Academic Bibliography

 Search 200 years of publications by Ghent University researchers.
Advanced search
2 files | 1.05 MB
Add to list
  1. Search results
  2. What is the state of the art regardin...

What is the state of the art regarding the application of Design Thinking in higher education? A scoping review

Sharon Guaman-Quintanilla (UGent) , Katherine Chiluiza, Ariana Bravo Matamoros (UGent) , Patricia Everaert (UGent) and Martin Valcke (UGent)
(2022) AULA ABIERTA. 51(4). p.319-328
Author
Organization
Abstract
Design Thinking (DT) remains a fuzzy concept when applied to education. This prompted the present scoping review (2008‐2022), following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. From 2853 Web of Science articles, only 172 met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results show: (a) There is no agreed definition of DT. (b) There is a variety of tools, techniques and models used to support DT. (c) Most‐assessed outcomes of DT are about creativity, teamwork, and problem solving. There were 100 out of 172 studies that included an evaluation of DT interventions. Research instruments were mainly based on student self‐reports. Most empirical studies reported a positive impact. (d) Only 12 empirical studies involved control groups, while 37 adopted a pre‐test and post‐test design. Intervention duration ranged from 90 minutes to one year. The median of the number of participants was around 47. DT presents an interesting research agenda but also there is a need for robust evidence‐based intervention studies.
Keywords
design thinking, higher education, scoping review, 21st century skills

Downloads

  • Download
    01 v51n4.pdf
    • full text (Published version)
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 543.29 KB
  • Download
    Supplementary material.pdf
    • supplementary material
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 506.55 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Guaman-Quintanilla, Sharon, et al. “What Is the State of the Art Regarding the Application of Design Thinking in Higher Education? A Scoping Review.” AULA ABIERTA, vol. 51, no. 4, 2022, pp. 319–28, doi:10.17811/rifie.51.4.2022.319-328.
APA
Guaman-Quintanilla, S., Chiluiza, K., Bravo Matamoros, A., Everaert, P., & Valcke, M. (2022). What is the state of the art regarding the application of Design Thinking in higher education? A scoping review. AULA ABIERTA, 51(4), 319–328. https://doi.org/10.17811/rifie.51.4.2022.319-328
Chicago author-date
Guaman-Quintanilla, Sharon, Katherine Chiluiza, Ariana Bravo Matamoros, Patricia Everaert, and Martin Valcke. 2022. “What Is the State of the Art Regarding the Application of Design Thinking in Higher Education? A Scoping Review.” AULA ABIERTA 51 (4): 319–28. https://doi.org/10.17811/rifie.51.4.2022.319-328.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Guaman-Quintanilla, Sharon, Katherine Chiluiza, Ariana Bravo Matamoros, Patricia Everaert, and Martin Valcke. 2022. “What Is the State of the Art Regarding the Application of Design Thinking in Higher Education? A Scoping Review.” AULA ABIERTA 51 (4): 319–328. doi:10.17811/rifie.51.4.2022.319-328.
Vancouver
1.
Guaman-Quintanilla S, Chiluiza K, Bravo Matamoros A, Everaert P, Valcke M. What is the state of the art regarding the application of Design Thinking in higher education? A scoping review. AULA ABIERTA. 2022;51(4):319–28.
IEEE
[1]
S. Guaman-Quintanilla, K. Chiluiza, A. Bravo Matamoros, P. Everaert, and M. Valcke, “What is the state of the art regarding the application of Design Thinking in higher education? A scoping review,” AULA ABIERTA, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 319–328, 2022.
@article{01GMXNRA1XRGRFGAVD0620FW11,
  abstract     = {{Design Thinking (DT) remains a fuzzy concept when applied to education. This prompted the present scoping review (2008‐2022), following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. From 2853 Web of Science articles, only 172 met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results show: (a) There is no agreed definition of DT. (b) There is a variety of tools, techniques and models used to support DT. (c) Most‐assessed outcomes of DT are about creativity, teamwork, and problem solving. There were 100 out of 172 studies that included an evaluation of DT interventions. Research instruments were mainly based on student self‐reports. Most empirical studies reported a positive impact. (d) Only 12 empirical studies involved control groups, while 37 adopted a pre‐test and post‐test design. Intervention duration ranged from 90 minutes to one year. The median of the number of participants was around 47. DT presents an interesting research agenda but also there is a need for robust evidence‐based intervention studies.}},
  author       = {{Guaman-Quintanilla, Sharon and Chiluiza, Katherine and Bravo Matamoros, Ariana and Everaert, Patricia and Valcke, Martin}},
  issn         = {{0210-2773}},
  journal      = {{AULA ABIERTA}},
  keywords     = {{design thinking,higher education,scoping review,21st century skills}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{4}},
  pages        = {{319--328}},
  title        = {{What is the state of the art regarding the application of Design Thinking in higher education? A scoping review}},
  url          = {{http://doi.org/10.17811/rifie.51.4.2022.319-328}},
  volume       = {{51}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}
Altmetric
View in Altmetric