An empirical study on the incorporation of APP and progressive reasoning teaching materials for improving technical creativity amongst students in the subject of automatic control

Abstract This study reformed teaching materials for automatic control, a mandatory course for engineering students, and designed a set of digital teaching materials based upon progressive reasoning with hand-mind combinations. The teaching materials were mainly delivered via a hands-on APP. The authors conducted an empirical study as well as pre-tests and post-tests for a total of 118 sophomore students majoring in engineering at two Universities. Outcomes found that the progressive reasoning teaching materials designed for this course were helpful in improving student creativity and scientific reasoning. Significant improvements were also achieved in product design, technical methods, and technological ideas aspects of technological creativity and every scientific reasoning skill, with the exception of proportional reasoning. Results also identified strong correlation between technical creativity and scientific reasoning. This relationship may be further investigated in follow-up studies. This study also proposed recommendations for coordinating designs of digital teaching materials in other engineering courses with the development of student thinking.

[1]  John F. Feldhusen,et al.  Creativity: A Knowledge Base, Metacognitive Skills, and Personality Factors , 1995 .

[2]  Robert D. Tennyson,et al.  A study on the usability of E-books and APP in engineering courses: A case study on mechanical drawing , 2016, Comput. Educ..

[3]  Yu-chu Yeh,et al.  The Cognitive Processes of Pupils' Technological Creativity , 2006 .

[4]  Mark A. Runco,et al.  Personal creativity: Definition and developmental issues , 1996 .

[5]  M. Csíkszentmihályi.  Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention , 1996 .

[6]  Mukyeong Kim,et al.  An underlying cognitive aspect of design creativity: Limited Commitment Mode control strategy , 2007 .

[7]  E. Simpson.  THE CLASSIFICATION OF EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES, PSYCHOMOTOR DOMAIN. , 1966 .

[8]  Weiping Hu,et al.  Increasing Students' Scientific Creativity: The “Learn to Think” Intervention Program , 2013 .

[9]  H. Gardner,et al.  Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences , 1983 .

[10]  H.H.C.M. Christiaans,et al.  Creativity in design: the role of domain knowledge in designing , 1992 .

[11]  Donghui Guo,et al.  A study on the effects of model-based inquiry pedagogy on students' inquiry skills in a virtual physics lab , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[12]  Patricia D. Morrell,et al.  Student's Attitudes Toward School and Classroom Science: Are They Independent Phenomena? , 1998 .

[13]  Jon-Chao Hong,et al.  The Development of Technological Creativity Through Project Work , 1999 .

[14]  David Klahr,et al.  Dual Space Search During Scientific Reasoning , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  Annie Roe,et al.  The Making of a Scientist , 1953 .

[16]  L. Terman.  A New Approach to the Study of Genius. , 1922 .

[17]  Jingbin Zhang,et al.  Research on the effects of cloud-based pedagogy for creative talents: A case study on Chinese High School , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[18]  Path analysis: A model for the development of scientific reasoning abilities in adolescents , 1989 .