This paper presents design thinking as an alternative approach to conduct research on collaborative learning with technology. The underlying premise of the paper is the need to adopt human-centered design principles in research and design of computer-supported collaborative tools. Two research results are described in order to discuss the possibilities and challenges of applying design methods for designing and researching collaborative knowledge building tools. The paper begins by defining collaborative learning with new technologies as a wicked problem that can be approached by adopting a design mindset. Design thinking and particularly research-based design relies on a shared, social construction of understanding with the people who will later use the tools. The key phases in researchbased design (contextual inquiry, participatory design, product design and software as hypothesis) are described and exemplified through the presentation of two research results. The two prototypes presented are the fourth version of the Future Learning Environment (Fle4), a software tool for collaborative knowledge building and Square1, a set of hardware and software for self-organized learning environments. Both cases contribute to the discussion about the role of artifacts as research outcomes. Through these cases, we claim that design thinking is a meaningful ap proach in CSCL research.El artículo presenta el pensamiento de diseño como un enfoque alternativo para realizar investigaciones sobre aprendizaje colaborativo con tecnología. Se describen dos resultados de investigación a fin de debatir las posibilidades y los retos de aplicar métodos de diseño para diseñar e investigar herramientas de construcción de conocimiento colaborativo. El texto comienza definiendo el aprendizaje colaborativo con nuevas tecnologías como un problema complejo que puede afrontarse mejor mediante la adopción de una actitud de diseñador. Se presenta el Diseño Basado en la Investigación (DBI) como un ejemplo de pensamiento de diseño basado en la construcción social del conocimiento con las personas que más adelante utilizarán las herramientas. Se describen las fases clave que caracterizan el método DBI (investigación contextual, diseño participativo, diseño de producto y software como hipótesis) y defiende la necesidad de adoptar un enfoque de diseño centrado en las personas. Los dos prototipos presentados son la cuarta versión de Future Learning Environment (Fle4), un software para la construcción de conocimiento colaborativo, y Square1, un conjunto de dispositivos y aplicaciones para entornos de aprendizaje auto-organizados. Ambos son ejemplos de DBI y contribuyen a la discusión sobre el rol de los artefactos como resultados de investigación. A través de estos casos, se afirma que el pensamiento de diseño es un enfoque significativo en la investigación sobre el aprendizaje colaborativo mediado por ordenador.

In recent years, digital fabrication, and especially its associated activities of 3D design and printing, have taken root in school education as curriculum‐based and maker‐oriented learning activities. This article explores the adoption of 3D design and printing for learning by fourth, fifth and sixth grade children (n=64) in multidisciplinary learning modules in elementary school education. School‐coordinated 3D projects were not led by design experts, such as art and design teachers, designers, researchers or technical specialists, but run ‘in the wild’ by school teachers. The study was conducted by using an ethnographic research design, including field observations, non‐formal interviews and a reflective questionnaire. The results indicate that, in the adoption of 3D printing activities, learning is centred on the technical skills and the usage of 3D tools. Hence, the elementary ABCs of 3D printing do not achieve the full design and creativity potential of digital fabrication that earlier research has suggested. However, the results do have implications for the potential of 3D printing projects to increase children’s empowerment. In their current state, 3D design and printing are some of the learning tools, among others, and similar achievements can be achieved with other hands‐on learning technologies. In order to enhance the learning of creativity and design thinking skills, 3D activities in school should be planned accordingly.

The need for environments conducive to learning and wellbeing has been broadly recognised. Considering particularly learner perceptions in the learning environment design is known to improve both their learning and wellbeing. There are no, however, shared theoretical frameworks guiding the learning environment co-design from the learner perspective. As a response to this challenge, a learning environment design (LED) framework was developed based on the literature and co-design involving learners aged 7 to 19 (n = 342) in Finland (n = 266) and Spain (n = 76). The LED framework entails 53 characteristics grouped under seven constructs. It draws attention to the importance of balancing communality with individuality, comfort with health, and novelty with conventionality. Flexibility and functionality are recognised as central enablers for a quality learning environment. The study suggests a design framework and principles for learning environment co-design. They can serve as a research-based introduction to the topic after which priorities can be defined based on the concrete design target and goals, and concrete design solutions can be created in the participatory design involving learners and other key stakeholders.