Figure 2 - uploaded by Karthik Ramani
Content may be subject to copyright.
The coded timelines of one design team showing the activities of planning, building, and testing during the marshmallow tower design challenge at the beginning and near the end of the workshop.
Source publication
In this study, we examined the development of middle school students’ engineering design thinking in a toy design workshop. The introduction of engineering design modules in middle school has been shown to aid understanding of scientific concepts and design thinking. Additionally, using concrete objects to augment abstract concepts and symbols has...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... the coding scheme described in Table 2 in the Measures section, the design activities were coded using the coding protocol, and categorized students' behaviors into "modality+activity" types (e.g. verbal planning, tangible building). Figure 2 shows the coded timeline of a team performing the marshmallow tower design activity, combining the categories into the overarching themes of plan, build and test. In the first trial: the team spent most of their early efforts in planning, and later moving on to building, continuing to switch between building and testing, with some movement back into planning. In total, the team spent 30% of their total time planning, 46% of their time building, and 11% on testing. This contrasts with their second trial, where they spend only 11% of time planning, 13% of time testing, and 76% of time in building. In addition, the students transitioned from planning into building much earlier in the second trial than the first trial. The rate at which the team switched between activities remained similar: 1.26 times a minute on average for the first trial, and 1.15 times a minute for the second trial. We also examined students' behaviors using the "modality+activity" types (e.g. verbal planning, tangible building). As is demonstrated in Figure 3, students made quicker transition from planning into building in trial 2 when compared to trail 1. Besides, students increased in the percentage of time spent on tangible planning (2.2%), verbal building (11.99%), and tangible building (29.09%), but decreased in the percentage of time spent on verbal (10.65%) and visual planning (10.4%) (Figure 3). Thus, while the students spent time on planning in both trial 1 and trial 2, they showed the tendency to use more tangible planning with objects, rather than mainly using verbal and visual planning. ...
Citations
... Zhou et al. conducted a two-week workshop on engineering students' self-efficacy and used the timeline of a team performing the marshmallow activity on two trials, combining the categories of plan, build, and test [14]. In the first trial: the team spent most of their early efforts in planning, and later moving on to building, continuing to switch between building and testing, with some movement back into planning. ...
The Marshmallow Challenge, a popular activity in classrooms and team-building exercises in offices promotes teamwork, communication, and collaboration. Despite its widespread use, its application within the Saudi educational context remains underexplored. Therefore, this research delves into the experiences and perceptions of 43 Saudi female undergraduate students participating in the Marshmallow Challenge in Organizational Behaviour (OB) class at the University of Hail, Saudi Arabia. Utilizing semi-structured interviews, the study aims to understand the nuances of this experiential learning activity, focusing on teamwork, communication, leadership, collaboration, and related responses. The findings reveal a spectrum of reactions from initial apprehension and nervousness to subsequent collaborative problem-solving and reflection. Ultimately, this research paper contributes to the broader literature on experiential learning in OB education, offering educators actionable insights to optimize student engagement, collaboration, and skill learning.
