Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Broadening design-led education horizons: conceptual insights and future research directions

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Design as an overarching pedagogical framework has been regarded by some as the avenue to re-envision general education to develop capabilities required for twenty-first century citizens. However, despite the adoption of design thinking within other domains, generic design-based education for lifelong learning remains largely unexplored. A comprehensive review of literature on educating a workforce for the knowledge economy, and the role of design in business and educational innovation, has been conducted to create a new approach to building a culture of practice for design-led education, based on the theory of the Innovation Matrix. This study proposes ‘design-led educational innovation’ as a new area of research which requires a deeper understanding of the knowledge, skills and mindsets students require to thrive in the twenty-first century and beyond as lifelong learners in informal and formal education contexts. The findings provide an opportunity to explore dynamic theories and methodologies borrowed from within the field of design-led innovation in business that will broaden the horizons of design-led education, challenging existing practices to transform educational institutions as knowledge creation organisations. This is the first paper to introduce the Design-led Education Innovation Matrix, providing a prototype design-led framework to assist educators in developing and assessing twenty-first century knowledge, skills and mindsets. In addition, it identifies related future research areas for academia, thereby extending the reach and scope of this emerging research area.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

(Adapted from Baghai et al. 1999; Carroll et al. 2010; P21 2009; Trilling and Fadel 2009; Hess et al. 2014)

Fig. 6

(Adapted from Kyffin and Gardien 2009; Carroll, et al. 2010; P21 2009; Trilling and Fadel 2009)

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baghai, M., Coley, S., & White, D. (1999). The alchemy of growth: Practical insights for building the enduring enterprise. Reading, MA: Perseus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhshi, H., Frey, C.B. & Osborne, M. (2015). Creativity vs. robots: The creative economy and the future of employment. Resource document. London: Nesta. https://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/creativity-vs-robots. Accessed August 10, 2015.

  • Bakhshi, H., Hargreaves, I., & Mateos-Garcia, J. (2013). A manifesto for the creative economy. Resource document. London: Nesta. https://www.nesta.org.uk/publications/manifesto-creative-economy. Accessed December 14, 2013.

  • Bellanca, J. A., & Brandt, R. S. (2010). 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentley, T. (1998). Learning beyond the classroom. In I. Hargreaves & I. Christie (Eds.), Tomorrow’s politics: The third way and beyond (pp. 80–95). London: Demos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2006). Education for the knowledge age. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 695–713). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., & Rumble, M. (2010). Draft white paper 1: Defining 21st century skills. Melbourne: ACTS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, W., Uebernickel, F., & Abrell, T. (2016). Design thinking as mindset, process, and toolbox. In W. Brennan & F. Uebernickel (Eds.), Design thinking for innovation: Research and practice (pp. 3–21). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. (2008). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnette, C. (1993). IDESiGN—Seven ways of design thinking, A teaching resource. Resource document. https://www.idesignthinking.com/. Accessed January 7, 2010.

  • Carroll, M. (2014). Shoot for the Moon!: The mentors and middle schoolers explore the intersection of design thinking and STEM. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 4(1), 14–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, M. (2015). Stretch, dream, and do: A 21st century design thinking and STEM journey. Journal of Research in STEM Education, 1(1), 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, K., 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castagno, A., & Brayboy, B. (2008). Culturally responsive schooling for indigenous youth: A review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CEDA. (2015). Australia’s future workforce. Resource document. Melbourne: Committee of Economic Development of Australia. https://www.ceda.com.au/research-and-policy/policy-priorities/workforcehttps://www.ceda.com.au/research-and-policy/policy-priorities/workforce. Accessed September 29, 2016.

  • Christensen, C. M. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, W., Estrada, C., & Goldman, S. (Producers). (2015). Design Time: Learning that is transformative. Documentary Film. REDlab, US. https://vimeo.com/122065737. Accessed January 22, 2017.

  • Cox, G. (2005). Cox review of creativity in business: Building on the UK’s strengths. Resource document. London, UK: Design Council. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/publications/the-cox-review/. Accessed December 14, 2013.

  • Cox, C., Apedoe, X., Silk, E., & Schunn, C. (2017). Analyzing materials in order to find design opportunities for the classroom. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 204–220). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2004). Expertise in design: An overview. Design Studies, 25(5), 427–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing (Vol. 1). London: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-301-9.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M., & Littlejohn, D. (2017). The culture of practice: Design-based teaching and learning. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 20–36). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte Access Economics. (2012). Economic modelling of skills demand and supply, prepared for the Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency. Barton: Deloitte Access Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. (2015). The purpose of place: Reconsidered. Building the Lucky Country (5). Resource Document. Sydney: Deloitte Australia. https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/building-lucky-country/articles/purpose-of-place-reconsidered.html. Accessed September 12, 2016.

  • Design Commission. (2011). Restarting Britain: Design education and growth. Resource document. London: Policy Connect. https://www.policyconnect.org.uk/apdig/restarting-britain-design-educationand-growth. Accessed April 27, 2013.

  • Doppelt, Y., Mehalik, M.M., Schunn, C.D., Silk, E., & Krysinski, D. (2008). Engagement and achievements: A case study of design-based learning in a science context. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2). https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v19n2/doppelt. Accessed August 15, 2017.

  • Dorst, K. (2015). Frame innovation: Create new thinking by design. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, S. E. (2004). The five-stage model of adult skill acquisition. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24(3), 177–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467604264992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duell, C., Wright, N., & Roxburgh, J. (2014). Developing ‘design minds’ for the 21st century through a public sector initiated online design education platform. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 19(1), 62–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education Commission. (2002). Progress Report on the Education Reform (1). Resource document. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Education Bureau. https://www.e-c.edu.hk/eng/reform/report_html.html. Accessed December 28, 2014.

  • Estrada, C., & Goldman, S. (2017). A praxis model for design thinking: Catalyzing life readiness. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 37–49). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foundation for Young Australians (FYA). (2015). The new work order. Resource document. Foundation for Young Australians. https://www.fya.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/fya-future-of-work-report-final-lr.pdf. Accessed September 27, 2016.

  • Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2013). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerization? Resource document. Oxford: University of Oxford. https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf. Accessed September 7, 2013.

  • Goldman, S., Carroll, M. P., Kabayadondo, Z., Cavagnaro, L. B., Royalty, A. W., Roth, B., et al. (2012). Assessing d.learning: Capturing the journey of becoming a design thinker. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research: Measuring performance in context (pp. 13–33). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S., & Kabayadondo, Z. (Eds.). (2017). Taking design thinking to school: How the technology of design can transform teachers, learners, and classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S., Knudsen, J., & Latvala, M. (1998). Engaging middle schoolers in and through real-world mathematics. In L. Leutzinger (Ed.), Mathematics in the middle (pp. 129–140). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, S., Zielezinski, M. B., Vea, T., Bachas-Daunert, S., & Kabayadondo, Z. (2017). Capturing middle school students’ understandings of design thinking. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 76–93). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, J., Halsz, G., Krawczyk, M., Leney, T., Micehl, A., Pepper, D., Putkiewicz, E., & Wisniewski, W. (2009). Key competences in Europe: Opening doors for lifelong learners across the school curriculum and teachers education. Resource document. Warsaw: Centre for Social and Economic Research on behalf of CASE Network. https://ec.europa.eu/education/more-information/doc/keyreport_en.pdf. Accessed December 14, 2013.

  • Group, M., & NCREL. (2003). EnGauge 21st century skills: Literacy in the digital age. Chicago, IL: NCREL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruenwald, D. A., & Smith, G. A. (Eds.). (2014). Place-based education in the global age: Local diversity. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunewald, D. A. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational researcher, 32(4), 3–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gudipati, M., & Sethi, K. B. (2017). Adapting the design framework for K-12 education. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 94–101). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hearn, G., & Bridgstock, R. (2010). Education for the creative economy: Innovation, transdisciplinarity and networks. In D. Araya & M. A. Peters (Eds.), Education in the creative economy (pp. 93–115). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heskett, J. (2003). Shaping the future: Design for Hong Kong—A strategic review of design education and Practice. Resource document. Hong Kong: The Design Task Force (DTF), School of Design, Hong Kong Polytechnic University.

  • Hess, K., Gong, B., & Steinitz, R. (2014). Ready for college and career?. Quincy, MA: The Nellie Mae Education Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoadley, C., & Cox, C. (2009). What is design knowledge and how do we teach it. In C. DiGiano, S. Goldman, & M. Chorost (Eds.), Educating learning technology designers: Guiding and inspiring creators of innovative education tools (pp. 19–35). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard, J. H. (2008). Between a hard rock and a soft space: Design, creative practice and innovation. Resource document. Council for Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (CHASS). https://www.chass.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/PAP20080521JH.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2017.

  • Howland, J. L., Jonassen, D., & Marra, R. M. (2012). Meaningful Learning with Technology (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • IDEO. (2012). Design thinking for educators. Resource document. IDEO. https://www.designthinkingforeducators.com/. Accessed April 24, 2012.

  • Immelt, J. R., Govindarajan, V., & Trimble, C. (2009). How GE is disrupting itself. Harvard Business Review, 87, 56–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ito, M., Gutierrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., et al. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jobst, B., Köppen, E., Lindberg, T., Moritz, J., Rhinow, H., & Meinel, C. (2012). The faith-factor in design thinking: Creative confidence through education at the design thinking schools Potsdam and Stanford? In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research, Understanding innovation (pp. 35–46). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31991-4_3.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson-Sköldberg, U., Woodilla, J., & Çetinkaya, M. (2013). Design thinking: Past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 121–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, Z. (2017). Teachers as designers of context-adaptive learning experience. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 126–142). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kana ‘iaupuni, S. M., Ledward, B., & Jensen, U. (2010). Culture-based education and its relationship on student outcomes. Honolulu, HI: Kamehameha Schools, Research & Evaluation Division.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, K., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2013). Design thinking in elementary students’ collaborative lamp designing process. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 18(1), 30–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, D., & Kelley, T. (2013). Creative confidence: Unleashing the creative potential within us all. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Lee, K. S. (2013). Design opportunities and their impact: Preservice teachers’ perception of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Global Chinese Journal of Computers in Education, 10(1), 20–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., & Hong, H. (2015). Design thinking for education: Conceptions and applications in teaching and learning (2015th ed.). Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-444-3.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al. (2003). Promoting deep science learning through case-based reasoning: Rituals and practices in learning by design classrooms. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Instructional design: International perspectives (pp. 89–114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwek, S.H. (2011). Innovation in the Classroom: Design Thinking for 21st Century Learning. Masters Thesis. https://www.stanford.edu/group/redlab/egi-bin/publications_resources.php.

  • Kyffin, S., & Gardien, P. (2009). Navigating the innovation matrix: An approach to design-led innovation. International Journal of Design, 3(1), 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B. (1990). How designers think (Vol. 2nd). Butterworth Architecture: Boston; London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, B., & Dorst, K. (2009). Design expertise. Oxford, UK: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2011). Scaffolding students’ development of creative design skills: A curriculum reference model. Educational Technology & Society, 14(1), 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S. T. (2013). Young children’s learning of water physics by constructing working systems. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(3), 537–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Lifelong learning and underemployment in the knowledge society: A North American perspective. Comparative education, 35(2), 163–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, E. L., & Haukka, S. (2008). Educating the creative workforce: New directions for 21st century schooling. British Education Research Journal, 34(5), 651–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middleton, J. A., & Corbett, R. (1998). Sixth-grade students’ conceptions of stability in engineering contexts. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 249–266). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Misko, J. (2008). Combining formal, non-formal and informal learning for workforce skill development. Adelaide, South Australia: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noweski, C., Scheer, A., Büttner, N., vonThienen, J., Erdmann, J., & Meinel, C. (2012). Towards a paradigm shift in education practice: Developing twenty-first century skills with design thinking. In H. Plattner, C. Meinel, & L. Leifer (Eds.), Design thinking research, Understanding innovation (pp. 71–94). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31991-4_5.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ohno, T. (1993). Das toyota-produktionssystem. Frankfurt: Campus Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies (Executive Summary). Resource document. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/35070367.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2017.

  • Owen, C. (2007). Design thinking: Notes on its nature and use. Design Research Quarterly, 2(1), 16–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • P21 (Partnership for 21st Century Learning). (2009). P21 Framework Definitions. Resource document. Washington DC, USA: The Partnership for 21st Century Skills. https://www.p21.org/overview/skills-framework. Accessed April 27, 2012.

  • Page, S. (2007). The difference: How the power of diversity creates better groups, firms, schools, and societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. (1978, April 7). Three worlds. https://www.tannerlectures.utah.edu/lectures/documents/popper80.pdf. Accessed March 16, 2010.

  • Punthambekar, S., & Kolodner, K. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauth, I., Köppen, E., Jobst, B., & Meinel, C. (2010). Design thinking: An educational model towards creative confidence. In DS 66-2: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on design creativity (ICDC 2010).

  • Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, G. (2004). Shall we dance? A design epistemology for organizational learning and performance. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 33–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sara, R., & Parnell, R. (2004). The review process. CEBE Transactions, 1(2), 56–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Boston: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D. (1995). The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change, 27(6), 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweitzer, J., Groeger, L., & Sobel, L. (2016). The design thinking mindset: An assessment of what we know and what we see in practice. Journal of Design, Business & Society, 2(1), 71–94. https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs.2.1.71_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan, J. (2007). Lifelong learning in a postmodern age: Looking back to the future through the lens of adult education. LLI Review, 2, 4–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. (2014). Design alchemy: Transforming the way we think about learning and teaching (Vol. 8). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02423-3.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skills Australia. (2010). Australian workforce futures: A national workforce development strategy. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. A. (2002). Place-based education. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(8), 584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanford University Hasso Plattner Institute of Design. (2007). Design thinking process. Palto Alto, CA: Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanford University Hasso Plattner Institute of Design. (2011, March). The Bootcamp Bootleg. Resource document. Hasso Plattner Institute of Design: d.school. https://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/METHODCARDS-v3-slim.pdf. Accessed January 28, 2017.

  • Tan, V., Keune, A., & Peppler, K. (2017). The materiality of design in e-textiles. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 180–194). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • The State of Queensland (State Library of Queensland). (2012). Design minds. https://designminds.org.au/?categories=resources,community. Accessed February 12, 2013.

  • Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A New culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. CreateSpace: Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Acad Manage J, 45(6), 1137–1148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, R. (1999). Design and technology yields a new paradigm for elementary schooling. Journal of Technology Studies, 25(2), 26–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, C.-C., Chai, C. S., Wong, B., Hong, H.-Y., & Tan, S. C. (2013). Positioning design epistemology and its applications in educational technology. Educational Technology and Society, 16(2), 81–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waks, L. (2001). Donald Schon’s philosophy of design and design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11(1), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendell, B. K., & Rogers, C. (2013). Engineering design-based science, science content performance, and science attitudes in elementary school. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(4), 513–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westera, W. (2001). Competences in education: A confusion of tongues. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(1), 75–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Economic Forum. (2015). New vision for education: Unlocking the potential of technology.Resource document. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEFUSA_NewVisionforEducation_Report2015.pdf. Accessed September 27, 2016.

  • Wright, N., & Davis, R. M. (2014). Educating the creative citizen: Design education programs in the knowledge economy. Techne Series: Research in Sloyd Education and Craft Science A, 21(2), 42–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrigley, C. (2016). Design Innovation Catalysts: Education and Impact. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(2), 148–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yelland, N., Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2008). Learning by design: Creating pedagogical frameworks for knowledge building in the twenty-first century. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 197–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zielezinski, M. B. (2017). Finding your fit: Empathy, authenticity, and ambiguity in the design thinking classroom. In S. Goldman & Z. Kabayadondo (Eds.), Taking design thinking to school (pp. 195–203). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Design, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane, Australia

    Natalie Wright

  2. Sydney School of Architecture, Design and Planning, The University of Sydney, 148 City Road, Darlington, Australia

    Cara Wrigley

Authors
  1. Natalie Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cara Wrigley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalie Wright.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wright, N., Wrigley, C. Broadening design-led education horizons: conceptual insights and future research directions. Int J Technol Des Educ 29, 1–23 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9429-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9429-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation