Abstract
This study examines the design activities of engineers and product designers from the perspective of knowledge building. The practice of knowledge building has been studied for more than 30 years. However, in recent years, analytical methods have been developed to analyze it from two directions—idea improvement and epistemic frames—and these methods are currently being enhanced. Nevertheless, studies that have analyzed idea improvement and epistemic frames have focused on practices in the classroom rather than discussing the activities of engineers and designers, who are also knowledge building models. Therefore, this study analyzed the co-design process of a product design team and an engineering team that engaged in creative activities for their work from the perspectives of idea improvement using socio-semantic network analysis (SSNA) and the epistemic frame by epistemic network analysis (ENA). Moreover, this study discussed defining meaning segments using SSNA as a computational approach for quantitative ethnography (QE). As a result, both teams showed good knowledge building characteristics in that they continuously improved their ideas. Furthermore, the engineering team worked under various epistemic actions, while the product designers worked under a limited epistemic frame. We also confirmed that the analysis method of this study was able to extract the characteristic discourse of each team. These results support future knowledge building practices, as they illustrate that designers and engineers engage in the same continuous idea improvement under different epistemic actions. Furthermore, this study contributes to future QE research because the results show the qualitative differences between designers and engineers using determining meaning segments as a computational approach.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Paavola, S., Hakkarainen, K.: The knowledge creation metaphor–an emergent epis- temological approach to learning. Sci. Educ. 14(6), 535–557 (2005)
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C.: Knowledge building and knowledge creation: theory, pedagogy, and technology. Cambridge Handbook Learn. Sci. 2, 397–417 (2014)
Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C.: Two models of thinking in knowledge building. Re- vista Catalana de Pedagogia, pp. 61–83 (2017)
Chen, B., Hong, H.-Y.: Schools as knowledge-building organizations: thirty years of design research. Educ. Psychol. 51(2), 266–288 (2016)
Zhang, J., Tao, D., Chen, M.H., Sun, Y., Judson, D., Naqvi, S.: Co-organizing the collective journey of inquiry with idea thread mapper. J. Learn. Sci. 27(3), 390–430 (2018)
Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Fujita, W.: A mixed-methods approach to analyze shared epistemic agency in jigsaw instruction at multiple scales of temporality. J. Learn. Anal. 5(1), 10–24 (2018)
Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Saruwatari, S.: Analysis of students’ ideas and conceptual artifacts in knowledge-building discourse. British J. Educ. Technol. 51(4), 1308–1321 (2020)
Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Matsuzawa, Y.: Knowledge building discourse explorer: a social network analysis application for knowledge building discourse. Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 60(5), 903–921 (2012)
Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Ohsaki, A., Splichal, J.M.: Collective knowledge advancement through shared epistemic agency: Socio-semantic network analyses. In: K. Lund, G. Niccolai, E. Lavoué, C. Hmelo- Silver, G. Gweon, M. Baker (Eds.), A wide lens: Combining embodied, enactive, extended, and embedded learning in collaborative settings. In: 13th international conference on computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL) 2019, vol. 1, pp. 57–64. Lyon: International Society of the Learning Sciences (2019)
Ohsaki, A., Oshima, J.: A Socio-Semantic Network Analysis of Discourse Using the Network Lifetime and the Moving Stanza Window Method. In: Eagan, B., Misfeldt, M., Siebert-Evenstone, A. (eds.) ICQE 2019. CCIS, vol. 1112, pp. 326–333. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33232-7_29
Ohsaki, A., Oshima, J.: Socio-semantic Network Analysis of Knowledge-Creation Discourse on a Real-Time Scale. In: Ruis, A.R., Lee, S.B. (eds.) ICQE 2021. CCIS, vol. 1312, pp. 170–184. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67788-6_12
Shaffer, D.W.: Quantitative Ethnography. Cathcart, Madison (2017)
Damşa, C., Kirschner, P.A., Andriessen, J.E., Erkens, G., Sins, P.H.: Shared epistemic agency: An empirical study of an emergent construct. J. Learn. Sci. 19(2), 143–186 (2010)
Ohsaki, A., Tan, Y., Eagan, B., Oshima, J., Shaffer, D.W.: Directed epistemic network analysis of knowledge-creation discourse. In: International Conference on Quantitative Ethnography 2021 (ICQE21) Conference Proceedings Supplement, pp. 34–37 (2021)
Fogel, A., et al.: Directed Epistemic Network Analysis. In: Ruis, A.R., Lee, S.B. (eds.) ICQE 2021. CCIS, vol. 1312, pp. 122–136. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67788-6_9
Brown, T.: Design thinking. Harv. Bus. Rev. 86(6), 84 (2008)
Visualization, usability group, The National Institute of Standards usability group, and Technology (NIST).: Human Centered Design (HCD). https://www.nist.gov/itl/iad/visualization-and-usability-group/human-factors-human-centered-design. Aaccessed 29 May 2022.
Verganti, R.: Overcrowded. Gildan Media (2017)
Stanford d.school.: Get Started with Design Thinking. https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources/getting-started-with-design-thinking. Accessed 29 May 2022
Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Viilo, M., Hakkarainen, K.: Learning by collaborative designing: technology-enhanced knowledge practices. Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ. 20(2), 109–136 (2010)
Epistemic Network Analysis (ENA), https://www.epistemicnetwork.org/, Accessed 29 May 2022
Barany, A., Philips, M., Kawakubo, A.J., Oshima, J.: Choosing units of analysis in temporal discourse. In: Wasson, B., Zörgő, S. (eds) Advances in Quantitative Ethnography. ICQE 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1522. Springer, Cham. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93859-8_6
Gee, J.P.: An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method, 3rd edn. Routledge, London (2010)
Siebert-Evenstone, A.L., Arastoopour, G., Collier, W., Swiecki, Z., Ruis, A.R., Shaffer, D.W.: In search of conversational grain size: Modeling semantic structure using moving stanza windows. J. Learn. Anal. 4(3), 123–139 (2017). https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2017.43.7
Shaffer, D.W.: Big data for thick description of deep learning.: In Millis, K., Long, D. L., Magliano, J. P., Wiemer, K. (eds.) Deep Comprehension. Routledge, New York (2018)
Acknowledgment
I would like to thank Amanda Barany for her support. The present research was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP16H01817, JP18K13238, JP19H01715, and JP20KK0046. This work was funded in part by the National Science Foundation (DRL-1661036, DRL-1713110, DRL-2100320), the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, and the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The opinions, findings, and conclusions do not reflect the views of the funding agencies, cooperating institutions, or other individuals.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Ohsaki, A., Oshima, J. (2023). Analyzing the Co-design Process by Engineers and Product Designers from Perspectives of Knowledge Building. In: Damşa, C., Barany, A. (eds) Advances in Quantitative Ethnography. ICQE 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1785. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31726-2_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-31726-2_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-31725-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-31726-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)