Design thinking and Adaptive Comparative Judgement

RM Compare can significantly enhance design thinking in higher and further education by providing a platform that supports the iterative, user-centered, and collaborative processes central to design thinking methodologies. Here's how RM Compare aligns with and supports these key aspects of design thinking:

Facilitating Iterative Feedback Loops

Design thinking emphasizes the importance of iterative processes, where ideas are developed, prototyped, tested, and refined based on feedback. RM Compare, by enabling peer assessment and adaptive comparative judgment (ACJ), facilitates these iterative feedback loops. It allows students and educators to continuously compare and evaluate design solutions, thereby fostering a culture of ongoing improvement and refinement

Promoting User-Centered Design

A core principle of design thinking is its focus on the end-user. RM Compare supports this by allowing the design community in higher and further education to engage in evaluative judgments that consider user perspectives and needs. Through peer assessment, students can gain insights into how their designs are perceived by others, encouraging a user-centered approach to design.

Enhancing Collaborative Learning

Design thinking is inherently collaborative, involving teams working together to solve complex problems. RM Compare promotes collaborative learning by enabling students to engage in the assessment process together. This not only helps in developing critical thinking and evaluative skills but also fosters a sense of community and shared purpose among students

Supporting Diverse Educational Fields

The flexibility of RM Compare makes it applicable across various educational fields, including those where design thinking is increasingly being integrated, such as engineering, business, healthcare, and K–12 education. This multidisciplinary applicability ensures that design thinking principles can be adopted and adapted to suit the specific needs and challenges of different domains.

Reducing Educator Workload

By automating aspects of the assessment process, RM Compare can reduce the workload on educators, allowing them more time to focus on facilitating the design thinking process. This includes guiding students through the stages of empathy, definition, ideation, prototyping, and testing, rather than being bogged down by the administrative aspects of assessment.

Conclusion

RM Compare supports design thinking in higher and further education by facilitating iterative feedback, promoting user-centered design, enhancing collaborative learning, supporting diverse educational fields, and reducing educator workload. Its use of peer assessment and ACJ aligns well with the principles of design thinking, making it a valuable tool for educators and students alike in fostering a culture of innovation and creativity.