Skip to main content

Promoting Design Thinking Through Knowledge Maps: A Case Study in Computer Games Design and Development Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Higher Education Computer Science

Abstract

Modern computing is pervaded by human-centric technologies which potentiate people’s capabilities to address complex problems and needs in contextualised and meaningful ways. Creating such technologies requires thinking approaches that overcome the limitations of traditional paradigms that focus on specific aspects of human-computer interaction in well-defined problem contexts. Design thinking is an ill-defined problem-solving strategy which addresses this need through a systematic and iterative process that integrates exploration, ideation and testing of possible solutions based on the participation of stakeholders, and the investigation and accommodation of their often-conflicting needs. Developing design thinking in students is key to face the challenges of an ever-changing and increasingly complex world, and it is therefore crucial to have approaches and tools that can support educational endeavours aimed at this. In this chapter we describe the use of knowledge maps to promote design thinking for game design and development students. Knowledge maps are a variant of hierarchical concept maps created by domain experts to support learners’ knowledge construction processes. Game design knowledge maps were conceived to integrate and structure multidisciplinary knowledge regarding game systems, players, player engagement principles, and design and testing processes. Their structure was planned so that students could explore imparted knowledge iteratively and incrementally, driven by a human-centric focus. The evidence collected from students so far indicates that knowledge maps integrate large amounts of information in an easily accessible structure which fosters students’ design thinking processes. The maps seem to support students in connecting themes and ideas, and guide them through the whole design thinking process. This suggests that properly structured imparted knowledge can be effective in helping students to learn “how” to think, not just “what” to think.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bannon L (1991) From human factors to human actors: the role of psychology and human-computer interaction studies in system design. In: Greenbaum JM, Kyng M (eds) Design at work: cooperative design of computer systems. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 25–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan R (1992) Wicked problems in design thinking. Des Issues 8(2):5–21

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cross N (1982) Designerly ways of knowing. Des Stud 3(4):221–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross N (2001) Designerly ways of knowing: design discipline versus design science. Des Issues 17(3):49–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorst K (2011) The core of “design thinking” and its application. Des Stud 32(6):521–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunne D, Martin R (2006) Design thinking and how it will change management education: an interview and discussion. Acad Manage Learn Educ 5(4):512–523

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dym CL, Agogino AM, Eris O, Frey DD, Leifer LJ (2005) Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. J Eng Educ 94(1):103–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabricatore C, López X (in press) Education in a complex world: nurturing chaordic agency through complexity science and game design. In: Visser J, Visser M (eds) Seeking understanding: the lifelong pursuit to build the scientific mind, Sense Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabricatore C, López X (2013) Fostering creativity through educational video game development projects: a study of contextual and task characteristics. Creativity Res J 25(4):418–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabricatore C, López MX (2014) Complexity-based learning and teaching: a case study in higher education. Innovations Educ Teach Int 51(6):618–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabricatore C, López X (2015) Higher education in a complex world: nurturing “chaordic” influencers. In :Proceedings of the sixth advanced international colloquium on building the scientific mind (BtSM2015), Learning Development Institute, Jupiter, pp 1–11. Retrieved from http://www.learndev.org/BtSM2015.html

  • Giacomin J (2014) What is human centred design? Des J 17(4):606–623

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Grudin J (2012) A moving target: the evolution of HCI. In: Jacko JA (ed) The human-computer interaction handbook: fundamentals, evolving technologies, and emerging applications, 3rd edn. Taylor & Francis Group, New York, pp xxvii–lxi

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaimes A, Gatica-Perez D, Sebe N, Huang TS (2007) Human-centered computing—toward a human revolution. Computer 40(5):30–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh JHL, Chai CS, Wong B, Hong H-Y (2015) Design thinking for education: concepts and applications in teaching and learning. Springer, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  • Kokotovich V (2008) Problem analysis and thinking tools: an empirical study of non-hierarchical mind mapping. Des Stud 29(1):49–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathias JR (1993) A study of the problem solving strategies used by expert and novice designers (Doctoral Dissertation). Aston University, Birmingham, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak JD (2010) Learning creating and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. J E-Learn Knowl Soc 6(3):21–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak JD, Cañas AJ (2008) The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them. Technical report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01 Rev 01-2008, Florida. http://cmap.ihmc.us/publications/researchpapers/theoryunderlyingconceptmaps.pdf

  • O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ (2004) “Any other comments?” Open questions on questionnaires—a bane or a bonus to research?, BMC Medical Research Methodology

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxman R (1999) Educating the designerly thinker. Des Stud 20(2):105–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxman R (2004) Think-maps: teaching design thinking in design education. Des Stud 25(1):63–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor P (2000) Designerly thinking: what software methodology can learn from design theory. In: Gray J, Croll P (eds) Proceedings international conference on software methods and tools, smt 2000. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, pp 107–116

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlo Fabricatore .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fabricatore, C., López, M.X. (2018). Promoting Design Thinking Through Knowledge Maps: A Case Study in Computer Games Design and Development Education. In: Carter, J., O'Grady, M., Rosen, C. (eds) Higher Education Computer Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98590-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98590-9_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98589-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98590-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics