pdf (Español (España))
FLIP
How to Cite
Restrepo-Quevedo, D. A., González Tobón, J., Cuervo, R., Camacho, J., & Hernández-Mihajlovic, E. . (2022). Metacognitive Transcendence in the Learning of the Project Activity of Design through the Sketchbook Visuality. Kepes, 19(25), 295–324. https://doi.org/10.17151/kepes.2022.19.25.11
More Citation Formats
Authors
Diego Aníbal Restrepo-Quevedo
Perfil Google Scholar
Juanita González Tobón
Roberto Cuervo
Jorge Camacho
Edgar Hernández-Mihajlovic
Abstract
This article aims to report the transition from intuitive to intentional projective activities in design recorded in the visual modes of sketchbook to analyze the metacognitive processes of design students. Phenomenography was used as an empirical sampling method to diagnose the sketchbooks of industrial design and graphic design students. The observation criteria focused on describing the metacognitive characteristics of the students with respect to the way they recorded their ideas visually, which showed design-specific projective actions. This research demonstrated and codified how students externalize intentional approaches in their sketchbook iterations, which can be grouped into three representation strategies: technical, methodological, and reflective; they are related to their experiences in projective activity. Consequently, we propose a new category called metacognitive transcendence, which refers to a strategy for controlling and regulating cognitive processes to transform an intuitive action into an intentional action mediated by a cognitive artifact: the design sketchbook. Three ways of metacognitive transcendence are suggested: instrumental (technical aspects), procedural (related to projection), and comprehensive (own reflection about the project itself).
Keywords:
References
Ackerman, R. & Thompson, V. (2017). Meta-reasoning: Monitoring and control of thinking and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(8), 607-617.https://doi-org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.05.004
Adar, L. (1969). A Theoretical Framework for the Study of Motivation in Education. Hebrew University.
Anstey, M. & Bull, G. (2010). Helping teachers to explore multimodal texts. Curriculum & Leadership Journal, 8(16). http://goo.gl/Na2JR
Bacas, P. & Martín-Díaz, M. J. (1992). Distintas Motivaciones para Aprender Ciencias (Ciencias de la Naturaleza). Narcea.
Ball, L. J. & Christensen, B. T. (2019). Advancing an understanding of design cognition and design metacognition: Progress and prospects. Design Studies, 65, 35–59. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.003
Brown, T. & Martin, R. (2015). Design for action: How to use design thinking to make great things actually happen. Harvard Business Review, 56–64. https://hbr.org/2015/09/designfor-action
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. https:// doi.org/10.2307/1511637
Burnette, C. (1 nov 2009). A theory of design thinking. FAIA Prepared in response to the Torquay Conference on Design Thinking [conference]. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Carlson, S. E., Rees, D. G., Maliakal, L. V., Gerber, E. M. & Easterday, M. W. (2020). The design risks framework: Understanding metacognition for iteration. Design Studies, 70, 100961.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100961
Coll, C., Engel, A. & Bustos, A. (2009). Distributed Teaching Presence and Participants’ Activity Profiles: a theoretical approach to the structural analysis of Asynchronous Learning Networks. European Journal of Education, 44(4), 521–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465- 3435.2009.01406.x
Cross, N. (1991). Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. John Wiley & Sons.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793601750357196
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Springer-Verlag London Limited.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking : Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Berg. Culache, O. & Obadă, D. R. (2014). Multimodality as a Premise for Inducing Online Flow on a Brand Website: A Social Semiotic Approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149, 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.227
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
Epstein, S. (2010). Demystifying intuition: What it is, what it does, and how it does it. Psychological Inquiry, 21(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2010.523875
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive– developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
González-Tobón, J., Cuervo, R., Hernández, E. & Camacho, J. (2020). The logbook in design, learning cognitive artifact. Externalization of mental models and metacognition. Bitácora Urbano Territorial, 30(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.15446/bitacora.v30n2.81635
González-Ugalde, C. (2014). Investigación fenomenográfica. Magis, 7(14), 141–158. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=281032883011
Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J. & Salas, C. R. (2013). Supporting effective self-regulated learning: The critical role of monitoring. In International handbook of metacognition and learning
technologies (pp. 19–34). Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3_2
Holroyd, A. (2009). Interpretive hermeneutics and modifying the modern idea of method. The Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 40(4), 130-145. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19186789/
Jewitt, C. (Ed.). (2011). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. Routledge.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Mental Models in Cognitive Science. Cognitive Science, 4(1), 71– 115. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0401_4
Jones, P. (2014). Systemic design principles for complex social systems. In G.S. Metcalf (Ed.) Social systems and design, vol.1,(pp.91-128). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54478-4
Kavousi, S., Miller, P. A. & Alexander, P. A. (2020). Modeling metacognition in design thinking and design making. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(4), 709–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09521-9
Krippendorff, K. (2007). An exploration of artificiality. Artifact, 1(1), 17–22. https://repository. upenn.edu/asc_papers/238/
Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An Overview.
Martí, E. (2003). Representar el Mundo Externamente. La Adquisición Infantil de los Sistemas Externos de Representación. A. Machado Libros S.A.
Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography—a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 28–49. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42589189
Maya, J. & Patiño, E. (2020). Propiedades de las representaciones en diseño: una exploración interdisciplinaria de su rol funcional. Kepes, 17(21), 17–60. https://doi.org/10.17151/ kepes.2020.17.21.2
Mayer, R. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1–2), 49–63.
Norman, D. (1983). Some observations on mental models. Mental Models, 7(112), 7–14.
Norman, D. (1991). Cognitive artifacts. In J.M. Carroll (Ed.). Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface (pp. 17-38) Cambridge University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1974). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 2). Harvard University Press.
Powers, M. (2016). Self-Regulated Design Learning: A Foundation and Framework for Teaching and Learning Design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315746081
Qian, L. & Gero, J. S. (1996). Function-behavior-structure paths and their role in analogy-based design. Artificial Intelligence for Engeneering Design, Analysis Ans Manufacturing, 10(4), 289–312. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400001633
Ramírez Escobar, M. F. (2020). Prácticas de visualización en la investigación académica en diseño gráfico. Kepes, 17(22), 76–108. https://doi.org/10.17151/kepes.2020.17.22.4
Restrepo-Quevedo, D. A. (Dec. 2015). Developing a Reference Framework for the Research of Multimodality in Design. In. University of Caldas (Ed.) Primer Precoloquio Doctoral: Memorias Doctorado en Diseño y Creación (pp.104-108). https://bit.ly/2w9QY9O
Restrepo-Quevedo, D. A. (2016). Intercreativity in Potency: Designing of Virtual Learning Environments Enhancers of Creative Participations (Intercreatividad en Potencia: Diseño de Ambientes Virtuales de Aprendizaje Potenciadores de Participaciones Creativas) [Doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Caldas]. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14010.70085
Rittel, H. & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Ryd, N. (2004). The design brief as carrier of client information during the construction process. Design Studies, 25(3), 231–249. https://doi.org. /10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.003
Sennett, R (2010). El Artesano. Editorial Anagrama.
Simon, H. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(73)90011-8
Simon, H. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial.
Smith, T. W., & Colby, S. A. (2007). Teaching for Deep Learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 80(5), 205–210. https://doi.org/10.3200/tchs.80.5.205-210
Tamayo, O.E. (2006). La metacognición en los modelos para la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de las ciencias. In VV. AA., Los Bordes de La Pedagogía: Del Modelo a La Ruptura (pp. 275–306). Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.
Tight, M. (2016). Phenomenography: the development and application of an innovative research design in higher education research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(3), 319–338. http://10.0.4.56/13645579.2015.1010284
Visser, W. (2006a). Designing as Construction of Representations: A Dynamic Viewpoint in Cognitive Design Research. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(1), 103–152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2101_4
Visser, W. (2006b). The Cognitive Artifacts of Designing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Yzerbyt, V., Lories, G. & Dardenne, B. (1998). Metacognition: Cognitive and Social Dimensions. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Adar, L. (1969). A Theoretical Framework for the Study of Motivation in Education. Hebrew University.
Anstey, M. & Bull, G. (2010). Helping teachers to explore multimodal texts. Curriculum & Leadership Journal, 8(16). http://goo.gl/Na2JR
Bacas, P. & Martín-Díaz, M. J. (1992). Distintas Motivaciones para Aprender Ciencias (Ciencias de la Naturaleza). Narcea.
Ball, L. J. & Christensen, B. T. (2019). Advancing an understanding of design cognition and design metacognition: Progress and prospects. Design Studies, 65, 35–59. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.003
Brown, T. & Martin, R. (2015). Design for action: How to use design thinking to make great things actually happen. Harvard Business Review, 56–64. https://hbr.org/2015/09/designfor-action
Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21. https:// doi.org/10.2307/1511637
Burnette, C. (1 nov 2009). A theory of design thinking. FAIA Prepared in response to the Torquay Conference on Design Thinking [conference]. Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Carlson, S. E., Rees, D. G., Maliakal, L. V., Gerber, E. M. & Easterday, M. W. (2020). The design risks framework: Understanding metacognition for iteration. Design Studies, 70, 100961.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2020.100961
Coll, C., Engel, A. & Bustos, A. (2009). Distributed Teaching Presence and Participants’ Activity Profiles: a theoretical approach to the structural analysis of Asynchronous Learning Networks. European Journal of Education, 44(4), 521–538. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465- 3435.2009.01406.x
Cross, N. (1991). Engineering Design Methods: Strategies for Product Design. John Wiley & Sons.
Cross, N. (2001). Designerly Ways of Knowing: Design Discipline versus Design Science. Design Issues, 17(3), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1162/074793601750357196
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly Ways of Knowing. Springer-Verlag London Limited.
Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking : Understanding How Designers Think and Work. Berg. Culache, O. & Obadă, D. R. (2014). Multimodality as a Premise for Inducing Online Flow on a Brand Website: A Social Semiotic Approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 149, 261–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.08.227
Dorst, K. (2011). The core of ‘design thinking’and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006
Epstein, S. (2010). Demystifying intuition: What it is, what it does, and how it does it. Psychological Inquiry, 21(4), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2010.523875
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive– developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
González-Tobón, J., Cuervo, R., Hernández, E. & Camacho, J. (2020). The logbook in design, learning cognitive artifact. Externalization of mental models and metacognition. Bitácora Urbano Territorial, 30(2), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.15446/bitacora.v30n2.81635
González-Ugalde, C. (2014). Investigación fenomenográfica. Magis, 7(14), 141–158. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=281032883011
Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J. & Salas, C. R. (2013). Supporting effective self-regulated learning: The critical role of monitoring. In International handbook of metacognition and learning
technologies (pp. 19–34). Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3_2
Holroyd, A. (2009). Interpretive hermeneutics and modifying the modern idea of method. The Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 40(4), 130-145. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19186789/
Jewitt, C. (Ed.). (2011). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. Routledge.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Mental Models in Cognitive Science. Cognitive Science, 4(1), 71– 115. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0401_4
Jones, P. (2014). Systemic design principles for complex social systems. In G.S. Metcalf (Ed.) Social systems and design, vol.1,(pp.91-128). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54478-4
Kavousi, S., Miller, P. A. & Alexander, P. A. (2020). Modeling metacognition in design thinking and design making. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(4), 709–735. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09521-9
Krippendorff, K. (2007). An exploration of artificiality. Artifact, 1(1), 17–22. https://repository. upenn.edu/asc_papers/238/
Livingston, J. A. (2003). Metacognition: An Overview.
Martí, E. (2003). Representar el Mundo Externamente. La Adquisición Infantil de los Sistemas Externos de Representación. A. Machado Libros S.A.
Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography—a research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 28–49. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42589189
Maya, J. & Patiño, E. (2020). Propiedades de las representaciones en diseño: una exploración interdisciplinaria de su rol funcional. Kepes, 17(21), 17–60. https://doi.org/10.17151/ kepes.2020.17.21.2
Mayer, R. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1–2), 49–63.
Norman, D. (1983). Some observations on mental models. Mental Models, 7(112), 7–14.
Norman, D. (1991). Cognitive artifacts. In J.M. Carroll (Ed.). Designing Interaction: Psychology at the Human-Computer Interface (pp. 17-38) Cambridge University Press.
Peirce, C. S. (1974). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. 2). Harvard University Press.
Powers, M. (2016). Self-Regulated Design Learning: A Foundation and Framework for Teaching and Learning Design. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315746081
Qian, L. & Gero, J. S. (1996). Function-behavior-structure paths and their role in analogy-based design. Artificial Intelligence for Engeneering Design, Analysis Ans Manufacturing, 10(4), 289–312. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0890060400001633
Ramírez Escobar, M. F. (2020). Prácticas de visualización en la investigación académica en diseño gráfico. Kepes, 17(22), 76–108. https://doi.org/10.17151/kepes.2020.17.22.4
Restrepo-Quevedo, D. A. (Dec. 2015). Developing a Reference Framework for the Research of Multimodality in Design. In. University of Caldas (Ed.) Primer Precoloquio Doctoral: Memorias Doctorado en Diseño y Creación (pp.104-108). https://bit.ly/2w9QY9O
Restrepo-Quevedo, D. A. (2016). Intercreativity in Potency: Designing of Virtual Learning Environments Enhancers of Creative Participations (Intercreatividad en Potencia: Diseño de Ambientes Virtuales de Aprendizaje Potenciadores de Participaciones Creativas) [Doctoral dissertation, Universidad de Caldas]. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.14010.70085
Rittel, H. & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Ryd, N. (2004). The design brief as carrier of client information during the construction process. Design Studies, 25(3), 231–249. https://doi.org. /10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.003
Sennett, R (2010). El Artesano. Editorial Anagrama.
Simon, H. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(73)90011-8
Simon, H. (1996). The Sciences of the Artificial.
Smith, T. W., & Colby, S. A. (2007). Teaching for Deep Learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 80(5), 205–210. https://doi.org/10.3200/tchs.80.5.205-210
Tamayo, O.E. (2006). La metacognición en los modelos para la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de las ciencias. In VV. AA., Los Bordes de La Pedagogía: Del Modelo a La Ruptura (pp. 275–306). Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.
Tight, M. (2016). Phenomenography: the development and application of an innovative research design in higher education research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(3), 319–338. http://10.0.4.56/13645579.2015.1010284
Visser, W. (2006a). Designing as Construction of Representations: A Dynamic Viewpoint in Cognitive Design Research. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(1), 103–152. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2101_4
Visser, W. (2006b). The Cognitive Artifacts of Designing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Yzerbyt, V., Lories, G. & Dardenne, B. (1998). Metacognition: Cognitive and Social Dimensions. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
