CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 68Problem and Project Based LearningScience Education and PedagogyInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Children’s Emotions in Design-Based Learning: A Systematic Review

Open access
Zhang, Feiran, Markopoulos, Panos, Bekker, Tilde·2020·Journal of Science Education and Technology
DOI 10.1007/s10956-020-09830-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Design-based learning (DBL) is gaining increasing acceptance as a motivating and practical approach that can be used to prepare young people for the challenges of the twenty-first century. Emotions are known to influence a student’s academic performance in traditional learning, which raises the question as to what role emotions can play in DBL. This article presents a systematic survey of literature published in the last 20 years (searching from 1998 to 2019) and indexed in the Scopus, ERIC, and PsycINFO databases which contribute to our understanding of children’s emotions in DBL. This review coded a total of 34 papers that met the inclusion criteria. Findings that reported on children’s emotions are structured under three themes: (1) the affective DBL components, (2) the labeled emotions, and (3) the impact of emotions in DBL. Based on this evidence, we make recommendations for future research and compile a set of guidelines for designing DBL activities, taking into account students’ emotions that can aid their learning.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10956-020-09830-y

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • DBL can also lead to frustration, boredom, and anger, in addition to positive emotions.

    “This is also reflected in [39], in which the authors found that DBL can also lead to frustration, boredom, and anger, in addition to the more positive emotions of happiness and excitement.”

    From Students as Designers of Augmented Reality: Impact on Learning and Motivation in Computer Science (2021) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Achievement Emotions section reports happiness and excitement alongside frustration and boredom in DBL studies. It mentions anger only as a survey item used to measure failure tolerance, not as an observed outcome of DBL. The Recommendations for Future Research section also cautions that evidence of specific negative-emotion incidents is minimal; the claim overstates the evidence for anger. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • DBL can contribute to self-regulated learning and improves self-efficacy among learners.

    “Zhang, Markopoulos, and Bekker [39] conducted a systematic review and found that DBL can contribute to self-regulated learning and improves self-efficacy among learners.”

    From Students as Designers of Augmented Reality: Impact on Learning and Motivation in Computer Science (2021) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Quasi-experimental Comparisons section reports that children in a DBL class had higher self-efficacy in science, and the Conclusion lists self-efficacy among the advantages found in the review. The passages do not establish that DBL contributes to self-regulated learning; a reference title mentions that topic, but does not report it as a DBL finding. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • DBL has a motivating effect, generates interest, and can arouse curiosity about professional topics.

    “Furthermore, DBL has a motivating effect, generates interest, and can arouse curiosity about professional topics.”

    From Students as Designers of Augmented Reality: Impact on Learning and Motivation in Computer Science (2021) · cites this paper as [39]

  • DBL appears to have a particularly positive effect on motivational and affective factors during learning.

    “In addition to learning, DBL appears to have a particularly positive effect on motivational and affective factors during learning [38,39].”

    From Students as Designers of Augmented Reality: Impact on Learning and Motivation in Computer Science (2021) · cites this paper as [39]

  • Previous research on the motivational effect of DBL for STEM-learning supports this.

    “This is line with previous research on the motivational effect of DBL for STEM-learning [7,39,40].”

    From Students as Designers of Augmented Reality: Impact on Learning and Motivation in Computer Science (2021) · cites this paper as [39]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 69

  1. Apedoe, X. S., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: the heating/cooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454-465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008- 9114-6. · DOI
  2. Aschbacher, P. R., Li, E., & Roth, E. J. (2009). Is science me? High school students' identities, participation and aspirations in science, engineering, and medicine. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20353. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Averill, J. R. (1980). A constructivist view of emotion. In Theories of emotion (pp. 305-339). Academic Press.
  4. Bagiati, A., Raidis, D., Papaioannou, N., & Houstis, E. (2010). Design based learning: Comparative effects on high school student's interest in engineering. In Joint International IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference.
  5. Balaam, M., Fitzpatrick, G., Good, J., & Luckin, R. (2010). Exploring affective technologies for the classroom with the subtle stone. In: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on human factors in computing systems -CHI'10 (p. 1623). New York: ACM Press.
  6. Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (1999). Integrating the cognitive research trust (CoRT) programme for creative thinking into a project-based tech- nology curriculum. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17(2), 139-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0263514990170202. · DOI
  7. Beardsley, M., Vujovic, M., Portero-Tresserra, M., & Hernández-Leo, D. (2019). ClassMood app: a classroom orchestration tool for identify- ing and influencing student moods. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning (pp. 723-726).
  8. Boekaerts, M. (2007). Understanding students' affective processes in the classroom. In Emotion in Education (pp. 37-56). Elsevier.
  9. Buechley, L., Eisenberg, M., Catchen, J., & Crockett, A. (2008). The LilyPad Arduino: using computational textiles to investigate en- gagement, aesthetics, and diversity in computer science education. In The SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 423-432). New York: ACM Press.
  10. Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination, imagination and the fires within: design thinking in a middle school classroom. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 37-53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j. 1476-8070.2010.01632.x. · DOI
  11. Chan, M. M., & Holbert, N. (2019). Exploring modalities of reflection using social online portfolios for maker-oriented project-based learning. Proceedings of FabLearn, 2019, 172-175.
  12. Chen, C. H., & Chiu, C. H. (2016). Employing intergroup competition in multitouch design-based learning to foster student engagement, learning achievement, and creativity. Computers in Education, 103, 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.007. · DOI
  13. Clifford, M. M. (1988). Failure tolerance and academic risk-taking in ten- to twelve-year-old students. British Journal ofEducational Psychology, 58 (1), 15-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279. 1988.tb00875.x · DOI
  14. Davies, D., Jindal-Snape, D., Collier, C., Digby, R., Hay, P., & Howe, A. (2013). Creative learning environments in education-A systematic literature review. Thinking skills and creativity, 8, 80-91.
  15. Davidson, R. J., Scherer, K. R., & Goldsmith, H. H. (2003). Handbook of affective sciences. Oxford University Press.
  16. Doppelt, Y. (2003). Implementation and assessment of project-based learning in a flexible environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13(3), 255-272. https://doi. org/10.1023/A:1026125427344. · DOI
  17. Doppelt, Y. (2009). Assessing creative thinking in design-based learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(1), 55-65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-9008-y. · DOI
  18. Doppelt, Y., & Barak, M. (2002). Pupils identify key aspects and out- comes of a technological learning environment. Journal of Technology Studies, 28(1), 22-28. https://doi.org/10.21061/jots. v28i1.a.4. · DOI
  19. Doppelt, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Identifying students' perceptions of the important classroom features affecting learning aspects of a design-based learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 11(3), 195-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-008- 9047-2. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Doppelt, Y., Mehalik, M. M., Schunn, C. D., et al. (2008). Engagement and achievements: a case study of design-based learning in a science context. Journal of Technology Education, 19, 22-39.
  21. Efklides, A., & Volet, S. (2005). Emotional experiences during learning: Multiple, situated and dynamic. Learning and Instruction, 15(5), 377-380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.07.006. · DOI
  22. Fiedler, K., & Beier, S. (2014). Affect and cognitive processes in educa- tional contexts. In International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 36-55).
  23. Friedman, B. H. (2010). Feelings and the body: the Jamesian perspective on autonomic specificity of emotion. Biological Psychology, 84(3), 383-393. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOPSYCHO.2009.10.006. · DOI · Paper page
  24. Gerber, E. M., Marie Olson, J., & Komarek, R. L. (2012). Extracurricular design-based learning: preparing students for careers in innovation*. International Journal of Engineering Education, 28, 317-324.
  25. Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2013). What motivates children to become creators of digital enriched artifacts? In Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Creativity & Cognition (pp. 104-113). New York: ACM.
  26. Giannakos MN, Jaccheri L, Leftheriotis I (2014) Happy girls engaging with technology: assessing emotions and engagement related to pro- gramming activities. In: International Conference on Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Springer International Publishing., pp 398-409.
  27. Hall, L., Hume, C., Tazzyman, S., 2016. Five Degrees of Happiness: Effective Smiley Face Likert Scales for Evaluating with Children. In Proceedings of the The 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children. ACM, pp. 311-321.
  28. Hascher, T. (2010). Learning and emotion: perspectives for theory and research. European Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 9-28. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2010.9.1.13. Hendricks, C. C., & Fasse, B. B. (2012). The impact of a problem-based learning launcher unit on eighth grade students' motivation and interest in science. In American Society for Engineering Education. · DOI
  29. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.
  30. Hugerat, M. (2016). How teaching science using project-based learning strategies affects the classroom learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 19(3), 383-395. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10984-016-9212-y. · DOI
  31. Jenkins, J. M., & Oatley, K. (1996). Emotional episodes and emotionality through the life span. In Handbook of emotion, adult development, and aging. Elsevier.
  32. Karahoca, D., Karahoca, A., & Uzunboylub, H. (2011). Robotics teach- ing in primary school education by project based learning for supporting science and technology courses. Progress in Computer Science, 3, 1425-1431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2011.01.025. · DOI
  33. Kim, P., Suh, E., & Song, D. (2015). Development of a design-based learning curriculum through design-based research for a technology-enabled science classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 575-602. https://doi.org/10. 1007/s11423-015-9376-7. · DOI
  34. Kolodner, J. L., Crismond, D., Gray, J., et al. (2001). Learning by design from theory to practice. In Proceedings of the international confer- ence of the learning sciences (pp. 16-22).
  35. Kort, B., Reilly, R., & Picard, R. (2001). An affective model of interplay between emotions and learning: reengineering educational pedagogy-building a learning companion. In In advanced learning technologies, 2001 (pp. 43-46). Proceedings. IEEE . IEEE.
  36. Laros, F. J. M., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. (2005). Emotions in consumer behavior: a hierarchical approach. Journal of Business Research, 58(10), 1437-1445. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2003.09. 013. · DOI
  37. Lin, C. S., Wu, S., & Tsai, R. J. (2005). Integrating perceived playfulness into expectation-confirmation model for web portal context. Information Management, 42(5), 683-693. https://doi.org/10.1016/ J.IM.2004.04.003. · DOI
  38. Loderer, K., Pekrun, R., & Lester, J. C. (2018). Beyond cold technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis on emotions in technology- based learning environments. Learning and Instruction, 101162. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LEARNINSTRUC.2018.08.002. · DOI
  39. Marks, J., & Chase, C. C. (2019). Impact of a prototyping intervention on middle school students' iterative practices and reactions to failure. Journal of Engineering Education, 108(4), 547-573. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/jee.20294. · DOI
  40. Martin, L. (2015). The promise of the maker movement for education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 5(1), 30- 39. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1099. · DOI · Paper page
  41. Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/j. 2168-9830.2008.tb00955.x. · DOI
  42. Milam, S., Lenio, M., Dunn, J., et al. (2016). Fake Mars, Real STEM. In 67th International Astronautical Congress (IAC) (pp. 26-30). International Astronautical Federation (IAF).
  43. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis a methods sourcebook edition (3rd ed.). SAGE.
  44. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta- analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264-269.
  45. Morozov, A., Herrenkohl, L. R., Shutt, K., et al. (2014). Emotional en- gagement in agentive science learning environments. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 1152-1156).
  46. Nelson, D. (2004). Design based learning delivers required standards in all subjects, K12. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 17.
  47. Nix, C. A., Ward, J., Fontecchio, A., & Ruddick, J. (2014). Using the similarities between biological and computer virus behavior to con- nect and teach introductory concepts in cybersecurity in a biology classroom. In: Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE.
  48. Oatley, K., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2014). Cognitive approaches to emo- tions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(3), 134-140. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/J.TICS.2013.12.004. · DOI
  49. Papavlasopoulou, S., Giannakos, M. N., & Jaccheri, L. (2017). Empirical studies on the maker movement, a promising approach to learning: a literature review. Entertainment Computing, 18, 57-78. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.entcom.2016.09.002. · DOI · Paper page
  50. Pekrun, R. (2014). Emotions and learning. Harvard Educational Review, 25(1), 95-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2006.12.002. · DOI
  51. Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students' self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_4. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Penuel, W., Van Horne, K., Severance, S., et al. (2016). Students' re- sponses to curricular activities as indicator of coherence in project- based science. In C.-K. Looi, J. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Transforming Learning, Empowering Learners (pp. 855- 858). Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences, June 20-24, 2016, Singapore.
  53. Phusavat, K., Hidayanto, A. N., Kess, P., & Kantola, J. (2019). Integrating design thinking into peer-learning community: impacts on professional development and learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 31(1), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-03-2018- 0055. · DOI
  54. Puente, S. M. G., van Eijck, M., & Jochems, W. (2013). A sampled literature review of design-based learning approaches: a search for key characteristics. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 717-732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-012- 9212-x. · DOI
  55. Read, J. C., & Macfarlane, S. (2006). Using the fun toolkit and other survey methods to gather opinions in child computer interaction. In Interaction design and children (pp. 81-88). ACM.
  56. Resnick, M., & Ocko, S. (1990). LEGO/logo: learning through and about design. Cambridge: Epistemology and Learning Group, MIT Media Laboratory.
  57. Resnick, M., & Rusk, N. (1996). The computer clubhouse: preparing for life in a digital world. IBM Systems Journal, 35(3.4), 431-439. https://doi.org/10.1147/sj.353.0431. · DOI
  58. Reynolds, B., Mehalik, M. M., Lovell, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). Increasing student awareness of and interest in engineering as a career option through design-based learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 25, 788.
  59. Rowe, P. G. (1987). Design thinking. MIT Press.
  60. Sáez-López, J.-M., & Sevillano-García, M.-L. (2017). Sensors, program- ming and devices in Art Education sessions. One case in the context of primary education / Sensores, programación y dispositivos en sesiones de Educación Artística. Un caso en el contexto de Educación Primaria. Cultura y Educación, 29(2), 350-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2017.1305075. · DOI
  61. Scherer, K. R. (2005). Geneva emotion wheel rating study (report). Social Science Information, 44(4), 695-729. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG. 2.1.2170.3527. · DOI
  62. Sim, G., Nouwen, M., Vissers, J., Horton, M., Slegers, K., & Zaman, B. (2016). Using the MemoLine to capture changes in user experience over time with children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 8, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJCCI.2016.07.001. · DOI
  63. Skinner, E., Pitzer, J., & Brule, H. (2014). The role of emotion in engage- ment, coping, and the development of motivational resilience. In International Handbook of Emotions in Education. Routledge.
  64. Vissers, J., De Bot, L., & Zaman, B. (2013). MemoLine: evaluating long- term UX with children. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 285-288).
  65. Vongkulluksn, V. W., Matewos, A. M., Sinatra, G. M., & Marsh, J. A. (2018). Motivational factors in makerspaces: a mixed methods study of elementary school students' situational interest, self-efficacy, and achievement emotions. International Journal of STEM Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0129-0. · DOI · Paper page
  66. Weinburgh, M. H., & Steele, D. (2000). The modified attitudes toward science inventory: developing an instrument to be used with fifth grade urban students. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science a n d E n g i n e e r i n g , 6 ( 1 ) , 8 . h t t p s : / / d o i . o rg / 1 0 . 1 6 1 5 / JWomenMinorScienEng.v6.i1. · DOI
  67. Zedan, R. (2008). Classroom climate among pupils of Arab elementary schools in Israel. Iyunim be-Nihul ve-Irgun ha-Hinukh, 30, 51-80 (In Hebrew). · DOI
  68. Zhang, F., Markopoulos, P., & Bekker, T. (2018). The role of children's emotions during design-based learning activity -a case study at a Dutch high school. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (pp. 198-205).
  69. Zhang, F., Markopoulos, P., Bekker, T., et al. (2019). EmoForm: captur- ing children's emotions during design based learning. Proceedings of FabLearn, 2019, 18-25.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, F., Markopoulos, P., & Bekker, T.
Affiliations
Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
Corresponding author
  • Zhang, Feiran
  • Markopoulos, Panos
  • Bekker, Tilde
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-05-06
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
459-481
ISSN
  • 1059-0145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1839
DOI
10.1007/s10956-020-09830-y
OpenAlex
W3020988228
Cited by
68
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4
FWCI
2.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Science Education and Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
China Scholarship Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
design-based learning, children's emotions, affective learning, student motivation, academic performance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review