Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Open Education Studies

Editor-in-Chief: Bastiaens, Theo

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2544-7831
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Design Thinking for German Vocational Schools? Discovering of an Innovative Approach by Testing in Teacher Education

Marc Krüger
  • Corresponding author
  • Münster School of Vocational Education, University of Applied Sciences Münster, Münster, 48149 North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2019-12-23 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2019-0015

Abstract

Design Thinking is an innovative approach that solves concrete problems and develops new products. Its constant spreading in industry, business, and non-profit organizations raises the question to which extent this approach may be of importance for German vocational schools. There is an increasing debate among scientists about design thinking in educational contexts, in which different authors regard it as useful for curriculum and school development as well as for coping with everyday school life. To assess the importance of design thinking for German vocational schools, pre-service teachers have tackled vocational school issues with design thinking. The paper concludes that design thinking is indeed of interest to vocational schools and that further work is recommended.

Keywords: Action Research; Design Thinking; Innovation; School Development; Teacher Education; Vocational Education and Training

References

  • Allert, H., & Richter, C. (2011). Designentwicklung. Anregungen aus Designtheorie und Designforschung. In M. Ebner & S. Schön (Eds.), Lehrbuch für Lernen und Lehren mit Technologien (L3T). Bad Reichenhall: BIMS e.V.Google Scholar

  • Altrichter, H., Feldman, A., Posch, P., & Somekh, B. (2008). Teachers Investigate their Work. An Introduction to action research. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (2006). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation (4. Auflage). Heidelberg: Springer Medizin.Google Scholar

  • Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organizations and inspires innovation. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar

  • Burrell, A., Cavanagh, M., Young, S., & Carter, H. (2015). Team-Based Curriculum Design as an Agent of Change. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(8), 753-766.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Danah, H., & Richardson, C. (2017). Teachers Are Designers. Addressing Problems of Practice in Education. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 60-64.Google Scholar

  • Fischer, M. (2015). Design Thinking im Seminarunterricht. Ein strukturierter Kreativprozess im Politikseminar. B. Berendt, H.-P. Voss & J. Wildt (Eds.), Neues Handbuch Hochschullehre. Lehren und Lernen effizient gestalten. [Teil] C. Lehrmethoden und Lernsituationen. Aktivierende Lehrmethoden (pp. 7-18). Berlin: Raabe.Google Scholar

  • Gallagher, A., & Thordarson, K. (2018). Design thinking for school leaders. Five roles and mindsets that ignite positive change. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD.Google Scholar

  • Hartmann, M. (2016). Analyse beruflicher Handlungsprozesse und Planung beruflicher Kompetenzentwicklung vor dem Hintergrund von Industrie 4.0. In J. Steffen, U. Schwenger & T. Vollmer (Eds.), Digitale Vernetzung der Facharbeit (pp. 27-54). Bielefeld: wbv.Google Scholar

  • Heinrich, N. (2016). Informationstechnik als Querschnitssdimension gewerblich-technischer Facharbeit. In J. Steffen, U. Schwenger & T. Vollmer (Eds.), Digitale Vernetzung der Facharbeit (pp. 117-136). Bielefeld: wbv.Google Scholar

  • Höllen, M. (2017). Start-up-Atmosphäre an der VHS: Design Thinking auch in der Weiterbildung? Ein unkonventionelles Format für die Tagung großstädtischer Volkshochschulen. Dis.kurs, 3, 40-42.Google Scholar

  • Krüger, M. (2016). Wer – im Coburger Weg – was von wem wann mit wem wo, wie, womit und wozu lernen soll? In Hochschule Coburg (Ed.), Gute Aussichten. Zwischenbilanz zum Projekt “Der Coburger Weg” (pp. 48-57). Coburg.Google Scholar

  • Neber, H. (2001). Kooperatives Lernen. In D. H. Rost (Ed.), Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie. Weinheim: BelzPVU.Google Scholar

  • Noel, L., & Liub, T. (2017). Using Design Thinking to Create a New Education Paradigm for Elementary Level Children for Higher Student Engagement and Success. Design and Technology Education, 22(1).Google Scholar

  • Plattner, H., Meinel, C., & Weinberg, U. (2009). design THiNKING. Innovation lernen – Ideenwelten öffnen. München: mi-Wirtschaftsbuch.Google Scholar

  • Schlausch, R., & Schütte, M. (2003). Zur partizipativen Reorganisation eines Unternehmens des Maschinen- und Anlagenbaus. Zeitschrift für Arbeitswissenschaften, 57(1), 42-57.Google Scholar

  • Schmiedgen, J., Rhinow, H., Köppen, E., & Meinel, C. (2015). Parts Without a Whole? The Current State of Design Thinking Practice in Organizations. Technical Reports by Hasso-Plattner-Instituts für Softwaresystemtechnik an der Universität Potsdam, 97, Potsdam: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar

  • Statista (2018, July). Entwicklung der Gesamtzahl der anerkannten oder als anerkannt geltenden Ausbildungsberufe in Deutschland von 1971 bis 2018. Retrieved from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/156901/umfrage/ausbildungsberufe-in-deutschland/

  • Tremblay, D.-G., & Le Bot, I. (2000). The German Dual Apprenticeship System: An Analysis of Its Evolution and Present Challenges. Toronto (Ontario): York University.Google Scholar

About the article

Received: 2019-02-28

Accepted: 2019-11-15

Published Online: 2019-12-23


Citation Information: Open Education Studies, Volume 1, Issue 1, Pages 209–219, ISSN (Online) 2544-7831, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2019-0015.

Export Citation

© 2019 Marc Krüger, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License. BY 4.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in