Preparing for the Future
Towards a Measurement Instrument for Transdisciplinary Thinking in Singapore Tertiary Students View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Clarice Sim, Mark Lu
As the world and its problems become increasingly complex, there is a growing need for more holistic and integrative ways of thinking to address these issues. Transdisciplinary Thinking is increasingly recognised as an important ability or mindset for integration across disciplines and more innovative solutions (OECD, 2020, SSG, n.d.). Despite the increasing recognition of Transdisciplinary Thinking, there is no consensus on its conceptual definition, nor is there a validated instrument to measure this construct. This is a critical gap in the context of teaching, evaluating and assessing educational initiatives aimed at developing this ability in students. This paper builds on a literature review and analyses retrospective data (using Rasch Analysis and Exploratory Factor Analysis) from a 9-item self-report student survey conducted in 2021 (n = 84) to understand what Transdisciplinary Thinking entails and how it can be measured. Our findings suggest that Transdisciplinary Thinking is a multidimensional construct consisting of three dimensions: Perceiving (i.e., understanding and evaluating an issue from the perspective of different disciplines), Synthesizing (i.e., integrating efforts to synthesize knowledge from other disciplines to gain new knowledge), and Solutioning (i.e., proposing innovative solutions that go beyond the scope of any single discipline). A more robust 17-item survey instrument developed after this analysis is shared in this paper. We also review classroom activities that help nurture students in these dimensions. Our work on measuring Transdisciplinary Thinking and teaching it in a classroom setting will be beneficial to other educators seeking ways to foster holistic development in their students.
Navigating the Transient Economy: Speculative Futures of Design Education View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Rand Ang
The state of design faces an existential crisis. Traditional paradigms are being disrupted, as noted by Bruce Mau (2024), who describes a significant shift: “(A) shift from the old world, where design was a subset of business, business as a function of culture, and culture happened in a natural context.” Mau argues that design carries a profound responsibility to shape the world. However, it faces numerous challenges: the growing influence of the volatile gig economy, unprecedented technological advancements, the uncertain role of designers in an AI-driven world, and the blurred lines between practice, professionalism, and expression. Moreover, design must contend with social acceleration and shifting priorities across finance, healthcare, and politics—an ephemerality that can be termed the Transient Economy. In light of this transitoriness, what position should design education adopt to prepare the next generation of designers? How can we design today to create a preferable future for the designers of tomorrow? This paper seeks to offer insights by examining signals and drivers from various design research and pedagogical approaches in design education, as well as findings from a series of design futuring workshops.
Educator Perspectives on Teaching Design Thinking View Digital Media
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session Jo Li Tay, Monika Lukowska
Design Thinking is routinely taught in design schools around the world today, due to its usefulness in the types of interdisciplinary, complex problem-solving that designers are commonly required to engage in. Its popularity in design education has accordingly spawned interest in how design thinking is learned and taught – researchers have examined this across different modes and contexts, comparing these approaches, and speculating on the optimal ways to do so. This paper adds to this existing body of research, by reviewing the collective experiences of four educators who have taught across four different units (two undergraduate and two postgraduate) within Curtin University that involve the use of design thinking. This review consists of three main stages: first, each educator reflects individually on their experience within the unit or units they have taught; second, the individual reflections are then shared with the group so each educator can review everyone’s reflections individually; third, the group meets to discuss their thoughts and perspectives. The outcome of this review is presented in this paper, along with an analysis of the similarities and differences across the different units, as well as key considerations for the effective teaching of design thinking.
