content), students focused on using science and math concepts in design. Results: In both studies, Prototype students gained greater knowledge of iterative prototyping, reported a greater desire to iterate, and engaged in more iterative behaviors on a novel, unsupported design challenge than Content students. In Study 2, students in the Prototype condition reported more positive affect and actions in reaction to failure and produced more successful designs than their Content counterparts. However, regardless of condition, students who iterated earlier created more successful designs. Conclusions: These studies provide an existence proof that instruction on the iterative prototyping process and mindset can encourage students to try early and often and promote healthier reactions to failure. This work also demonstrated a performance benefit to testing one's design early in the design process.