Abstract
Prior research suggests that experts and novices employ markedly different approaches to engineering design tasks. For example, novice designers commonly use trial and error, which researchers liken to backward-reasoning. Experts use forward-reasoning, which allows them to accurately predict the impact of certain decisions. In this paper, we present a complementary conceptualization for how experience affects design approaches. We liken backward-reasoning to example-based reasoning, and forward-reasoning to principlebased reasoning. In study 1 (N=13) students complete an engineering design activity. A qualitative analysis shows clear instances of example-and principle-based reasoning strategies. Study 2 (N=20) compares the efficacy of the two approaches by using a between subject design. We find that principle-based reasoning improves the quality of designs (p < 0.01) and learning of important engineering principles (p < 0.001). This suggests that handson learning environments may benefit from encouraging students to employ principle-based reasoning.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1147-1151 |
Number of pages | 5 |
Journal | Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS |
Volume | 2 |
Issue number | January |
State | Published - 2014 |
Event | 11th International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Learning and Becoming in Practice, ICLS 2014 - Boulder, United States Duration: Jun 23 2014 → Jun 27 2014 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Computer Science (miscellaneous)
- Education