Publicado

2017-12-15

Design and Learning in Higher Education: A Perspective from Finland

Diseño y aprendizaje en la educación superior: Una perspectiva desde Finlandia.

Design et apprentissage dans l’enseignement supérieur: une perspective de la Finlande

Design e apprendimento nell’istruzione superiore: una prospettiva dalla Finlandia

Design e aprendizagem na educação superior: uma perspectiva da Finlândia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15446/actio.n1.95620

Palabras clave:

Higher education, Universities, Design thinking, Teaching, Learning (en)
Istruzione superiore, Università, Design thinking, Insegnamento, Apprendimento (it)
Universités, Design thinking, Enseignement, Apprentissage, Enseignement supérieur (fr)
Ensino superior, Universidades, Design thinking, Ensino, Aprendizagem (pt)
Educación superior, Universidades, Design thinking, Enseñanza, Aprendizaje (es)

Autores/as

  • Teemu Leinonen Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture

Meaningful design and valuable learning are processes with many similarities. In both, change is central. Design attempts to change the world around us. Learning changes us. In the article I explore the role and purpose of a university as community tackling humanity’s greatest challenges. I claim that the task requires design thinking. Approaching the world with design thinking should not be left for designer and engineers only. It should be central throughout the entire university. If taken seriously this means that we will rethink and redesign our ways of teaching and learning. If we aim to educate change makers, learning in a university should be knowledge building. I conclude by emphasis how in a university we should pay a lot of attention to have processes, practice and social structure that encourage innovation and creation of new knowledge.

El diseño significativo y el aprendizaje valioso son procesos con muchas similitudes debido a que en ambos casos el cambio es lo central. El diseño intenta cambiar el mundo alrededor y, a su vez, el aprendizaje nos cambia. En este artículo se explora el rol y propósito de la universidad: ser una comunidad que estudia los mayores retos de la humanidad. Se afirma que la tarea requiere de un pensamiento de diseño. De manera que, aproximarse al mundo de esta forma no debería dejarse solo a los diseñadores o ingenieros, sino que debería ser central en toda la universidad. Pensar en esto seriamente significa repensar nuestras formas de enseñar y aprender. Si queremos educar a quienes hacen cambios, el aprendizaje debería ser la construcción de conocimiento. Se concluye que la universidad debería enfocarse más en los procesos, práctica y una estructura social que promueva la innovación y creación de nuevo conocimiento.

Le design significatif et l’apprentissage utile sont des processus partageant plusieurs points communs, dû au fait que dans les deux cas, le changement est central. Le design cherche à changer le monde autour de nous, l’apprentissage nous change nous-même. Dans cet article, on explore le rôle et le but de l’université: être une communauté qui étudie les défis majeurs de l’humanité. Il affirme que la tâche exige le « design thinking ». Ainsi, se rapprocher du monde avec le design thinking ne devrait pas s’adresser seulement aux designers ou aux ingénieurs, mais ce doit être central dans toute l’université. Penser à cela sérieusement signifie repenser notre forme d’enseigner et d’apprendre. Si l’on veut éduquer ceux qui réalisent les changements, l’apprentissage devrait être la construction de connaissance. L’article conclue que l’université devrait se centrer davantage sur les processus, pratiques et une structure sociale qui promeut l’innovation et la création de nouvelles connaissances.

Il design prezioso e l’apprendimento significativo sono processi con molte somiglianze, poiché nei due casi il cambiamento è la cosa centrale. Il design cerca di cambiare il mondo intorno e, a sua volta, l’apprendimento ci cambia. Questo articolo esplora il ruolo e lo scopo dell’Università: una comunità che studia le maggiori sfide dell’umanità, e si regge che questo compito richiede di un pensiero di design. Pertanto, questa forma di avvicinarsi al mondo non dovrebbe lasciarsi soltanto ai designer o ingegneri, ma dovrebbe essere qualcosa di centrale in tutta l’università. Riflettere su questo significa seriamente ripensare le nostre forme di insegnare ed imparare. Quindi, se vogliamo ottenere un cambiamento attraverso l’educazione, l’apprendimento dovrebbe essere una costruzione dinamica della conoscenza. Si conclude cosi, in questo articolo, che l’università dovrebbe focalizzarsi più nei processi, nella pratica ed in una struttura sociale che promuovano l’innovazione e la creazione di nuova conoscenza.

O design significativo e a aprendizagem valiosa são processos com muitas semelhanças dado que ambos os casos a mudança é o valor central. O design pretende mudar o mundo que lhe rodeia e, por sua vez, a aprendizagem nós transforma. Nesse artigo é explorado o rol e o propósito da universidade: o fato de ser uma comunidade que estuda os maiores desafios da humanidade. É afirmado que a tarefa precisa pensamento de design. Assim, se aproximar ao mundo a partir desse olhar não deveria estar reservado unicamente aos designers ou engenheiros, mas deveria virar numa forma de proceder em toda a universidade. Pensar seriamente a questão significa repensar as nossas formas de ensinar e aprender. Se querermos educar àqueles que mudam a realidade, a aprendizagem deveria ser a construção de conhecimento. É concluído que a universidade deveria se focar mais nos processos, práticas e uma estrutura social que promova a inovação e criação de novo conhecimento.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

BEREITER, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

BUCHANAN, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.

EHN, P., & Kyng, M. (1987). The collective resource approach to systems design. In Computers and Democracy: A Scandinavian Challenge. Edited by Bjerknes, G; Ehn, P. and Kyng, M. (pp. 17–57). Avebury. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084068800900125

EHN, P., & Kyng, M. (1991). Cardboard Computers: Mocking-it-up or Hands-on the Future. In Design at Work: cooperative design of computer systems. Edited by Greenbaum, J & Kyng, M. (pp. 169–195). CRC Press.

ENGESTRÖM, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003063988-11

LATOUR, B (2008). A Cautious Prometheus? A Few Steps Toward a Philosophy of Design. Hackney, F., Glynne, J., Minton, V. "Networks of Design", Annual International Conference of the Design History Society, Sep 2008, University College Falmouth, Cornwall, United Kingdom. Universal Publishers, pp.2-10.

LAVE, J.; Wenger, E. (1991): Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511815355

LEINONEN, T., Toikkanen, T., & Silfvast, K. (2008). Software as Hypothesis: Research-Based Design Methodology. In: The Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference 2008. Presented at the Participatory Design Conference, PDC 2008, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA: ACM.

LEINONEN, T. (2010). Designing Learning Tools -- Methodological Insights. Aalto University, School of Art and Design. Helsinki, Finland.

MULLER, M. J., & Kuhn, S. (1993). Participatory design. Commun. ACM, 36(6), 24-28.

NELSON, H. G. & Stolterman, E. (2003). The design way. Intentional change in an unpredictable world. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-004-4099-9

NONAKA, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

PAAVOLA, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004557

RITTEL, H. (1972). On the planning crisis: Systems analysis of the "first and second generations". Bedrifts Okonomen, 8, 390–396.

RITTEL, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.

SFARD, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, volume 27, number 2, pp. 4–13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x027002004

SPINUZZI , C. (2002). A Scandinavian challenge, a US response: methodological assumptions in Scandinavian and US prototyping approaches. In Proceedings of the 20th annual international conference on Computer documentation (pp. 208-215). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/584955.584986

WHITEHEAD, A.N. (1927) Universities and Their Function. Address to the American Association of the Collegiate Schools of Business, 1927.