Assessing d.learning: Capturing the Journey of Becoming a Design Thinker

  • Shelley GoldmanEmail author
  • Maureen P. Carroll
  • Zandile Kabayadondo
  • Leticia Britos Cavagnaro
  • Adam W. Royalty
  • Bernard Roth
  • Bernard Roth
  • Swee Hong Kwek
  • Jain Kim
Part of the Understanding Innovation book series (UNDINNO)


The research explored the relationship of learning design thinking and assessing that progress. It addressed the questions: How can we understand what is learned in design thinking classes, and how assessments might contribute to that process in authentic ways? The study followed a reciprocal research and design methodology where basic research and the design of assessment solutions were ongoing, reciprocal, and related to each other in organic ways. We learned that the learning of design thinking dispositions and mindsets is an emergent journey—with various levels of sophistication, transformation, application, and integration. We introduce the concept of mindshifts to represent the developing and nascent epistemological viewpoints and instincts that are strengthened while becoming a design thinker. We review designs for tools that were based on the concept of mindshifts that include reflective and performance assessments and an assessment dashboard.


Assessment Task Design Thinking Design Learning Classroom Learning Environment 21st Century Skill 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We would like to thank the students and instructors who participated in our studies. They have made it possible for us to better understand what it means to become a design thinker and how assessment tools could add value to design learning. A grant from the Hasso Plattner Design Thinking Research Program made this work possible. Findings and opinions presented are those of the authors and do not represent the HPDTRP.


  1. Alexander A, Blair KP, Goldman S, Jimenez O, Nakaue M, Pea R, Russell A (2010) Go Math! How research anchors new mobile learning environments. In: Proceedings of the sixth international IEEE conference on wireless, mobile, and ubiquitous technologies in education (WMUTE). Kaohsiung, pp 57–64Google Scholar
  2. Baker E (2010) What probably works in alternative assessment. CRESST Report 772. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakhtin MM [1930s] (1981) The dialogic imagination: four essays. In: Holquist M (ed) (Trans: Emerson C, Holquist M). University of Texas Press, Austin/LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Barron B (2006) Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: learning ecology perspective. Hum Dev 49(4):193–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Black P, Wiliam D (1998) Inside the black box: raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2):139–148, October 1998Google Scholar
  6. Bogdan R, Biklen S (1992) Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theory and methods. Allyn & Bacon, BostonGoogle Scholar
  7. Carnegie Foundation Commission on Mathematics and Science (2009) Excellence and equity in mathematics and science to transform education. Accessed 29 Jan 2011
  8. Carroll M, Goldman S, Britos L, Koh J, Royalty A, Hornstein M (2010) Destination, imagination, and the fires within: design thinking in a middle school classroom. Int J Art Design Educ 29(1):37–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cobb P, DiSessa A, Lehrer R, Scauble L (2003) Design experiments in educational research. Educ Res 21(1):9–13Google Scholar
  10. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1997) The Jasper Project: Lessons in Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment, and Professional Development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  11. Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy (COSEPUP) (2006) Beyond bias and barriers: fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and engineering. National Science Foundation, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  12. National Science Foundation Task Force on Cyberlearning (2008) Fostering learning in the networked world: the cyberlearning opportunity and challenge. Accessed 20 Dec 2010
  13. Design-Based Research Collective (2003) Design-based research: an emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educ Res 32(1):5–8Google Scholar
  14. Dewey J (1916) Democracy and education. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Dweck C (2007) How not to talk to your kids: the inverse power of praise. New York Magazine. Accessed 8 Nov 2011
  16. Freire P, Macedo D (1987) Literacy: reading the word and the world. Bergin and Garvey, South HadleyGoogle Scholar
  17. Goldman S (2) Instructional design: learning through design. In: Guthrie J (ed) Encyclopedia of education, 2nd edn. Macmillan Reference USA, New York, pp 1163–1169Google Scholar
  18. Goldman S, Knudsen J, Latvala M (1998) Engaging middle schoolers in and through real-world mathematics. In: Leutzinger L (ed) Mathematics in the middle. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, pp 129–140Google Scholar
  19. Gutiérrez KD (2008) Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Read Res Quart 43(2):148–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Haskell TL (1985) Capitalism and the origins of the humanitarian sensibility, parts 1 and 2. Am Hist Rev. 90(3, 4):339–361, 547–566Google Scholar
  21. Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford (2007) Design thinking process. Stanford University, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
  22. Hmelo C, Holton D, Kolodner J (2000) Designing to learn about complex systems. JLearn Sci 9(3):247–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jenkins H (2006) Convergence culture: where old and new media collide. New York University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Jenkins H, Clinton K, Purushotma R, Robinson AJ, Weigel M (2006) Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: media education for the 21st century. The MacArthur Foundation, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  25. Kafai Y, Resnick M (eds) (2000) Constructionism in practice: designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  26. Kolodner J, Gray JT, Fasse BB (2000) Promoting transfer through case-based reasoning: rituals and practices in learning by DesignTM classrooms. Cogn Sci Q 1:183–232Google Scholar
  27. Kolodner JL, Camp PJ, Crismond D, Fasse B, Gray J, Holbrook J, Putambeckar S, & Ryan M (2003) Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting Learning By Design Into Practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12 (4): 495–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lundell DB, Higbee JL, Hipp S, Copeland RE (2004) Building bridges for access and success from high school to college: proceedings of the metropolitan higher education consortium's developmental education initiative. Center for Research on Developmental Education and Urban Literacy, University of Minnesota, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  29. Meinel C, Leifer L, Plattner H (eds) (2011) Design thinking: understand–improve–apply. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  30. Middleton JA, Corbett R (1998) Sixth-grade students’ conceptions of stability in engineering contexts. In: Lehrer R, Chazan D (eds) Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 249–266Google Scholar
  31. Obama B (2009) Address to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. U.S. Department of Education, Assessment: measure what matters. Accessed 20 Dec 2010
  32. Papert S (1980) Mindstorms. Children, computers and powerful ideas. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2008) 21st Century Skills, Education & Competitiveness: A Resource and Policy Guide. Tucson: Partnership for 21st Century SkillsGoogle Scholar
  34. Silva E (2008) Measuring skills for the 21st century. Education Sector, pp 1–10. Accessed 28 Nov 2010
  35. Smith JP, diSessa AA, Roschelle J (1993) Misconceptions reconceived: a constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. J Learn Sci 3(2):115–163 (1993–1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Todd R (1999) Design and technology yields a new paradigm for elementary schooling. J Technol Stud 25(2):26–33Google Scholar
  37. Vande Zande R (2007) Design education as community outreach and interdisciplinary study. J Learn Through Arts 3(1):1–22Google Scholar
  38. Vygotsky LS (1934/1976) Thought and language. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  39. Wallace A (1956) Revitalization movements: some theoretical considerations for their comparative study. Am Anthropol 58:264–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shelley Goldman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Maureen P. Carroll
    • 1
  • Zandile Kabayadondo
    • 1
  • Leticia Britos Cavagnaro
    • 2
  • Adam W. Royalty
    • 3
  • Bernard Roth
    • 4
  • Bernard Roth
    • 4
  • Swee Hong Kwek
    • 1
  • Jain Kim
    • 1
  1. 1.Stanford University School of EducationStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Stanford University Technology Ventures ProgramStanfordUSA
  3. 3.Stanford University Hasso Plattner Institute of DesignStanfordUSA
  4. 4.Stanford University School of EngineeringStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations