Exploring E-tutors' Technological Knowledge of the Design Process to Facilitate the Design Step to Advance Giftedness of students in an ODeL Education

Abstract

In an ODeL context, the design step of the design process is regarded as a vital component that should be taught in the Technology curriculum. Teaching the design step in an ODeL setting places specific expectations on qualified e-tutors who can prepare students for the workplace. The central question of this research is "How does e-tutors' technical knowledge influence effective teaching and learning of the design step?" The study focused on postgraduate students enrolled in a semester module in 2020. An online survey was used to investigate the technological expertise of e-tutors in order to facilitate the design process step for advancing giftedness in students in an ODeL setting. The information gathered from five e-tutor sites was analyzed. The findings reveal that e-tutors in ODeL settings lack the ability to choose technologies that will help students understand the design step content. Suggestions: based on the present model, an alternate technique for e-tutor appointments is proposed.

Keywords

• technological knowledge
• e-tutoring
• design process
• design step
• open and distance e-Learning

References

1. Alok, A. (2021). Sketching- an iterative tool for engineering problem solving. Journal of Engineering Education Transformation, 34(4), 51 – 57.
2. Anamova, R. R. (2021). Engineering and graphic education during and after the COVID-19 pandemic: challenges and opportunities. AIP Conference Proceedings 2389, 100007. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0063501
3. Baker, A. H., & Kassimer, J. L. (2021). Using a connected learning framework to promote democratic education during a transition to online learning. Middle Grades Review, 7(1),1-15. https://scholarsworks.uvm.edu/mgreview/vol7/iss1/2.
4. Benning, L., Linsell, C., & Ingram, N. (2018). Using technology in mathematics: professional development for teachers. In Hunter, J., Perger, P., & Darrah, L. (Eds), Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference for Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia (MERGA) making Waves, Opening Spaces (pp.146- 153). Auckland.
5. Department of Basic Education. (2011). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement. (CAPS). Technology. Grades 7-9. Department of basic Education: Pretoria.
6. Evans, P., & Sonderlund, C. (2021). Prototyping remotely together with 2d, 3d and immersive virtual reality design tools. International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. 9-10 September.
7. Franchuk, N.P. & Prydacha, T.V. (2020). Organization and conduct of classes in educational institutions during distance learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 1-11. Doi;10.1088/1742-6596/1840/1/012054.
8. Han, J., Gu, L. Y., Chen, D. (2021). Application of innovative design thinking in product design, intelligent waste-paper recycling machine design case. 1-5. E3S Wed Conference. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3scomf/202123604062

9. Haj-Yahya, A. (2021). Can a number of diagrams linked to a proof task in 3d geometry improve proving ability? Mathematics Education Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00385-8.
10. Hietajarvi, L., Lonka, K., Hakkarainen, K., Alho, K., & Salmela- Aro, K. (2020). Are schools alienating digitally engaged students? Longitudinal relations between digital engagement and school engagement. Frontline Learning Research, 8(1), 33-55.
11. Kieman, N., Manches, A., Seery, M.K (2021). The role of visuospatial thinking in students’ predictions of molecular geometry, 1-14. Chemistry Education Research and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1039/DORP00354A.
12. Komatsu, K., & Jones, K. (2020). Interplay between paper-and-pencil activity and dynamic- geography-environment use during generalisation and proving. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 6. 123-143.
13. Kounlaxay, K., Shim, Y., Kang, S. J. Kwak, H. O & Kim, S. M. (2021). Learning media on mathematical education based on augmented reality. KS11 Transactions on Internet and Information Systems, 15(3),1015-1029.
14. Lin, K. Y., Wu, Y. T., Hsu, Y.T., & Williams, P. J. (2021). Effects of infusing the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to develop preservice technology teachers’ engineering design thinking. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1),1-15. http://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00258-9.
15. Maré, S., & Mutezo, A.T. (2021). The effectiveness of e-tutoring in an open and distance e-learning environment: evidence from the university of south Africa. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 36(2), 164–180.
16. Mohamad, T. (2021). “The eight grids: a new method to enhance students’ sketching skills in the schools of architecture. Architecture And Planning Journal (APJ), 27(1),1-13.
17. Ocal, T., & Halmatov, M. (2021). 3d geometric thinking skills of preschool children. International Journal of Curriculum Instruction, 13(2), 1508-1526.
18. Phillips, C., Sunderlin, D., & Addy, T. (2021). Adapting to new modes of teaching during COVID-19: developing instructional approaches that empower learners and facilitate virtual learning experiences. Journal of Transformative Learning, 8(1),10-21.
19. Pittalis, M., & Christou, C. (2010). Types of reasoning in 3D geometry thinking and their relation in spatial ability. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(2), 191-212.
20. Pownall, M. J., Brook, E. E., & Pashley, K. (2021). H.I.I.T, High intensity ideation training- facilitating group design ideation in a digital space. International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, 9-10 September, 2021. Via Design, Via University College, Herning, Denmark.
21. Ravioloa, P., Simoneb, M.G., Mauroc, I., & Rondonotti, M. (2021). Blended Learning in Online Teaching. Design Strategies and Future Developments, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Technology Enhanced Learning Environments for Blended Education (teleXbe2021), January 21-22, 2021, Foggia, Italy. https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2817/paper22.pdf.
22. Rohendi, D., Utami, N., Anna, A., & Sukandar, A. (2021). Projection simulation media in technical drawing for vocational students. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 16(1), 385-397.
23. Serrano, A., Chen, B., Wang, C., Piovarci., Seidel, H.P., Didyk, P., & Myszkowski, K. (2021). The effect of shape and illumination on material perception; model and applications. ACM Trans. 40(4), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3450626.3459813
24. Smith, S., Talley, K., Ortiz, A., & Sriraman, V. (2021). You want to teach me to engineering? Impacts of recurring experiences on K-12 teachers’ engineering design self-efficacy. Familiarity with engineering, and confidence to teach with design -based learning pedagogy. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 11(1), 26-44. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1241.
25. Sung, T. R., Kelly, T. R. & Han, J. (2019). Influence of sketching instruction on elementary students’ design cognition: a study of three sketching approaches. Journal of Engineering Design, 30(6), 199 – 226.
26. Taraszkiewicz, A. (2021). Freehand drawing versus digital design tools in architectural teaching. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 23(2), 100-105.
27. Tyrus, Y. V., & Harasymenko, I. V. (2021). Approaches, models, methods and means of training of future IT-specialists with the use of elements of dual education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series in Press.
28. Vegliante, R., Sannicandro, K. (2020). The role of the e-tutor in the university context and in distance learning: an exploratory research. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 16(3),76-85.
29. Xueting, L., Sifei, L., Kihwan, K., Shalini, D.M., Varun J., Yang, M., Kautz, J. (2020). Self-supervised single view 3d reconstruction via semantic consistency. asXiv preprint arXiv:203.06473,
30. Zhaldak, M.I., Franchuk, V.M., & Franchuk, N.P. (2021). Some applications of cloud technologies in mathematical calculations. Journal of Physics: Conference Series In press.
31. Zhang, H., Zhou, H., Zhou, Z., Zeng, H., Zhang, X, Yang, J & Lei, H. S., Han, F.S. (2021). Energy absorption diagram characteristic of metallic self-supporting 3D lattices fabricated by additive manufacturing and design method of energy absorption structure. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 226-235.