Creating a Virtual Leader Development Course Using the Design Thinking Process for Innovation
[EN] This paper examines how a U.S. Air Force (USAF) faculty team reimagined and redesigned an in-person Leader Development Course (LDC) to a virtual version (vLDC). Using the Design Thinking Process for Innovation (DTPI) and action research methods, a new, virtual course was imagined, designed, tes...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | capítulo de libro |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV) |
| Repositorio: | RiuNet. Repositorio Institucional de la Universitat Politécnica de Valéncia |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:riunet.upv.es:10251/172940 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/172940 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Higher Education Learning Educational systems Teaching Design thinking process for innovation Action research USAF Leader development |
| Sumario: | [EN] This paper examines how a U.S. Air Force (USAF) faculty team reimagined and redesigned an in-person Leader Development Course (LDC) to a virtual version (vLDC). Using the Design Thinking Process for Innovation (DTPI) and action research methods, a new, virtual course was imagined, designed, tested, and improved over a six-cycle-process. Data was collected via multiple sources from 121 participants (19 faculty/staff and 102 students) and analyzed using manual coding and NVivo Software. Results are organized into 22 categories under four themes (general course design, student experience, instructor experience and faculty development, and technology experience) showing a progressive refinement with key lessons learned that led to the final creation of the new virtual course. Of the five key features in action research (actions matter, context-specific research, multiple cycles and phases, inclusion of people as research target, and reflections), participants reported that multiple cycles and reflections were most important in relation to the DTPI so that change could be enacted that reflected participant voices in the design process of the virtual course. The application of the DTPI using action research methods produced results and lessons learned in the design process that contribute to the theory and practice on developing and teaching in a virtual learning environment. The study fills a gap in the scholarly field and informs other institutions on the process, failures, and successes of course redesign to a virtual version. |
|---|