Uncovering learning outcomes: explicating obscurity in learning of aesthetics in design and technology education

Education and training interventions can be evaluated through the success of learning outcomes. Kirkpatrick's four-level model is a widely accepted and highly popular evaluation tool. However, some criticise the model's shortcomings. This article will examine the extent to which the four-level model can evaluate design and technology students' learning about aesthetics after an intervention by reporting our use of an augmented version of the four-level model. We examine the results in terms of students' reaction to the intervention, their long-term learning and their behaviour changes by studying their visual analyses and drawings through segment codes. We found that, in order to uncover the obscurities imbedded in aesthetics and to explicate the complexities, we could not use the four-level-model on its own, but had to revert to a more augmented version.

[1]  M. Hannafin,et al.  Metacognition research and theory: Analysis and implications for instructional design , 1992 .

[2]  R. Arnheim.  Art and Visual Perception, a Psychology of the Creative Eye , 1967 .

[3]  Marc J. de Vries,et al.  Teaching about Technology: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Technology for Non-philosophers , 2005 .

[4]  M. Patton.  Two Decades of Developments in Qualitative Inquiry , 2002 .

[5]  Kyle L. Peck.  The Design Development and Evaluation of Instructional Software , 1988 .

[6]  Wucius Wong,et al.  Principles of Form and Design , 1993 .

[7]  Reid Bates.  A critical analysis of evaluation practice: the Kirkpatrick model and the principle of beneficence , 2004 .

[8]  John W. Newstrom.  Evaluating training programs: The four levels, by Donald L. Kirkpatrick. (1994). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. 229 pp., $32.95 cloth. , 1995 .

[9]  De Villiers,et al.  The dynamics of theory and practice in instructional systems design , 2004 .

[10]  Elwood F. Holton.  The flawed four‐level evaluation model , 1996 .

[11]  Donald L. Kirkpatrick,et al.  Evaluating Training Programs : The Four Levels , 2009 .

[12]  Darlene Russ-Eft,et al.  In Search of the Holy Grail: Return on Investment Evaluation in Human Resource Development , 2005 .

[13]  Sandra Mathison,et al.  Encyclopedia of Evaluation , 2004 .

[14]  Oscar Faber.  The aesthetic aspect of civil engineering design , 1945 .

[15]  J. W. Parr.  Aesthetic Intentions in Product Design Market driven or alternative form , 2003 .

[16]  R. Arnheim.  Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye, New version , 1955 .

[17]  James H. McMillan,et al.  Research in Education: A Conceptual Introduction , 1984 .

[18]  Donovan A. McFarlane,et al.  Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels , 2006 .

[19]  J. Huisman.  The Netherlands , 1996, The Lancet.

[20]  Winston Bennett,et al.  A META-ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONS AMONG TRAINING CRITERIA , 1997 .

[21]  Jan van den Akker,et al.  Principles and Methods of Development Research , 1999 .

[22]  Rudolf Arnheim,et al.  New Essays on the Psychology of Art , 2023 .

[23]  Winston Bennett,et al.  Effectiveness of training in organizations: a meta-analysis of design and evaluation features. , 2003, The Journal of applied psychology.

[24]  B. Tversky,et al.  What Does Drawing Reveal about Thinking? , 1999 .