Digital Learning Design: From Ideation via TRIZ to Implementation

  • Iuliia ShnaiEmail author


Current digital medium influences on traditional higher education arrangement. Innovative standards, pedagogical methods, mechanisms for evaluations emerge driven by technology. In response to this changes, teachers adapt and embed creative course designs and invent new classrooms. This study is an attempt to apply systematic creativity toolkit for generation of ideas in higher education. The prime aim is to create concepts of completely new or enhanced educational course designs and methodologies. Theory of Inventive Problem Solving is defined package of idea generation tools, commonly applied for engineering. However, in this paper its value is recognized for ideation in general and applied to education. To achieve this aim the case-study was placed. The preliminary results provide conceptual models and ideas for new more effective knowledge, experience and attitude transfer forms. Each design is described in terms of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) model. TPCK is a basic framework for effective technology integration in teaching process. Some ideas appear in the real “Systematic Creativity and TRIZ” course in Lappeenranta University of Technology. Students’ satisfaction and design effectiveness were tested by the surveys, observations and learning analytics from platforms. Overall, this work sheds light on the new blended and online learning designs and standards, underlining the necessity and direction of inventing and improving in higher education.


  1. 1.
    Bergmann J, Sams A (2012) Flip your classroom reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daly S, Yilmaz S, Christian J, Seifert M, Gonzalez R (2012) Design heuristics in engineering concept generation. J Eng Educ 101(4):601–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Altshuller G. S., Shapiro R. B. (1956). Psychology of inventive creativity. Vopr. Psikhologii (Issues Psychoilogy), no. 6. (in Russian)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chechurin L (2016) TRIZ in science. Reviewing indexed publications, Procedia CIRP, vol 39, pp 156–165. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chechurin L, Shnai I (2017) Open materials,
  6. 6.
    Tucker B (2012). The flipped classroom. Education Next 12 (1), 82. Retrieved 28 January 2017
  7. 7.
    Mishra P, Koehler M (2006) Technological. Pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge teachers college record 108(6):1017–1054Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shulman L (1987) Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harv Educ Rev 57(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Antonova N, Shnai I, Kozlova M (2016) Flipped classroom as innovative practice in the higher education system: awareness and attitude. 3rd International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts SGEM (Book 1). Educ Educ Res 3:327–332Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shnai I (2017) Systematic review of challenges and gaps in flipped classroom implementation: toward future model enhancement, 16th European Conference on eLearning, Conference proceedings, 484Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Keith Sawyer R (2014) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (Cambridge handbooks in psychology). University of North Carolina, Chapel HillCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shnai I, Kozlova M (2016) Resource and profitability assessment of transition to flipped video-based lecturing. European Conference on Technology in the Classroom, Official Conference Proceedings, ISSN: 2188-1138, 109–116Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shnai I, Chechurin L (2017) Teaching creativity creatively, 28th Australian Association for Engineering Education Conference (AAEE 2017), 188–197Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Business and ManagementLappeenranta University of TechnologyLappeenrantaFinland

Personalised recommendations