Abstract:Can design education have a positive impact on primary school education beyond merely preparing designers? As designers, we know almost intuitively that design education is 'good education', and most designers would affirm that it would be beneficial to expose children to design education, because of the benefits of the signature pedagogies of design, such as problem-based learning, human centred creativity and iterations of prototyping and testing. This paper seeks to review and synthesize existing literature… Show more
“…An interest in DT at the elementary level has begun to emerge as researchers and curriculum designers are interested in approaches that support the engineering processes outlined in the NGSS. As Noel and Liub () state, In addition to meeting traditional education demands, design thinking principles in children's education, such as empathy, collaboration and facilitation, human‐centeredness, and creativity by iterations of prototyping and testing, will provide a sound base for children not only seeking to enter a design profession in the future but moving into any profession in the future and will lead to higher engagement at school and greater success in life (p. 1).…”
Complementing the aims of problem‐based inquiry, a pedagogical approach called design thinking (DT) has students grapple with issues that require a creative redefinition and reimagining of solutions akin to professional skills of designers, who consider conflicting priorities and complex negotiations to arrive at a solution to an ill‐defined problem. This article aims to synthesize the limited existing literature on the use of DT in the K–12 classroom, share two exemplars of DT in action in Grades 3–5 so that science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) educators, teacher educators, researchers, and other stakeholders can visualize how it can take shape in the elementary classroom, followed by concluding remarks on DT. The DT framework provides an exciting avenue for teaching more than simply the content areas of STEAM, it provides a vehicle through which a true transdisciplinary learning experience can occur—where students are passionately invested in solving problems as they strive to make the world a better place.
“…An interest in DT at the elementary level has begun to emerge as researchers and curriculum designers are interested in approaches that support the engineering processes outlined in the NGSS. As Noel and Liub () state, In addition to meeting traditional education demands, design thinking principles in children's education, such as empathy, collaboration and facilitation, human‐centeredness, and creativity by iterations of prototyping and testing, will provide a sound base for children not only seeking to enter a design profession in the future but moving into any profession in the future and will lead to higher engagement at school and greater success in life (p. 1).…”
Complementing the aims of problem‐based inquiry, a pedagogical approach called design thinking (DT) has students grapple with issues that require a creative redefinition and reimagining of solutions akin to professional skills of designers, who consider conflicting priorities and complex negotiations to arrive at a solution to an ill‐defined problem. This article aims to synthesize the limited existing literature on the use of DT in the K–12 classroom, share two exemplars of DT in action in Grades 3–5 so that science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) educators, teacher educators, researchers, and other stakeholders can visualize how it can take shape in the elementary classroom, followed by concluding remarks on DT. The DT framework provides an exciting avenue for teaching more than simply the content areas of STEAM, it provides a vehicle through which a true transdisciplinary learning experience can occur—where students are passionately invested in solving problems as they strive to make the world a better place.
“…Broadly, the goals of most of the articles (nine out of 11) were to situate design thinking within the relevant industry for the purpose of bolstering its processes or practices (Orthel, ; Nia & Atun, ; Kleinsmann et al , ; Noel & Liub, ; Oxman, ; Cook & Bush, ; Kleber, ; Robbins, ; Periera & Russo, ). Of the remaining two, one sought to determine the nature of design thinking and its relevant competencies for application to education (Razzouk & Shute, ), and the other was part of a larger conversation seeking to negotiate the role of embodied cognition in relation to design (Goldschmidt, ).…”
Section: Analysis Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the 11 articles, most represented design thinking in a manner that adheres closely to the literature in a scholarly analysis of the topic (i.e. Razzouk & Shute, ; Orthel, ; Goldschmidt, ; Kleinsmann et al , ; Noel & Liub, ; Cook & Bush, ; Kleber, ; Pereira & Russo, ). Three represented design thinking in non‐standard ways: one in terms of aesthetic design (Nia & Atun, ), one as compared to art thinking (Robbins, ) and one as parametric design related to computer‐aided design in architecture (Oxman, ).…”
Section: Analysis Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While several of the articles identified or utilised design thinking models (Noel & Liub, ; Cook & Bush, ; Kleber, ), four works examined design thinking on a deeper level (Robbins, ; Pereira & Russo, ; Kleinsmann et al , ; and Razzouk & Shute, ). It is interesting that three of these articles, which focus on clarifying or deepening the understanding of design thinking, are so recent, especially in the light of the increase in popularity and the introduction of the approach to new fields in recent years.…”
Section: Analysis Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the 11 articles, four were conceptual papers making a particular case for using design thinking in some specific manner or context. Of these, three contained a literature review (Noel & Liub, ; Oxman, ; Cook & Bush, ), where Goldschmidt () did not. Another three of the 11 contained systematic content analyses, reviewing the literature in a systematic way to come to a better understanding of design thinking (Razzoulk & Shute, ; Kleber, ; Pereira & Russo, ).…”
Section: Analysis Results and Discussionmentioning
The purposes of this study are 1) to explore the concept of design thinking/human-centred design as expressed across the literature, using a systematic content analysis methodology, and 2) to arrive at empirically-based implications and recommendations for the instructional design field drawn from this search and analysis. Since 2000, design thinking has been highly sought after and is increasingly applied to novel challenges. Since then, it has become a force of innovation in business, and a point of contention in design-having created a reductionist perspective of design which has simultaneously become a buzzword for innovation. In the instructional design field, practitioners incorporate the methods used into new design models, and scholars frame new theories within its bounds. Through this process, the meaning and nature of the concept have become complex and clouded. This paper reports results of a systematic content analysis involving examination of 12 databases, analysing 1075 abstracts for fit and identifying 11 core articles. An extended literature review, including more than 70 non-core articles selected from the study data pool, provides a foundation for analysis of the 11 core articles. Results include analysis of the core articles for themes, industry and common citations; recommendations and implications for the instructional design field are drawn from the literature, as well as recommendations for future research.
Structured Practitioner NotesWhat is already known about this topic:• Design thinking, also known as human-centred design, has seen a steady increase in use in the last twenty years.• Design thinking is a method that has become popular in business for seeking innovation, in education for teaching creative problem-solving, and in design as a valuable tool for analysing how designers think while designing.• The meaning of design thinking has become somewhat clouded, and it is often misconstrued and misapplied.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
