education critical thinking in design research

Advertisement

Mapping the Relationship Between Critical Thinking and Design Thinking

• Published: 02 February 2021
• Volume 13 , pages 406–429, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• Jonathan D. Ericson   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9076-0596 1  

2567 Accesses

15 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Critical thinking has been a longstanding goal of education, while design thinking has gradually emerged as a popular method for supporting entrepreneurship, innovation, and problem solving in modern business. While some scholars have posited that design thinking may support critical thinking, empirical research examining the relationship between these two modes of thinking is lacking because their shared conceptual structure has not been articulated in detail and because they have remained siloed in practice. This essay maps eleven essential components of critical thinking to a variety of methods drawn from three popular design thinking frameworks. The mapping reveals that these seemingly unrelated modes of thinking share common features but also differ in important respects. A detailed comparison of the two modes of thinking suggests that design thinking methods have the potential to support and augment traditional critical thinking practices, and that design thinking frameworks could be modified to more explicitly incorporate critical thinking. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for the knowledge economy, and a research agenda for researchers, educators, and practitioners.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Design Thinking

Introduction: Design Thinking—Tensions and Opportunities

Looking Inside the Box to Think Outside It: Contextualizing Design Thinking

Aranda, M. L., Lie, R., & Guzey, S. (2019). Productive thinking in middle school science students’ design conversations in a design-based engineering challenge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education , (January). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09498-5 .

Association for Computing Machinery. (2018). ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct . Retrieved from https://www.acm.org/code-of-ethics .

Bailin, S. (1987). Critical and creative thinking. Informal Logic, 9 (1), 23–30.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bailin, S. (1988). Achieving extraordinary ends: An essay on creativity . Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Book   Google Scholar  

Banfield, R., Lombardo, C. T., & Wax, T. (2015). Design sprint: A practical guidebook for building great digital products . Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media Inc.

Google Scholar  

Benson, J., & Dresdow, S. (2014). Design thinking: A fresh approach for transformative assessment practice. Journal of Management Education, 38 (3), 436–461. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562913507571 .

Bloom, B.S. (Ed.), Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.

Wilner, S., & Micheli, P. (2015). Reconciling the tension between consistency and relevance: design thinking as a mechanism for brand ambidexterity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43 (5), 589–609.

Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active Learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (ASHEERIC Higher Education Report No. 1) . Washington, DC: George Washington University.

Brown, A. (2015). Developing career adaptability and innovative capabilities through learning and working in Norway and the United Kingdom. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 6 (2), 402–419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0215-6 .

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., Duguid, P., & Seely, J. (2007). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032 .

Brown, T. (2021). Design thinking. Accessed 4 January 2021. http://www.ideou.com/pages/design-thinking

Callaway, M. R., & Esser, J. K. (1984). Groupthink: Effects of cohesiveness and problemsolving on group decision making. Social Behavior and Personality, 12, 157–164.

Carayannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5 (2), 212–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-014-0185-8 .

Churchman, C. W. (1967). Guest editorial: Wicked problems. Management Science, 14 (4), B141–B214.

Colzato, L. S., Szapora, A., Lippelt, D., & Hommel, B. (2017). Prior meditation practice modulates performance and strategy use in convergent- and divergent-thinking problems. Mindfulness, 8 (1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-014-0352-9 .

Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18 (3), 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13 .

Cross, N, Dorst, K. & Roozenburg, N. (Ed.). (1992). Research in design thinking . Delft: Delft University Press.

Cross, N. (1993). A history of design methodology. In M. J. de Vries, N. Cross, & D. Grant (Eds.), Design methodology and relationships with science (pp. 15–27). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8220-9_2 .

Crossan, M. M. (1998). Improvisation in action. Organization Science, 9 (5), 593–599. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.9.5.593 .

Davies, M. (2015). A model of critical thinking in higher education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12835-1_2 .

Davis, C. M. (1990). What is empathy, and can empathy be taught. Physical Therapy, 70 (11), 707–711. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2011.3225 .

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think . Boston, MA: D.C. Health.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process . Lexington, MA: D.C. Health.

Dorst, K. (2011). The core of “design thinking” and its application. Design Studies, 32 (6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006 .

Dym, C., Agogino, A., Erics, O., Frey, D., & Leifer, L. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94 (1), 103–120.

Ennis, R. H. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard Educational Review, 32 (1), 81–111.

Ennis, R. H. (1987a). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and practice . New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.

Ennis, R. H. (1987b). Critical thinking and the curriculum. Slomianko: In M. Heiman & J.(Eds.), Thinking skills instruction: Concepts and techniques. Building Students’ Thinking Skills Series. (pp. 40–48). National Education Association. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263658807250830 .

Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: a streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14 (1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.5840/teachphil19911412 .

Eyler, J., & Giles, D. (1999). Where’s the learning in service-learning . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking : A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction executive summary “ The Delphi Report. American Philosophical Association Delphi Research Report . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.07.002 .

Fisher, A., & Scriven, M. (1997). Critical thinking: Its definition and assessment . Norwich: Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia.

Gibbons, S. (2018). Empathy Mapping: The first step in design thinking. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup.com/articles/empathy-mapping/ .

Glaser, E. M. (1941). An experiment in the development of critical thinking . New York: Columbia University Teacher’s College.

Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education , 7 (1), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v7i1.a.2 .

Halonen, J. S. (1995). Demystifying critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 75–81. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2201_23 .

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains. American Psychologist, 53 (4), 449–455. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.53.4.449 .

Haupt, G. (2015). Learning from experts: fostering extended thinking in the early phases of the design process. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25 (4), 483–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9295-7 .

Harley, A. (2018). UX Expert Reviews. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/ux-expert-reviews/

Haupt, G. (2018). Hierarchical thinking: a cognitive tool for guiding coherent decision making in design problem solving. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28 (1), 207–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9381-0 .

Hitchcock, D. (2018). Critical thinking. In E. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2018). Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/critical-thinking/ .

Hogland-Smith. (2017). Critical thinking skills are now in top demand in sales, business. Chicago Tribune . Retrieved from https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/opinion/ct-ptb-hoagland-smith-problem-st-0723-20170723-story.html .

Hu, Y., Du, X., Bryan-Kinns, N., & Guo, Y. (2018). Identifying divergent design thinking through the observable behavior of service design novices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1, 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9479-7 .

Hutchins, E. (1996). Cognition in the Wild . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hutchins, E. (2010). Cognitive ecology. Topics in Cognitive . Science, 2 (4), 705–715. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01089.x .

IDEO. (2015). The field guide to human-centered design (1st ed.). Canada: IDEO.org / DesignKit.

ITEA (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. (2007). In Phi Delta Kappan (3rd ed.). International Technology Education Association (ITEA). https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170108200707 .

Janis, I. L. (1971). Groupthink. Psychology Today, 5 (6), 43–46.

Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.

Janis, I. L. (2008). Groupthink. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 36 (1), 36.

Johansson-Sköldberg, U., & Woodilla, J. (2013). Design thinking: past, present and possible futures. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22 (2), 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/caim.12023 .

Joyce, A., & Paquin, R. L. (2016). The triple layered business model canvas: A tool to design more sustainable business models. Journal of Cleaner Production , 135 (November 2017), 1474–1486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.067 .

Kelley, T. R., & Sung, E. (2017). Sketching by design: Teaching sketching to young learners. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27 (3), 363–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9354-3 .

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2016). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4 (2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566 .

Kolko, J. (2018). The Divisiveness of Design Thinking. Interactions, 25 (3), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3194313 .

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1477405

Kuiper, R. (2002). Enhancing metacognition through the reflective use of self-regulated learning strategies. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 33 (2), 78–87. https://doi.org/10.3928/0022-0124-20020301-11 .

Lancione, M., & Clegg, S. R. (2015). The lightness of management learning. Management Learning, 46 (3), 280–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507614526533 .

Levin, J. S. (2018, May). Sharpen your critical thinking skills with these 14 leadership practices. Forbes . Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2018/05/31/sharpen-your-critical-thinking-skills-with-these-14-leadership-practices/ .

Lloyd, P. (2013). Embedded creativity: Teaching design thinking via distance education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23 (3), 749–765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-012-9214-8 .

Luchs, M. (2016). A brief introduction to design thinking. In M. Luchs, K. Swan & A. Griffin (eds.), Design thinking: new product development essentials from the PDMA (pp. 1–12). Hoboken: (NJ): Wiley.

Lukovics, M., Udvari, B., Nádas, N., & Fisher, E. (2019). Raising awareness of researchers-in-the-making toward responsible research and innovation. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 10 (4), 1558–1577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-019-00624-1 .

LUMA. (2012). Innovating for People: Handbook of Human-Centered Design Methods (1st ed.). Pittsburg, PA: LUMA Institute LLC.

Mason, T. H., Pollard, C. R., Chimalakonda, D., Guerrero, A. M., Kerr-Smith, C., Milheiras, S. A., & Bunnefeld, N. (2018). Wicked conflict: Using wicked problem thinking for holistic management of conservation conflict. Conservation letters, 11 (6), e12460.

McPeck (1981/2017). Critical thinking and education . New York: Routledge.

Montini, L. (2014, October). The trouble with hiring for “critical thinking” skills. Inc. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/laura-montini/are-you-sure-you-want-to-hire-a-critical-thinker.html .

Moshavi, D. (2001). “Yes and...”: Introducing improvisational theatre techniques to the management classroom. Journal of Management Education , 25 (4), 437–449.

Nodder, C. (2013). Evil by design: Interaction design to lead us into temptation. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0703993104 .

Norris, P. E., O’Rourke, M., Mayer, A. S., & Halvorsen, K. E. (2016). Managing the wicked problem of transdisciplinary team formation in socioecological systems. Landscape and Urban Planning, 154, 115–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.01.008 .

Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. In Booksgooglecom (Vol. 30). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39 (6), 751–760.

Park, W. W. (1990). A review of research on groupthink. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3, 229–245.

Pithers, R. T., & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational Research, 42 (3), 237–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/001318800440579 .

Price, R. (2016). March) . Business Insider: Microsoft is deleting its AI chatbot’s incredibly racist tweets.

Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work ? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93 (3), 223–231.

Quitadamo, I. J., Brahler, C. J., & Crouch, G. J. (2009). Peer-led team learning: A prospective method for increasing critical thinking in undergraduate science courses. Science Educator, 18 (1), 29–39.

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

Reed, L. (2018, January). Building critical thinking skills to solve problems at work. Business.Com . Retrieved from https://www.business.com/articles/building-critical-thinking-skills-at-work/ .

van Reine, P. P. (2017). The culture of design thinking for innovation. Journal of Innovation Management, 5 (2), 56–80.

Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4 (2), 155–169.

Rosenberger, C. (2000). Beyond empathy: Developing critical consciousness through service learning. In Integrating service learning and multicultural education in colleges and universities (pp. 23–43). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606051-9 .

Rowe (1987). Design thinking . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Runco, M. A. (1991). Divergent thinking (creativity research) . Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Runco, M. A., & Acar, S. (2012). Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creativity Research Journal, 24 (1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.652929 .

Scheer, A., Noweski, C., & Meinel, C. (2012). Transforming constructivist learning into action: Design thinking in education. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 17 (3), 8–19.

Schleicher, D., Jones, P., & Kachur, O. (2010). Bodystorming as embodied designing. Interactions, 17 (6), 47. https://doi.org/10.1145/1865245.1865256 .

Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1987). Critical thinking. 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform [Web page]. Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

Spiro, H. M. (1992). What is empathy and can it be taught? Annals of Internal Medicine, 116 (10), 843–846. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-116-10-843 .

Somerson, R. (2013). The art of Critical Making: An introduction. In E. Somerson, M. Hermano, & J. Maeda (Eds.), The Art of Critical Making: Rhode Island School of Design on Creative Practice (pp. 19–31). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Stempfle, J., & Badke-Schaub, P. (2002). Thinking in design teams - An analysis of team communication. Design Studies, 23 (5), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(02)00004-2 .

Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Sun, J., Chen, Q., Zhang, Q., Li, Y., Li, H., Wei, D., & Qiu, J. (2016). Training your brain to be more creative: Brain functional and structural changes induced by divergent thinking training. Human Brain Mapping, 37 (10), 3375–3387. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23246 .

Totten, S., Sills, T., Digby, A., & Russ, P. (1991). Cooperative learning: A guide to research . New York, NY: Garland.

Varela, F., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1991). The embodied mind . Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Waddock, S. (2013). The wicked problems of global sustainability need wicked (good) leaders and wicked (good) collaborative solutions. Journal of Management for Global Sustainability , 1 (1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.13185/JM2013.01106 .

Wells, A. (2013). The importance of design thinking for technological literacy: A phenomenological perspective. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23 (3), 623–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-012-9207-7 .

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9 (4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322 .

Yildirim, B., & Özkahraman, Ş. (2011). Critical thinking in nursing process and education. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1 (13), 257–262.

Zidulka, A., & Mitchell, I. K. (2018). Creativity or cooptation? thinking beyond instrumentalism when teaching design thinking. Journal of Management Education, 42 (6), 749–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918799797 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Information Design & Corporate Communication, Bentley University, 175 Forest Street, Waltham, MA, 02452, USA

Jonathan D. Ericson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan D. Ericson .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Design Thinking: Challenges and Opportunities

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Ericson, J.D. Mapping the Relationship Between Critical Thinking and Design Thinking. J Knowl Econ 13 , 406–429 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00733-w

Download citation

Received : 20 July 2020

Accepted : 19 January 2021

Published : 02 February 2021

Issue Date : March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00733-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Critical thinking
• Design thinking
• Entrepreneurship
• Knowledge economy
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Utility Menu

Design Thinking in Education

Design Thinking is a mindset and approach to learning, collaboration, and problem solving. In practice, the design process is a structured framework for identifying challenges, gathering information, generating potential solutions, refining ideas, and testing solutions. Design Thinking can be flexibly implemented; serving equally well as a framework for a course design or a roadmap for an activity or group project.

Download the  HGSE Design Thinking in Education infographic  to learn more about what Design Thinking is and why it is powerful in the classroom.

Design Consultation for projects, session, and courses, including active learning and facilitation strategies.

Brainstorming Kits including Post-it notes, Sharpie markers, and stickable chart paper.

Physical Prototyping Cart with dozens of creative, constructivist supplies, including felt, yarn, foil, craft sticks, rubber bands, Play-Doh, Legos, and more.

For more information about TLL resources or to check-out brainstorming or prototyping materials, contact Brandon Pousley .

Other Resources  There are dozens of ready-made activities, workbooks, and curricular guides available online. We suggest starting with the following:

Stanford — d.school  and the  The Bootcamp Bootleg IDEO — ' Design Thinking for Educators ' and the  Design ThinkingToolkit Business Innovation Factory —  'Teachers Design for Education'  and the TD4Ed Curriculum Research —  Design Thinking in Pedagogy  —  Luka, Ineta (2014). Design Thinking in Pedagogy. Journal of Education Culture and Society, No. 2, 63-74.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Wiley Open Access Collection

Educational design research: Portraying, conducting, and enhancing productive scholarship

Susan mckenney.

1 Department of Teacher Development (ELAN), Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente, Enschede the Netherlands

Thomas C. Reeves

2 Department of Career and Information Studies, College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens Georgia, USA

Solutionism is the all‐too‐common human propensity to jump to a solution before adequately understanding the nature of a problem. Solutionism has long been prevalent in efforts to improve education at all levels, including medical education.

Educational design research (EDR) is a genre of research that features the gaining of in‐depth understanding of a problem before any prototype solution is designed and tested. It is different from other forms of scientific inquiry because it is committed to the simultaneous development of both theoretical insights and practical solutions, together with stakeholders. This approach is powerful for theory building because it privileges ecologically valid studies that embrace the complexity of investigating learning in authentic (as opposed to laboratory) settings. When conducted well, both the research process and its outcomes generate valuable contributions to practice.

This article constitutes an expository essay on EDR, comprised of three movements. First, the approach is defined, its origins are presented, and its characteristics are described. Second, a generic model for conducting EDR is offered, and illustrated with examples from the field of medical education. Third, pathways towards advancing this form of inquiry are discussed, including ways to address inherent challenges and limitations, as well as recommendations for the medical education community. Although EDR is no panacea, this article illustrates how it can serve medical education research in a wide variety of geographic and disciplinary contexts.

Key message

Educational design research features collaboration between stakeholders (eg, researchers, instructors, clinicians, and medical students) to simultaneously develop both new theoretical insights and practical solutions to serious teaching and learning challenges.

1. INTRODUCTION

Humans have a common tendency to jump to solutions prior to fully understanding the nature of the problem they are trying to solve, thus demonstrating a practice described as ‘solutionism’ by Morozov. 1 Education is not the only field to fall prey to such behaviour, but it has seen its fair share of examples over the course of many decades. For instance, in 1922 Edison promised that films would replace textbooks. 2 Similar predictions continue to be made today as augmented reality and other technologies are put forward as the future of medical education. 3 Despite the fact that critics have revealed that the majority of studies on technological solutions in education yield ‘no significant difference,' 4 the tendency persists. Perhaps this represents the triumph of optimism over experience, or perhaps it is simply naïveté. We posit another explanation, which is that for many years problem solving was not considered serious science. In this contribution to Medical Education ’s special issue on ‘solutionism,' we examine a powerful approach to education research that features productive synergies between problem solving and serious science.

A distinction has often been made between basic research to discover new knowledge and applied research to solve practical problems, but this simplistic dichotomy does not adequately represent either how research is actually conducted or the multiple goals pursued by most scholars. 5 Education researchers, including those working in the field of medical education, often have a range of different goals in that their purposes may be descriptive, predictive, interpretivist, or refer to development or action. 4 For researchers interested in contributing to theory alongside development goals, educational design research (EDR) may be a compelling option. 6 We observe that the achieving of complex development goals is rarely feasible through simple, linear or predictable pathways, and this is also the case in medical education.

2. PORTRAYING EDR

‘Educational design research can be defined as a genre of research in which the iterative development of solutions to practical and complex educational problems also provides the context for empirical investigation, which yields theoretical understanding that can inform the work of others.’ 7 Identifying problems amenable to EDR involves finding real‐world challenges that are worthy of investigation and capable of being solved through the EDR process. Specific problems may be identified by practitioners, by researchers, or through the study of literature. 7 For example, a serious problem in medical education refers to helping future physicians develop consistent habits to prevent sepsis. 8 Over a million cases of sepsis occur in United States hospitals every year and 15%‐30% of them result in death. 9 Although antisepsis protocols are well known, research is needed to understand why they are insufficiently adhered to, and to develop additional solutions that can eradicate this problem. 10

When even an obvious serious problem is raised, verification in both literature and practice is necessary to ascertain if it is, indeed, legitimate, researchable and research‐worthy. From the theoretical perspective, the problem is worth studying if doing so would address a clear gap in the existing literature (legitimate), if existing methods will allow it to be studied well enough to warrant the effort (researchable), and if the work will contribute to theory development or scientific understanding related to a widely held, as opposed to idiosyncratic, concern (research‐worthy). 7 From the practical perspective, the problem is worth solving if the real problem, as opposed to a symptom, is identified (legitimate), if it can be identified in accessible contexts (researchable), and if it is severe enough to encourage stakeholders to invest in solving it (research‐worthy). 7 Here is an example situated in a gross anatomy class:

• Problem: corpse donors are limited and existing simulations for teaching human anatomy lack sufficient fidelity (the practical side of the problem). The current simulation literature provides insufficient guidance on how to develop high‐quality simulations for mammalian anatomy (the scientific side of the problem).
• Practical aim: to develop a high‐quality human dissection simulation that allows students to meet course goals without conducting actual dissection.
• Scientific aim: to understand and describe the characteristics of high‐quality simulations for mammals in general and humans in particular.

Research that does not explicitly seek to contribute to both theory and practice by addressing real‐world challenges can certainly be of great value, but it does not constitute EDR.

Undertaken in three movements, the purpose of this paper is to introduce EDR to the medical education community. The remainder of this section further portrays (the origins of) the approach, as well as similar approaches found in medical education research. The second section of this article describes how EDR is conducted and gives examples from the field. The third section considers productive pathways forward, in light of inherent challenges and limitations.

2.1. Theoretical and practical synergies: a brief, non‐comprehensive review

The notion of a linking science connecting theoretical and practical work has been advocated by psychologists for over a century. 11 , 12 In the 1930s and 1940s, major advancements in this direction were made by Lewin and colleagues, through action research, in which hypothesis generation and testing through the discussion of problems followed by group decisions were central. 13 In the 1960s and 1970s, (participatory) action research flourished in the social sciences, practitioner inquiry emerged, and calls for educational research to directly address the problems and needs of education increased. 14 Amongst other things, this set the stage for the rise of ‘action science’ in the 1980s 15 and the notion of ‘use‐inspired basic research,' which gained widespread momentum in the 1990s 5 . Around that time, researchers in the fields of instruction design and curriculum development began to stress the need for more reliable, prescriptive understanding to guide the robust design of educational products, programmes, processes and policies. 16 , 17 , 18 At the same time, researchers in the field of education psychology published landmark papers arguing for how theory informs the design of learning and vice versa, calling for research to be situated in the contexts in which that learning actually takes place, and citing the shortcomings of laboratory settings for understanding learning phenomena. 19 , 20

Across disciplinary lines, such views gained momentum upon the publication of Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation . 5 In this seminal work, Stokes questions the popular assumption that basic research inevitably leads to the development of new technologies, and argues that technological advances often permit the conduct of new types of basic research, thus reversing the direction of the basic to applied model. Moreover, he argues for more research like that of the French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur, who sought fundamental knowledge within the context of solving real‐world problems such as the spoilage of milk and treatment for rabies. In this tradition, EDR is concerned with the solving of existing problems in practice and with the structuring of the inquiry process so that it yields scientific understanding that is ecologically valid and informs the work of others.

2.2. A family of approaches

We use the term 'EDR' to describe a family of approaches that strive towards the dual goals of developing theoretical understanding and also designing and implementing interventions in practice. 21 This family of approaches may, but does not always, include design‐based research, design‐based implementation research, development research, design experiments, formative research, participatory design research, realist evaluation, the Medical Research Council (MRC) framework for evaluating complex interventions, action research and improvement science. The various names are not synonymous, and some authors have extensively described how specific members of this family differ from others. 22 Although a comprehensive overview is beyond the scope of this contribution, we do attempt to situate EDR in relation to other approaches that are frequently used in (medical) education research by way of Table  1 . Though citing the literature upon which it is based, Table  1 summarises the goals and characteristics of each approach in light of that which sets EDR apart from other forms of inquiry: the pursuit of theoretical understanding through the (iterative) development of solutions to problems in practice. Cells with grey shading indicate approaches that inherently yield theoretical and practical outcomes through intervention development, whereas white cells indicate that both theoretical and practical outcomes may be sought through the given approach, but this is not necessarily the case.

Family of approaches seeking practical and scientific synergies, including those that inherently yield theoretical and practical outcomes through intervention development (grey cells), and those that may yield theoretical and practical outcomes, depending on how they are used (white cells)

2.3. Examples of EDR in medical education

Like other research, EDR extends existing theoretical knowledge through data collection and analysis. 23 , 24 , 25 However, unlike many other kinds of research, the EDR process is embedded in the (often cyclic) development of a solution to the problem being tackled. 23 , 24 , 25 Here are three examples:

• Hege et al 26 describe the research embedded in the development of a clinical reasoning tool featuring virtual patients. After a framework for software design had been developed based on psychological theories, patient‐centredness, teaching and assessment, learner‐centredness and context, a software tool was developed to be used with virtual patient systems. It specifically supports clinical reasoning skills acquisition and assesses all steps of this complex process. The authors 26 describe the main components of the software, results of usability tests and a pilot study, and indicate directions for further development.
• Duitsman et al 27 describe their cyclic approach to improving the functioning of a clinical competency committee. In this project, theoretical principles were distilled from the literature to (re‐)shape clinical competency meetings focused on resident performance in a university children’s hospital. The meetings were evaluated and deemed useful for obtaining a broad indication of resident performance. The design principles and recommendations given are useful for other (research on) residency programmes, and can be adjusted to different contexts.
• Baarends et al 28 conducted EDR to foster evidence‐based decision‐making capacity amongst undergraduate occupational therapy students. Their report describes a mixed‐methods study undertaken to generate and pilot test the pedagogic principles underlying a teaching and learning scenario based on principles of cognitive apprenticeship and situated learning. The intervention was well received and the authors 28 make recommendations for subsequent research and development that can help students develop the self‐efficacy, cognitive skills and critical thinking skills required for evidence‐based decision making.

Although brief, these descriptions show how each of these studies developed theoretical understanding and contributed to the improving of practice through the design and testing of interventions.

2.4. Key characteristics

In the same way that engineering design melds creative insights with pragmatic understanding and follows the best available theoretical principles derived from physics, materials science, aesthetics and other disciplines, EDR is a complex and multifaceted endeavour. The simultaneous pursuit of practical and scientific goals is central to the process, which can be characterised by five essential features. Educational design research is 'theorectically oriented' not only because it uses theory to ground design, but also because the design and development work is undertaken to contribute to broader scientific understanding. It is 'interventionist' because it is undertaken to engender productive change in a particular education context. It is 'collaborative' because it requires the expertise of multidisciplinary partnerships, including researchers and practitioners, but also often others (eg, subject matter specialists, software programmers and facilitators). It is 'responsively grounded' because its products are shaped by participant expertise, the literature and, especially, field testing. Finally, it is 'iterative' because it generally evolves through multiple cycles of design, development, testing and revision. Given these characteristics, it will come as no surprise that the overall duration of EDR studies is typically measured in years, rather than months.

Educational design research is not a methodology. This is important to mention because it clarifies that the methodological standards to which it should be held are no different from those of other kinds of research. The methodological rigour of EDR initiatives should therefore be judged using existing criteria for qualitative, quantitative or mixed‐methods studies (eg, reliability, validity, credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability). Further, EDR leverages existing practices from the fields of design, sociology and education to shape participation and engagement.

3. CONDUCTING EDR

3.1. modelling the process.

The present authors 7 previously surveyed models for EDR, as well as for instruction design and curriculum development (eg, Ejersbo et al, 29 Bannan‐Ritland, 30 Wang and Hannafin 31 ). Based on this analysis, we created a generic model for EDR, shown in Figure  1 . This model shows a single, integrated research and development endeavour. It depicts the core elements of a flexible process that features the three main stages (described below), taking place in interaction with practice and yielding the dual outputs of knowledge and intervention. Each element of the model is discussed and examples are given.

Generic model for conducting educational design research 7

Although additional information is given in the source publication, 7 three main features bear mention here. First, the squares in Figure  1 denote three core phases, and the arrows between them indicate that the process is both iterative and flexible. During the 'analysis and exploration' phase, collaboration with practitioners is sought in order to shape a better understanding of the problem to be addressed. Research during this phase is typically informed by and contributes to theoretical understanding concerning the problem, context or stakeholders. During 'design and construction,' ideas about how the problem might be addressed tend to start off as rather large and vague, and gradually become refined, pruned and operationalised. Although this phase does not inherently involve empirical work, it does rely on and contribute to theoretical understanding about the (kind of) intervention, including its characteristics and underlying theory of action. During 'evaluation and reflection,' design ideas and prototype solutions are empirically investigated, and the findings are reflected upon, with the aim of refining (theoretical) understanding about if, how and why intervention features work. During this phase, research is shaped by and contributes to theoretical understanding about the (kind of) intervention or the responses it engenders. Across all phases, a blend of rational and creative mindsets is productive.

Second, the dual focus on theory and practice is made explicit through the rectangles, which represent the practical and scientific outputs, respectively. The practical solutions resulting from EDR can be educational products (eg, a multi‐user virtual learning game), processes (eg, a strategy for scaffolding medical student learning in a flipped classroom), programmes (eg, a series of workshops intended to help medical teachers develop more effective questioning strategies), or policies (eg, the designation of a minimum amount of one‐to‐one time for on‐site mentoring of interns). The theoretical understanding resulting from EDR can be used to describe, explain, predict or manipulate education phenomena. As noted previously, the theoretical understanding in design research underpins the design of the intervention, frames the scientific inquiry, and is advanced by findings generated through the empirical testing of the intervention.

Finally, the model demonstrates that attention to practical use through the trapezoid, which represents implementation and spread. It shows that interaction with practice is present from the start of the process, not as an afterthought, and increases over time. The bi‐directional arrows indicate that what happens in practice influences the ongoing core processes, as well as the ultimate outputs, and vice versa. Although not shown here, the professional development of those participating in the study (practitioners and researchers alike) is often a by‐product of the overall process and especially of the implementation work.

3.2. One example spanning all phases

To illustrate how this model comes to life, we briefly describe a previously published 4‐year PhD study, 32 which addressed a problem experienced by the World Health Organization (WHO). Namely, the WHO lacked a scalable, high‐quality training programme on the ‘cold chain’ that applies to the handling of vaccines and other pharmaceutical products that must be kept within the appropriate temperature range during shipping, storage and distribution. During analysis and exploration, Vesper 32 conducted a literature review on relevant learning approaches, field‐based investigation to understand the state of the art of WHO e‐learning programmes, and participant observation of the existing cold chain training programme. During design and construction, Vesper developed and revised multiple training programme prototypes on the basis of the literature and empirical testing (ie, the outcomes of evaluation and reflection). 32 During evaluation and reflection, Vesper 32 used diverse strategies to investigate the various prototypes, including expert appraisal by e‐learning specialists, risk analysis by content experts, and field testing of a mature prototype with target users. From the very first analysis activities through to a final version of the course, attention was given to implementation and spread through close interaction with practitioners. In addition to the practical output (the e‐learning course and underlying design framework), which has subsequently been applied to the design of other online learning environments at the WHO, 33 the scientific output is visible in the form of five journal articles, based on the investigation during analysis and exploration, 34 design and construction, 35 and evaluation and reflection 36 , 37 , 38 phases, respectively. Figure  2 portrays this example in light of the generic model.

Overview of Vesper’s PhD study 32 in light of the generic model for conducting design research in education 7

3.3. Multiple examples highlighting contributions from different phases

Across the shared characteristics of EDR, differences are also present. Some of the variation stems from the units of analysis, scope of implementation and nature of the subject areas addressed, as well as from the research domains and methodological traditions in which studies originate. The relative emphasis on each goal (solution development, new knowledge or both equally) can also wield strong influence on the design research process.

Here, different research reports 39 , 40 , 41 are used to illustrate the variety of EDR conducted within the field of medical education. For each one, the problem addressed, the intervention developed, the knowledge created and the methods used are summarised in Table  2 .

Three examples demonstrating variations in educational design research

The three examples described here 39 , 40 , 41 illustrate how different types of research reports are published as sub‐components of larger EDR projects. Results from the analysis and exploration phase are highly visible in the article by Subramaniam et al, 39 who used quantitative and qualitative methods in their design research to create, implement and revise HackHealth, an after‐school programme for health literacy that was targeted at adolescents from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. This particular sub‐study demonstrates how the implementation of the initial, literature‐based prototype provided the context for deeper analysis and exploration of the challenges encountered when completing various health‐related information activities. The findings extend beyond improving the HackHealth programme and hold important implications for working with this population, assessing and improving their health literacy skills, and designing instruction that stands to meet their needs.

The design and construction phase is central in the work of Vandewaetere et al, 40 who describe the steps they took, and especially their underlying reasoning, in the course of building five learning modules for general practice students. Through authentic complex tasks such as caring for elderly people or handling patients with physically undefined symptoms, this work demonstrates how educators can address the development of integrated competencies, such as clinical reasoning, communication and health promotion. The module descriptions illustrate how principles of whole‐task learning and the 4C/ID (four‐component/instructional design) model can be applied, as well as also noting challenges and pitfalls in the educational innovation process, and thus offers guidance to others wishing to tackle similar challenges.

The evaluation and reflection processes and findings are foregrounded in the work of Bok et al, 41 who investigated the implementation of a theory‐based assessment programme for veterinary medicine students. Their programme integrates learning and assessment by motivating and supporting students to seek, accumulate and learn from feedback in the workplace. They used quantitative and qualitative methods to explore the experiences of students and clinical supervisors. Their findings hold implications for revisions to their programme, as well as the development of similar initiatives. For example, peer feedback, social interaction and external guidance are crucial elements in this (kind of) programme, whereas the level of training required for portfolio judges and unintended student perceptions (namely, that even formative assessments are still summative) constitute challenges to be tackled head on.

4. ENHANCING EDR

4.1. challenges and limitations.

Phillips and Dolle, 42 amongst others, have cautioned that the simultaneous pursuit of practical innovation and theory building is extremely ambitious and difficult. This partially stems from the fact that researchers pursuing design research work hand‐in‐hand with practitioners to grapple directly with the complex variation of real‐world education problems. Although it increases complexity, this collaboration can lead to the accomplishment of a third goal of EDR, that of professional development for all those involved. Such an ambitious agenda clearly brings its share of challenges.

Four types of challenges are commonly encountered when conducting EDR, and sensible researchers attempt to address them proactively. Conceptual challenges relate to understanding what EDR is (or is not) and the kinds of goals being pursued. From a methodological standpoint, EDR is challenging because, given the variety in the types of questions asked throughout a project’s lifecycle, it requires that researchers possess well‐rounded skills in a variety of methods. Communicating the processes and outcomes of EDR studies can be challenging because these studies are typically large and complex, and because their value to non‐stakeholders is not always articulated. A fourth set of challenges relates to political dimensions, often stemming from (implementing) the design, such as organisational policies and stakeholder dynamics. Table  3 presents an overview of the four common challenges: a) conceptual; b) methodological; c) communicative, and d) political that arise when conducting EDR. It also offers recommendations for addressing each.

Common challenges and ways to mitigate them

Every research approach has its limitations and EDR is no different in this regard. For those considering EDR, it is important to make informed choices. First, EDR requires close collaboration between (at least) researchers and practitioners. 43 When this is not feasible or desirable, EDR ceases to be a viable option. Second, EDR connects theory, innovation and practice. 44 When the development of one or more of these is not of high priority, EDR is not likely to be useful. Third, because it centres on creating productive change in practice, EDR requires substantial amounts of time. 45 If the time available is measured in weeks (rather than months or years), EDR is not likely to be feasible.

Finally, given that EDR is fairly easy to do poorly and quite difficult to do well, a fourth limitation of EDR has less to do with the approach per se and more to do with the capacity of those conducting it. As with other ideas, the value of EDR lies not in its definition but in its realisation. ‘Design research is constituted within communities of practice that have certain characteristics of innovativeness, responsiveness to evidence, connectivity to basic science, and dedication to continual improvement.’ 46 In these trajectories, researchers must also fulfil the roles of designers and consultants, rendering this a highly challenging endeavour. McKenney and Brand‐Gruwel 47 examined these three roles in light of each sub‐process of design research (analysis and exploration; design and construction; evaluation and reflection; implementation and spread). They articulate four foundational competencies that are required to enact each role, and offer guidelines for developing them. They note that 'empathy' is needed, for example, to explore (un)shared goals or become exposed to the incentives, motives and reward structures in different settings. 'Orchestration' helps to simultaneously attend to research framing, data collection, solution design, implementation, infrastructure woes and stakeholder ownership. Creative and analytical 'flexibility' supports the optimisation of the human and material resources available in ways that remain aligned with the goals of the instruction. Finally, 'social competence' refers to a robust repertoire of the interaction strategies needed to fulfil each role. Thus, conducting EDR is clearly a complex task. If this form of inquiry is to realise its potential contribution to the field of medical education, explicit attention must be given to the holistic development of design researcher capacity. As is the case with other forms of complex learning, this requires engaging with entire authentic design research projects. In deciding whether EDR is an appropriate fit for a given project, scholars are advised to consider the substantial and varied demands placed on researchers undertaking this kind of work.

4.2. CONCLUSIONS

Educational design research is of course no panacea. However, it does put the metaphorical brakes on solutionism because of its heightened attention to clarifying the nature of the problem before an educational intervention or solution is conceived. We believe that medical education faces many challenges that might be best addressed by synergistically pursuing both theoretical and development goals. For example, as Chen and Reeves 48 argue, this approach could be used to:

• develop capacities to work effectively in increasingly fluid health care teams;
• cultivate skills to communicate in a culturally competent manner with patients and other health care professionals;
• prepare health care professionals for practice in a world that is increasingly infused with machine learning algorithms and robots;
• improve assessment protocols and feedback practices to promote competency‐based education, and
• enhance health care professionals’ clinical reasoning skills.

This article set out to discuss the nature and origins of EDR, how it is conducted, and what is needed to advance this kind of work. First, the approach was introduced, discussed in the light of related developments in the last century, as well as other contemporary approaches that strive towards both practical and theoretical goals, and characterised. Second, a generic model for conducting EDR was described and illustrated with multiple examples. Third, the challenges and limitations of this approach were considered. We conclude this article with a few words about next steps.

According to its website, this journal promises its readers ‘practically oriented and theory‐informed papers that emphasise empirical evidence and advancing the field.' As such, it would seem that EDR’s twin pursuits align well with the ambitions of Medical Education . If fluency with the approach has yet to be developed before this community shares its design studies (more), then collaboration with researchers in sister fields, who are more accustomed to design research (eg, those in the learning sciences, instructional design or educational technology) may be worth exploring. In so doing, it seems crucial to seek out like‐minded scholars who prioritise the giving of careful attention to ensuring descriptive and explanatory understanding of problems worth tackling before developing solutions. The contributions to this special issue on solutionism offer multiple starting points for doing just that.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

SMcK and TCR have been collaborating on the articulation of this approach for over a decade. This piece is based on that collaborative effort. SMcK drafted, revised and finalised the present text and figures. TCR edited and revised the present text. Both authors (SMck and TCR) developed the core ideas described in this paper, approved the final manuscript for submission, and agreed to be accountable for the work.

5. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Not applicable.

6. ETHICAL APPROVAL

Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to thank Professor Diana Dolmans (Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, the Netherlands) for encouraging this submission.

McKenney S, Reeves TC. Educational research design: Portraying, conducting, and enhancing productive scholarship . Med Educ . 2020; 55 :82-92. 10.1111/medu.14280 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Design Thinking in Education: A Critical Review of Literature

Design Thinking is an innovative, creative and human-centered process and mindset that employs collaborative multidisciplinary teams in order to generate user-focused products, services or experiences. It has been applied beyond the original sphere of design work to business, engineering, technology, and more recently, education, because of its ability of advancing creativity and innovation by applying an empathetic, flexible and iterative approach. With the quest for a teaching strategy for 21st century skills, work habits and character traits, there has been, in the past five years, keen and wide interest towards Design Thinking as applied in education. This paper therefore provides a systematic, comprehensive and analytical strategy in mapping out and offering a critical review and analysis of over 68 journal articles, books and reports on design thinking in education. Overall, this paper recognizes the gains that can be made from utilizing Design Thinking in education especially in the global quest of teaching 21st century skills. This paper also suggests a need to pursue further studies on the development of a Design Thinking framework for teaching, learning, curriculum design & teacher training.

Related Papers

Design Thinking is an innovative, creative and human-centered process and mindset that employs collaborative multidisciplinary teams in order to generate user-focused products, services or experiences. It has been applied beyond the original sphere of design work to business, engineering, technology, and more recently, education, because of its ability of advancing creativity and innovation by applying an empathetic, flexible and iterative approach. With the quest for a teaching methodology for 21st century skills, work habits and character traits, there has been, in the past five years, keen and wide interest towards Design Thinking as applied in education. This paper therefore provides a systematic, comprehensive and analytical methodology in mapping out and offering a critical review and analysis of over 68 journal articles, books and reports on design thinking in education. Overall, this paper recognizes the gains that can be made from utilizing Design Thinking as a methodology in education especially in the global quest of teaching 21st century skills. This paper also suggests a need to pursue further studies on the development of a Design Thinking framework for teaching.

Ayu Firnanda

David Wooff

Book review for: Design Thinking for Education; Conceptions and Applications in Teaching and Learning, By Joyce Hwee Ling Koh, Ching Sing Chai, Benjamin Wong, Huang-Yao Hong.

International Journal for Innovation Education and Research

Fabiano Pamato Nunes

Children become more motivated to learn when what is presented to them reflects or simulates their own reality, providing a sense of authenticity to education. This article aims to analyse which studies have already been carried out in the scope of the use and teaching of Design Thinking for children in the school environment. In order to achieve this aim, a descriptive exploratory research was conducted, based on the integrative literature review, with the Scopus and Web of Science platforms as the basis. It was noticed that Design Thinking is a valuable tool for the empowerment of children and adolescents, as it stimulates empathy, communication, creativity, and the ability to analyse and solve problems. One point that should be drawn from the articles is that there is few formally structured materials on the use of Design Thinking as a pedagogical practice, which can hinder its more accelerated dissemination. Finally, although interventions are centred on children and adolescents...

Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018)

Katja Tschimmel , Joana Santos

Based on continual social and technological transformations, many academics and governmental organisations call attention to the need for urgent changes in Education. Design Thinking (DT), an innovation method derived from design methodology connected to business innovation, has shown itself also as an useful method to be applied in the innovation of educational systems. This paper provides an introductional approach to Design Thinking and its possible role in educational contexts as a method to rethink learning/teaching experiences. For this purpose we present the conceptual background of Design and Design Thinking, introduce Design Thinking in Education, and present the D-Think Toolkit, a new framework which aims to support the understanding of the designer's mindset and culture, and the application of its methods and tools in the redesign of education. The toolkit is the main result of the European research project D-Think, developed between 2014 and 2017 with the support of the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Commission. The conclusion of our paper highlights that DT offers a complementary framework for the innovation work of educators, so transforming them into change-makers. The designers' creative and empathic mindset and collaborative working approach can enrich the reflection on the educators new role as 'learning facilitators'.

Katja Tschimmel , Alexandre Jacinto

Many academic organisations are calling attention to the need for urgent changes in curricula and learning methods demanded by the continual social transformation of an increasingly technological world. Transversal skills such as the ability to think creatively and critically, take initiative, and work collaboratively for common goals, are essential to guarantee a qualified and entrepreneurial workforce in Europe. The D-Think research project emerged in this educational context during September 2014. It is an initiative of 7 partners from 6 different European countries, supported by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Commission. The project aims to promote a wider use of Design Thinking as a transversal learning tool by developing and making available a toolkit and an innovative digital course for educators and professional trainers. The result of the first year of the D-Think project is a Research Report about Design Thinking and its application in Education and Training, providing a spring board for the next stages of the project: the creation of the D-Think toolkit and the D-Think m-learning course, both in development and testing until August 2017. The main objective of the Research Report is the clarification of the role of Design Thinking in HEI (Higher Education Institutions) and VET (Vocational Training) Education, and the identification of new approaches to teaching/learning. The target group of the D-Think project are educators/trainers who want to rethink the education system and the current teaching/learning methodologies. As a result, the partnership expects HEI´s and VET providers to prepare people to respond better to the challenges of the labour market, and so be able to stimulate the growth of flexible and innovative businesses in the future.

Thinking Skills and Creativity

Carmen Richardson

The problems educators face in professional practice are complex, varied, and difficult to address. These issues range across teaching and learning topics, to social or community issues, classroom climate issues and countless others. Such problems are multifaceted, cross-disciplinary, human-centered, and rarely solved through simple or linear solutions. Grappling with them requires educators to think creatively about educational problems of practice. But given the challenges and expectations facing teachers, creativity is often seen as leisure in teaching practice. While creativity is considered a core 21st century thinking skill, many people are hesitant to self-identify as " creative, " or are uncomfortable with intellectual risk-taking and open-endedness. We suggest that design thinking may provide an accessible structure for teachers and teacher educators to think creatively in dealing with educational problems of practice. We examine a qualitative study of a graduate ...

9th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'23)

Iris Schmidberger

The dynamic changes currently caused by various megatrends challenge the educational sector. Prospective strategies are required to cope with these issues. This is where the innovation methodology of Design Thinking comes in: it can be described as creative thinking in heterogeneous teams to develop creative solution ideas for complex challenges. This approach helps to initiate new or adjusted strategies for special target groups in the context of education. In this article, essential aspects of Design Thinking are introduced, and references to innovations in the field of education are presented. Two examples from the higher education sector are then used to illustrate the practical implementation.

Journal of Ege Education Technologies

Yelız Tunga

Design thinking is a rising term in educational literature and role of design thinking in classrooms is one of current research subjects in these days. Design thinking a general approach that utilize the designer’s methods and sensibility to overcome problems in efficient and effective way in terms of technological and commercial aspects. In educational context, it is seen as a learning approach that mainly focuses on developing creative confidence of students. Before the emergence of design thinking, in educational literature design as a keyword has been one of the most used term in educational researches, as well. Design based learning, learning by design, reflective design based learning, learning technology by design are several examples. Therefore, it is necessary to recognize that whether design thinking is entirely new phenomena for educators or it is just the replication of previous design related learning approaches. In this paper, definition and current position of design thinking in the literature and relationship between design thinking and previous design related learning approaches has discussed. It is obtained that design thinking is sparkling phenomena yet it doesn’t completely new approach for educators and it has several similarities in both practice and theoretical perspective with earlier design-related educational studies.

Merwyn Baccay

This qualitative study seeks to explore how design thinking as a new model of learning is used in classroom learning. The participants for this study are the school leader and teachers from a public middle school in the San Francisco Bay Area. Through lesson observations and interviews, this study aims to develop a fuller understanding of the motivations that drive teachers to adopt this innovative approach and the considerations they have when using it in the teaching and learning of core content. The findings showed that the teachers were not passive recipients of this new pedagogical tool and have " appropriated " it in multiple unique ways – to suit different purposes, different learning contexts and their different subjects. Another key finding is that mastery of academic core content still drives how design thinking is used to intersect with classroom learning. This study thus emphasizes the need to promote 21 st century skills and academic content knowledge as similarly important student outcomes. The cultivation of a broader set of skills and dispositions beyond core content knowledge is critical, and they merit the investment of more time in the classroom.

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Education Sciences

Michela Tramonti

proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’09): Design Society

Åsa Ericson

Milena Droumeva

Carolina Gill

Sanmitra Chitte

THE JOURNAL OF TEACHING ENGLISH FOR SPECIFIC AND ACADEMIC PURPOSES

Ivana Pondelíková (Styková)

Nicola Crea

Georgi V. Georgiev

Dianna Hardy

De Gruyter Open Education Studies

Gnanaharsha Beligatamulla PhD

jurgen faust

Zaana Howard

Technology Supported Active Learning

Petri Vesikivi

Design Research Society/CUMULUS, 2nd International Conference for Design Education Researchers

Andrew Withell , Neil Haigh

SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference

Andra Irbīte

International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Sharon Guaman

MATEC Web of Conferences

Valentin Grecu

John Lockley

Form Akademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk

leila Aflatoony

F1000Research

Sharmini Gopinathan

Eden Hennessey

Design Science and Innovation

Keith Stockman

Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education

Erik Bohemia

Reinhold Steinbeck

International Journal Of Advance Research And Innovative Ideas In Education

Ryan Pecson , Monina S. Romero

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Design Thinking has been widely recognized as an alternative way of thinking and methodology for problem solving in Education institutions from K-12 to Grad Schools in educational institutions such as Stanford, MIT, Darden School of Business at Virginia University, Carnegie Mellon and many more. Read about their courses, programs, research and other involvement with design thinking on this page.

See our listing of courses and programs offered by all Universities and other institutions on the Education page .

This is a follow on article to our original article "5 Design Thinking Examples for Students" .

What are Design Thinking Tools? Design thinking is an approach to problem-solving that is centered around understanding the needs and experiences of end-users. It is a creative and innovative approach that is used by designers and organizations to develop effective solutions to complex problems. Design thinking tools are a set of methods and techniques that facilitate the design thinking process. In this article, we will discuss some of the most popular design thinking tools and their benefits.

1. Empathy Mapping

Design thinking training has become increasingly popular in recent years, with businesses and organizations around the world looking to develop their innovation and problem-solving capabilities. While design thinking can be a powerful tool for creativity and innovation, there are also some potential pitfalls and limitations to its use. In this article, we will critically examine design thinking training, looking at its strengths and weaknesses, and providing recommendations for how to make the most of this approach.

Design thinking has emerged as one of the most popular frameworks for creative problem-solving. It has been used by businesses, startups, and non-profits around the world to develop innovative solutions to complex challenges. As a result, the demand for design thinking certification has increased significantly. However, the question remains, is design thinking certification necessary, and does it truly add value to the process of design thinking?

Welcome to our educators page. We hope that we can support you on your journey to discover and use Design Thinking to help the next generation to become more confident in using creativity to solve problems.

Why is Design Thinking important for students?

21st Century Learning and Innovation Skills are the skills that will be essential for students to possess to thrive in the increasingly complex life and work environments in the 21st century. These include:

• Creativity and Innovation • Critical Thinking and Problem Solving • Communication • Collaboration

Applying Design Thinking internally, within a group, community or to ourselves. This is a new application of the Design Thinking Methodology.

An internal application in this sense can have two meanings. First, the internal application of design thinking tactics within a group, organization or community, and second, the internal application of design thinking to one’s own self and life.

Can Design Thinking help you solve your own problems?

Talk to any educator, parent, or policy maker and you will inevitably hear about the many problems that exist in education. It’s not for lack of trying—millions of people are working across the country to find new solutions for our schools. And yet we’re struggling to find new answers that make a real difference. 

Recently IDEO, the design and innovation firm where I work, collaborated with San Francisco Unified School District to develop a new vision for their food system.

This case study focuses on a Design Thinking Workshop for primary school learners. The aim of the workshops was to provide learners with a new set of skills which they can employ when problem solving for real world challenges.

Building resilience is essential for cities that face increasing uncertainty and new challenges that threaten the well-being of its citizens. This is especially important when looking at the diversity and complexity of potential shocks and stresses. 

This study shows that a short, 3-day intervention can make a positive impact on young female youths’ perceptions of STEM, pro-social attitudes, creative confidence, and career pathways. It does this by creating a “hook” or stimulating interest among youths to have a more favorable opinion about working in STEM.

The study’s second finding is that persistent gender norms are hard to overturn and require additional interventions.

This very informative article discusses design thinking as a process and mindset for collaboratively finding solutions for wicked problems in a variety of educational settings. Through a systematic literature review the article organizes case studies, reports, theoretical reflections, and other scholarly work to enhance our understanding of the purposes, contexts, benefits, limitations, affordances, constraints, effects and outcomes of design thinking in education.

Specifically, the review pursues four questions:

As children move from kindergarten, through middle school, and to high school, instruction shifts from stories to facts, from speculation to specifics, and imagination fades from focus. Design Thinking provides an alternative model to traditional ways of learning academic content by challenging students to find answers to complex, nuanced problems with multiple solutions and by fostering students’ ability to act as change agents.

In her doctoral paper Loraine Rossi de Campos explores the use of Design Thinking in a school district for a 4-5 grade school.

How to use design thinking to make great things actually happen by Tim Brown and Roger L. Martin. In this great HBR article, the authors look at design thinking in Finance with two case studies, one from MassMutual and the other from Intercorp. Group of Peru.

In this article highlighting the development of the acceptance of Design Thinking, they discuss how Design Thinking helps to create the artifact that creates the new solution as well as the intervention/s that brings the artifact to life.

Ever since it became clear that smart design led to the success of many products, companies have been employing it in other areas, from customer experiences, to strategy, to business ecosystems. But as design is used in increasingly complex contexts, a new hurdle has emerged: gaining acceptance (for the new solutions).

Read more...

Reham has been working at Mohammed bin Rashid school, a public school in Dubai, for the last five years as a Design & Technology Teacher. She teaches grades 3 to grade 8 students. Prior to working as a teacher, Reham was an architect and worked at an engineering consultancy where her duties included designing buildings using Autocad and 3d Max software. 

In an ever changing society of the 21st century, there is a demand to equip students with meta competences going beyond cognitive knowledge. Education, therefore, needs a transition from transferring knowledge to developing individual potentials with the help of constructivist learning. A Scheer, C Noweski,  C Meinel , University of Potsdam, Germany.

Design Thinking is the most effective method of teaching constructivist learning.

Developing environmental sustainability strategies, the Double Diamond method of LCA and design thinking: a case study from aged care. Journal of Cleaner Production, 85, 67-82. Stephen J. Clune*, Simon Lockrey.

The Stanford University d.school  -  Design Thinking Bootcamp Bootleg , Design Thinking tools and the  Resources page . have gone through a number of iterations to refine the exercises and tools. The Bootleg offers the latest version (as of May 2020) for people to download and use for free.

Watch this video from Nathan Shedroff on design strategy and the merging of business and design. In this video Nathan very clearly articulates the difference between design and design thinking and discusses how design needs to mesh with business and business with design. Well worth watching.

Watch Video...

Admissions needs to communicate consistently at each touchpoint. Prospective students and families want to assess whether this educational experience is the right fit for them. Current students and alumni are asking for Maize and Blue landmarks to build the Michigan Tradition across campus.

Design Thinking is a powerful approach to problem solving and supports schools in moving toward a more hands-and minds-on, challenge-based curriculum. We want kids to be engaged right? You won't believe how well Design Thinking engages kids.

Watch this video...

Design Thinking in daily life is about creating creative and collaborative workflows engineered to tackle big projects and prototyping to discover new solutions.

And although we have K-12 schools incorporating design thinking into their curriculum and instruction, as well as educators attending  design thinking workshops  at places like the d. School at Stanford, what does design thinking in daily life really look like in K-12 classrooms and schools?

If we want our students to think critically, consider the needs of others and then develop solutions to solve real problems, design thinking project ideas offer a useful framework to make that happen. Are you looking to give it a try this year? Here are 6 design thinking project ideas that take students through the 5 stages – empathize, define, ideate, prototype and test – and get them digging deeper.

This video showcases three projects during this year’s Design Thinking Club. Each group of students used the design thinking method to help improve a school experience or help a teacher in need.

David Lee walks us through three Design Thinking projects. It's a great example of how the process works and the type of results that it produced.

Watch the kids go through the process and produce really great solutions. It is inspiring.

Watch here...

In this presentation from the Hathaway Brown School in Ohio, teachers will learn about the design thinking process, how it ties to the 21st century skills and how to conduct workshops for different grades. It provides a good overview for teachers who want to try Design Thinking in their classroom.

There are not that many Design Thinking project examples for students on the web. Most design thinking project examples are aimed at working professionals i.e. engineers, marketing, business people, and are not really great project examples for K-12 and college students to grasp how the process works. Nor is it easy to understand how they apply to your particular problem or passion.

The Stanford d.school's Design Thinking Workshop is a powerful tool for developing innovative solutions to complex problems. The workshop combines empathy, creativity, and critical thinking to develop unique and effective solutions to a wide range of problems. This article will explore the how long the workshop should take, and some tips and tools to ensure a successful Design Thinking Workshop.

How Long Should the Workshop Take?

The way we are educating students is not the way that they will have to work to succeed in the world. When last did you see students working together in teams and collaborating on problem solving? Education is an individual pursuit in a world that needs team thinking and collaborative skills.

Listen to her TED Talk...

Too often, we hear students say they want to leave West Virginia because there are limited opportunities and few things to do. Simulated Workplace Entrepreneurship Education Pathway (SWEEP) turns that notion on its head and empowers students to generate and create those opportunities

Design Thinking is a creative process that helps you design meaningful solutions to problems in the classroom, at your school, and in your community. This Design Thinking toolkit and Designer's Workbook provides you with instructions to explore Design Thinking with your students. Using the Design Thinking toolkit will help you to get your students engaged in the classroom in ways that are hard to achieve through other exercises.

Design thinking offers a creative yet structured approach for addressing large-scale challenges. 

We offer a summary of the webinar,   Design Thinking: Education Edition , which discusses design thinking principles and process, describes real-world examples of design thinking in action, and offeres possibilities for how you might introduce the approach into your own organization.

• Get in touch
• Enterprise & IT
• Banking & Financial Services
• News media & Entertainment
• Healthcare & Lifesciences
• Networks and Smart Devices
• Education & EdTech
• Service Design
• UI UX Design
• Data Visualization & Design
• User & Design Research
• In the News
• Our Network
• Voice Experiences
• Golden grid

Critical Thinking

• Enterprise UX
• 20 Product performance metrics
• Types of Dashboards
• Interconnectivity and iOT
• Healthcare and Lifesciences
• Airtel XStream
• Case studies

Data Design

• UCD vs. Design Thinking

User & Design Research

Critical thinking is a method of analyzing ideas, concepts or data collected to evaluate the situation from different perspectives and arrive at an unbiased optimum solution. A critical thinker can anticipate the consequences of certain actions in advance. A researcher with the competency to critically think can reflect, think independently, stay objective, problem solve to deduce a solution. Therefore, critical thinking requires self-actuated discipline and correction to get one step closer to the solution iteratively.

Quick details: Critical Thinking

Structure: Unstructured

Preparation: Information needed to analyze

Deliverables: Inferences, Insights

More about Critical Thinking

Most research methods require experienced or trained researchers to define the design specifications for a project. The researcher employs different methods to collect data, analyze it and arrive at the solution that addresses user needs and expectations. One of the most important competencies that a researcher must have in order to arrive at an optimum solution is the ability to critically think and analyze.

Critical Thinking can also help identify gaps in reasoning and assumptions. Although, design researchers are expected to have this competency independently, critical thinking promotes group ideation and task execution as well. Though, it shouldn’t be seen as an opportunity to criticize someone else’s ideas or work.  In that sense, the objective of critical thinking is to strengthen a theory, process, product or service and not to find unnecessary faults to ensure that the ideas or processes collapse. A mature critical thinker can define project goals, define timelines, set expectations, manage expectations, handle conflicts and work collaboratively with a team to accomplish the project goals. It is more and more evident that critical thinking, even though not given its due importance in organizations, is a critical competency that cannot be undermined.

Critical Thinking vs. Design Thinking

It is also important to discuss the difference between Design Thinking and Critical Thinking. Design Thinking is a process that involves stages of observation/interaction, empathy, problem formulation, solution deduction, testing, alteration and reiteration. Here, Critical Thinking is a part of every stage of the Design Thinking process. Essentially, effective Design Thinking cannot take place in the absence of critical or creative thinking. There is also a common misconception that critical and creative thinking are distinct from each other. 

However, critical thinking requires some form as well as level of creativity. Critical and creative thinking go hand-in-hand and cannot be separated or distinguished using any formal criteria.

Advantages of Critical Thinking

1. design thinking.

Critical thinking is an important component that comes into play at every stage of the design thinking process .

2. Creative Problem Solving

Critical Thinking is not just rational and based on a set of logical rules. There is plenty of room for solid creativity to play a significant role in the critical thinking process .

3. Reflection

Critical thinking promotes independent and reflective thinking in the researcher to question and evaluate the solutions they have devised and reiterate for an optimum solution .

4. Objectivity

Effective use of this method ensures objectivity and therefore doesn’t leave much scope for biases .

5. Applications

Critical thinking is a competency and method that is applicable in all projects irrespective of the type of solution expected .

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking

1. researcher can introduce unnecessary complexity.

Too much thinking can also be detrimental to a project. Some researchers can complicate an otherwise simple project by overthinking critical and pose questions when not required .

2. Expensive researcher

A mature Critical thinking researcher can be very expensive for a low budget project. However, Critical thinking is not a competency that is extremely difficult to master .

Think Design's recommendation

It is difficult to separate reasoning from thinking and hence, this is the best context to introduce the three reasoning types: Deductive, Inductive and Abductive.

Deductive reasoning

Deductive reasoning starts with the assertion of a general rule and ends up in a guaranteed specific conclusion.

Inductive reasoning

Inductive reasoning begins with observations that are specific and ends up with a conclusion that is likely but not certain.

Abductive reasoning

Abductive reasoning starts with an incomplete set of observations and ends up with a most likely explanation.

It is believed that Design, in general is an activity that can complement abductive reasoning; that it is not very essential in the process of Design to come up with deductive or inductive reasoning. However, we wouldn’t want to generalize this at this moment but would suggest that proceeding with abductive reasoning saves a lot of time and effort if that is the objective.

Critical Thinking, when coupled with the types of reasoning above, can generate magical results. It is therefore advised to employ Critical thinking in situations where we may need abductive reasoning skills… There are chances we over-complicate things if we indulge in Critical thinking when we have clear conclusions or clear observations (Deductive and Inductive).

Was this Page helpful?

Related methods.

• Audio/ Video Analysis
• Document Research
• Heatmap Analysis
• Social Network Mapping
• Time Lapse Video
• Trend Analysis
• Usage Analytics

UI UX DESIGN

Service design.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue we'll assume that you accept this. Learn more

Recent Tweets

Sign up for our newsletter.

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay updated with the latest insights in UX, CX, Data and Research.

Get in Touch

Thank you for subscribing.

You will be receive all future issues of our newsletter.

Thank you for Downloading.

One moment….

While the report downloads, could you tell us…

June 27, 2024

The Importance of Design Thinking in Education: Sparking Creativity in Children

The Creativity Crisis

Every generation has fond memories of how much better it was when they were kids. Just 40 short years ago, children didn’t come home from playing until the street lights came on. They drank from the water hose, and an advertisement at 10:00 pm reminded parents to make sure their children were home. Kids played make-believe with friends in the sandbox, built forts, and creatively figured out how to not be bored, all while trying not to get into too much trouble.

Today’s youth are very different. Raised in a world of on-demand video, cell phones, and non-stop digital entertainment, kids have little opportunity to be bored. Without boredom, creativity is diminished. However, in today’s rapidly evolving world, creativity is no longer just a desirable skill; it is essential. Many educators and parents are increasingly concerned that children are not developing their creative potential either in school or during play. This deficiency can be attributed to an overly structured educational system and the pervasive influence of instant gratification culture. 

Recent research indicates a worrying decline in children’s creativity. A study by Kyung Hee Kim found that while IQ scores have been rising, creativity scores have been decreasing since the 1990s. This phenomenon, known as the “creativity crisis,” can be partly attributed to the structured nature of modern education systems, which often prioritize standardized testing over creative exploration.

Children today spend less time in unstructured play, which is crucial for developing creativity. Instead, they are often engaged with digital devices that provide constant stimulation and limit opportunities for imaginative thinking. To address this issue, integrating design thinking into education can be a powerful solution.

Understanding Design Thinking

Design thinking is a problem-solving approach that involves empathizing with users, defining problems, ideating, prototyping, and testing. This process, originally developed for the design and business sectors, has been increasingly recognized for its potential in education. Encouraging students to think like designers fosters creativity, critical thinking, and collaboration.

How Design Thinking Can Help with the Creativity Crisis

• Fostering Empathy and Understanding: The first stage in design thinking is empathy. Children learn to understand the needs and perspectives of others, which enhances their emotional intelligence and creativity. By empathizing with end-users, they can develop more innovative and relative solutions to problems.
• Encouraging Problem Definition and Exploration: Design thinking teaches children to define problems clearly. This process involves exploring various aspects of a problem and asking critical questions. The define stage helps children develop a deeper understanding of issues and encourages them to think critically.
• Promoting Ideation and Brainstorming: In the ideation stage, children are encouraged to brainstorm multiple solutions without the fear of failure . This stage is vital for creativity as it allows children to explore a wide range of ideas and approaches without fear of criticism or reproach.
• Hands-On Prototyping and Experimentation: The prototyping stage involves creating tangible representations of ideas. This hands-on approach helps children learn by doing, which is essential for developing creative problem-solving skills. Experimentation and iteration are key components, teaching children that failure is part of the learning process.
• Iterative Testing and Feedback: Testing is the final stage in design thinking. This stage involves testing prototypes and gathering feedback from multiple stakeholders and potential end users. This iterative process helps children refine their ideas and learn from their mistakes, fostering resilience and adaptability.

Evidence of Effectiveness

Several studies highlight the benefits of design thinking in education. For instance, a 2010 study by Carroll et al. found that incorporating design thinking into the curriculum improved students’ engagement, collaboration, and problem-solving skills. Another study, this one by Henriksen et al ., demonstrated that design thinking projects enhanced students’ creative confidence and ability to innovate.

Additionally, research by Rauth et al. showed that students who participated in design thinking workshops exhibited greater creativity and critical thinking abilities compared to those who did not participate. These findings underscore the potential of design thinking to reinvigorate creativity in children.

Practical Implementation

To effectively integrate design thinking into education, schools and educators can:

• Encourage Interdisciplinary Projects: Design thinking works best when applied to real-world problems that require knowledge from various disciplines. Interdisciplinary projects help students see the connections between different subjects and develop a more holistic understanding of issues.
• Provide Time for Unstructured Play: Allowing children time for unstructured play is crucial for fostering creativity. Schools can create maker spaces or innovation labs where students can experiment with materials and ideas without the confines of a traditional classroom setting.
• Train Teachers in Design Thinking: Educators need to be trained in design thinking principles and practices. Professional development programs can equip teachers with the skills and knowledge to effectively implement design thinking in their classrooms. Design thinking is not just for STEM or elective courses. It can be integrated into lessons in core content areas, and is a great tool for encouraging students to develop relevant and meaningful connections to content beyond test preparation.
• Incorporate Technology Mindfully: While technology can be a powerful tool for learning, it should be used with educated intentionality to enhance creativity. Educators should look for digital tools that support design thinking, such as 3D modeling software or collaborative platforms.

Creating a Culture of Creativity, Together

In a world where creative problem-solving is increasingly important, design thinking offers a valuable approach to reinvigorating children’s creative potential. By fostering empathy, critical thinking, and hands-on experimentation, design thinking can help address the creativity crisis in education. It encourages children to explore, innovate, and develop the skills needed to thrive in the 21st century. As educators and parents, it is our responsibility to provide opportunities for children to unleash their creativity and become the problem-solvers of tomorrow.

Learn more about design thinking with our training and development resources . 

Also, read our previous blog on free STEM resources , including design thinking lessons.

And if you would like to learn more about resources and programs to integrate design thinking into your school, classroom or homeschool group, please contact us at [email protected] .

Kim Reynolds

Recent updates.

Cultivating Entrepreneurial Skills Through Music in K-12 Classrooms

May 29, 2024

When students collaborate to create a piece of music and perform it for an audience, they are practicing the exact skills of innovation and creativity that we value in entrepreneurship.

Igniting Indigenous Talent: A Story of Tech, Innovation and Entrepreneurial Spirit

November 01, 2023

As we celebrate National Native American Heritage Month, we honor the diverse cultures and important contributions of Indigenous peoples. This month is a chance to understand how having people from

The Benefits of Making Data-Driven Decisions in Business

September 28, 2023

Data collection is the foundation of nearly everything we interact with—what we watch, where we travel, our interests, hobbies, demographics and even our behavior. It’s everywhere. While discussions surrounding data

• Open access
• Published: 28 June 2024

Perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method for clinical competencies in nursing education: a mixed methods study

• Basma Mohammed Al Yazeedi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2327-6918 1 ,
• Lina Mohamed Wali Shakman 1 ,
• Sheeba Elizabeth John Sunderraj   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9171-7239 1 ,
• Harshita Prabhakaran   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5470-7066 1 ,
• Judie Arulappan 1 ,
• Erna Judith Roach   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5817-8886 1 ,
• Aysha Al Hashmi 1 , 2 &
• Zeinab Al Azri   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3376-9380 1  

BMC Nursing volume  23 , Article number:  441 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

24 Accesses

Metrics details

Case analysis is a dynamic and interactive teaching and learning strategy that improves critical thinking and problem-solving skills. However, there is limited evidence about its efficacy as an assessment strategy in nursing education.

This study aimed to explore nursing students’ perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method for clinical competencies in nursing education.

This study used a mixed methods design. Students filled out a 13-item study-advised questionnaire, and qualitative data from the four focus groups was collected. The setting of the study was the College of Nursing at Sultan Qaboos University, Oman. Descriptive and independent t-test analysis was used for the quantitative data, and the framework analysis method was used for the qualitative data.

The descriptive analysis of 67 participants showed that the mean value of the perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method was 3.20 (SD = 0.53), demonstrating an 80% agreement rate. Further analysis indicated that 78.5% of the students concurred with the acceptability of case analysis as an assessment method (mean = 3.14, SD = 0.58), and 80.3% assented its association with clinical competencies as reflected by knowledge and cognitive skills (m = 3.21, SD = 0.60). No significant difference in the perceived efficacy between students with lower and higher GPAs (t [61] = 0.05, p  > 0.05) was identified Three qualitative findings were discerned: case analysis is a preferred assessment method for students when compared to MCQs, case analysis assesses students’ knowledge, and case analysis assesses students’ cognitive skills.

Conclusions

This study adds a potential for the case analysis to be acceptable and relevant to the clinical competencies when used as an assessment method. Future research is needed to validate the effectiveness of case analysis exams in other nursing clinical courses and examine their effects on academic and clinical performance.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Nurses play a critical role in preserving human health by upholding core competencies [ 1 ]. Clinical competence in nursing involves a constant process of acquiring knowledge, values, attitudes, and abilities to deliver safe and high-quality care [ 2 , 3 ]. Nurses possessing such competencies can analyze and judge complicated problems, including those involving crucial patient care, ethical decision-making, and nurse-patient disputes, meeting the constantly altering health needs [ 4 , 5 ]. To optimize the readiness of the new graduates for the challenging clinical work environment needs, nurse leaders call for integrating clinical competencies into the nursing curriculum [ 6 , 7 ] In 2021, the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN) released updated core competencies for professional nursing education [ 8 ]. These competencies were classified into ten fundamental essentials, including knowledge of nursing practice and person-centered care (e.g. integrate assessment skills in practice, diagnose actual or potential health problems and needs, develop a plan of care), representing clinical core competencies.

Nursing programs emphasize clinical competencies through innovative and effective teaching strategies, including case-based teaching (CBT) [ 9 ]. CBT is a dynamic teaching method that enhances the focus on learning goals and increases the chances of the instructor and students actively participating in teaching and learning [ 10 , 11 ]. Additionally, it improves the students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills and enriches their capacity for independent study, cooperation capacity, and communication skills [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. It also broadens students’ perspectives and helps develop greater creativity in fusing theory and practice [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. As the learning environment significantly impacts the students’ satisfaction, case analysis fosters a supportive learning atmosphere and encourages active participation in learning, ultimately improving their satisfaction [ 21 , 22 ].

In addition to proper teaching strategies for clinical competencies, programs are anticipated to evaluate the students’ attainment of such competencies through effective evaluation strategies [ 23 ]. However, deploying objective assessment methods for the competencies remains challenging for most educators [ 24 ]. The standard assessment methods used in clinical nursing courses, for instance, include clinical evaluations (direct observation), skills checklists, Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), and multiple-choice questions (MCQs) written exams [ 25 ]. MCQs tend to test the recall of factual information rather than the application of knowledge and cognitive skills, potentially leading to assessment inaccuracies [ 26 ].

Given the aforementioned outcomes of CBT, the deployment of case analysis as a clinical written exam is more closely aligned with the course’s expected competencies. A mixed methods study was conducted among forty nursing students at the University of Southern Taiwan study concluded that the unfolding case studies create a safe setting where nursing students can learn and apply their knowledge to safe patient care [ 6 ]. In a case analysis, the patient’s sickness emerges in stages including the signs and symptoms of the disease, urgent care to stabilize the patient, and bedside care to enhance recovery. Thus, unfolding the case with several scenarios helps educators track students’ attained competencies [ 27 ]. However, case analysis as an assessment method is sparsely researched [ 28 ]. A literature review over the past five years yielded no studies investigating case analysis as an assessment method, necessitating new evidence. There remains uncertainty regarding its efficacy as an assessment method, particularly from the students’ perspectives [ 29 ]. In this study, we explored the undergraduate nursing students’ perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method for clinical competencies. Results from this study will elucidate the position of case analysis as an assessment method in nursing education. The potential benefits are improved standardization of clinical assessment and the ability to efficiently evaluate a broad range of competencies.

Research design

Mixed-method research with a convergent parallel design was adopted in the study. This approach intends to converge two data types (quantitative and qualitative) at the interpretation stage to ensure an inclusive research problem analysis [ 30 ]. The quantitative aspect of the study was implemented through a cross-sectional survey. The survey captured the perceived efficacy of using case analysis as an assessment method in clinical nursing education. The qualitative part of the study was carried out through a descriptive qualitative method using focus groups to provide an in-depth understanding of the perceived strengths experienced by the students.

Study setting

Data were collected in the College of Nursing at Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), Oman, during the Spring and Fall semesters of 2023. At the end of each clinical course, the students have a clinical written exam and a clinical practical exam, which constitute their final exam. Most clinical courses use multiple-choice questions (MCQs) in their written exam. However, the child health clinical course team initiated the case analysis as an assessment method in the clinical written exam, replacing the MCQs format.

Participants

For this study, the investigators invited undergraduate students enrolled in the child health nursing clinical course in the Spring and Fall semesters of 2023. Currently, the only course that uses case analysis is child health. Other courses use MCQs. A total enumeration sampling technique was adopted. All the students enrolled in child health nursing clinical courses in the Spring and Fall 2023 semesters were invited to participate in the study. In the Spring, 36 students registered for the course, while 55 students were enrolled in the Fall. We included students who completed the case analysis as a final clinical written exam on the scheduled exam time. Students who did not show up for the exam during the scheduled time and students not enrolled in the course during the Spring and Fall of 2023 were excluded. Although different cases were used each semester, both had the same structure and level of complexity. Further, both cases were peer-reviewed.

Case analysis format

The format presents open-ended questions related to a clinical case scenario. It comprises three main sections: Knowledge, Emergency Room, and Ward. The questions in the sections varied in difficulty based on Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy levels, as presented in Table  1 . An answer key was generated to ensure consistency among course team members when correcting the exam. Three experts in child health nursing peer-reviewed both the case analysis exam paper and the answer key paper. The students were allocated two hours to complete the exam.

Study instruments

Quantitative stage.

The researchers developed a study questionnaire to meet the study objectives. It included two parts. The first was about the demographic data, including age, gender, type of residence, year in the program, and cumulative grade point average (GPA). The second part comprised a 13-item questionnaire assessing the perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method. The perceived efficacy was represented by the acceptability of case analysis as an assessment method (Items 1–5 and 13) and the association with clinical competencies (Items 6 to 12). Acceptability involved format organization and clarity, time adequacy, alignment with course objectives, appropriateness to students’ level, and recommendation for implementation in other clinical nursing courses. Clinical competencies-related items were relevant to knowledge (motivation to prepare well for the exam, active learning, interest in topics, collaboration while studying) and cognitive skills (critical thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving skills) (The questionnaire is attached as a supplementary document).

The questionnaire is answered on a 4-point Likert scale: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree. Higher scores indicated better perceived efficacy and vice versa. The tool underwent content validity testing with five experts in nursing clinical education, resulting in an item-content validity index ranging from 0.7 to 1. The Cronbach alpha was 0.83 for acceptability and 0.90 for clinical competencies.

Qualitative stage

For the focus group interviews, the investigators created a semi-structured interview guide to obtain an in-depth understanding of the students’ perceived strengths of case analysis as an assessment method. See Table  2 .

Data collection

Data was collected from the students after they gave their written informed consent. Students were invited to fill out the study questionnaire after they completed the case analysis as a clinical written exam.

All students in the child health course were invited to participate in focus group discussions. Students who approached the PI to participate in the focus group discussion were offered to participate in four different time slots. So, the students chose their time preferences. Four focus groups were conducted in private rooms at the College of Nursing. Two trained and bilingual interviewers attended the focus groups, one as a moderator while the other took notes on the group dynamics and non-verbal communication. The discussion duration ranged between 30 and 60 min. After each discussion, the moderator transcribed the audio recording. The transcriptions were rechecked against the audio recording for accuracy. Later, the transcriptions were translated into English by bilingual researchers fluent in Arabic and English for the analysis.

Rigor and trustworthiness

The rigor and trustworthiness of the qualitative method were enhanced using multiple techniques. Firstly, quantitative data, literature reviews, and focus groups were triangulated. Participants validated the summary after each discussion using member checking to ensure the moderator’s understanding was accurate. Third, the principal investigator (PI) reflected on her assumptions, experiences, expectations, and feelings weekly. In addition, the PI maintained a detailed audit trail of study details and progress. The nursing faculty conducted the study with experience in qualitative research and nursing education. This report was prepared following the Standard for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) protocol [ 31 ].

Data analysis

Quantitative data were entered in SPSS version 24 and analyzed using simple descriptive analysis using means, standard deviations, and percentages. After computing the means of each questionnaire item, an average of the means was calculated to identify the perceived efficacy rate. A similar technique was used to calculate the rate of acceptability and clinical competencies. The percentage was calculated based on the mean: gained score/total score* 100. In addition, the investigators carried out an independent t-test to determine the relationship between the perceived efficacy and students’ GPA.

The qualitative data were analyzed using the framework analysis method. In our analysis, we followed the seven interconnected stages of framework analysis: (1) transcription, (2) familiarization with the interview, (3) coding, (4) developing a working analytical framework, (5) applying the analytical framework, (6) charting data into framework matrix and (7) interpreting the data [ 32 ]. Two members of the team separately analyzed the transcriptions. Then, they discussed the coding, and discrepancies were solved with discussion.

Mixed method integration

In our study, the quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed separately, and integration occurred at the interpretation level by merging the data [ 33 ]. As a measure of integration between qualitative and quantitative data, findings were assessed through confirmation, expansion, and discordance. If both data sets confirmed each other’s findings, it was considered confirmation, and if they expanded each other’s insight, it was considered expansion. Discordance was determined if the findings were contradictory.

Ethical considerations

Ethical approval was obtained from the Research and Ethics Committee of the College of Nursing, SQU (CON/NF/2023/18). Informed consent was collected, and no identifiable information was reported. For the focus group interviews, students were reassured that their grades were finalized, and their participation would not affect their grades. Also, the interviewers were instructed to maintain a non-judgmental and non-biased position during the interview. Data were saved in a locked cabinet inside a locked office room. The electronic data were saved in a password-protected computer.

The results section will present findings from the study’s quantitative and qualitative components. The integration of the two data types is described after each qualitative finding.

Quantitative findings

We analyzed the data of 67 participants, representing a 73.6% response rate. The mean age was 21.0 years old (SD 0.73) and 36.4% were male students. See Table  3 for more details.

The descriptive analysis showed that the mean value of the perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method was 3.20 (SD = 0.53), demonstrating an 80% agreement rate. Further analysis indicated that 78.5% of the students concurred the acceptability of case analysis as an assessment method (mean = 3.14, SD = 0.58) and 80.3% (m = 3.21, SD = 0.60) assented the clinical competencies associated with it.

For the items representing acceptability, 81.8% of the students agreed that the case analysis was written clearly, and 80.3% reported that it was well organized. As per the questions, 81% described they were appropriate to their level, and 79.8% agreed upon their alignment with the course objectives. Moreover, the time allocated was adequate for 74.5% of the students, and 73.5% recommend using case analysis as an evaluation strategy for other clinical written examinations.

Regarding the clinical competencies, 77.3% of students agreed that the case analysis motivated them to prepare well for the exam, 81.3% reported that it encouraged them to be active in learning, and 81.0% indicated that it stimulated their interest in the topics discussed in the course. Additionally, 76.5% of the students agreed that the case analysis encouraged them to collaborate with other students when studying for the exam. Among the students, 82.5% reported that the case analysis as an assessment method enhanced their critical thinking skills, 81.0% agreed that it helped them practice decision-making skills, and 81.8% indicated that it improved their problem-solving abilities. See Table  4 .

The independent t-test analysis revealed no significant difference in the perceived efficacy between students with lower and higher GPAs (t [61] = 0.05, p  > 0.05). Further analysis showed that the means of acceptability and clinical competencies were not significantly different between the lower GPA group and higher GPA group, t [62] = 0.72, p  > 0.05 and t [63] = -0.83, p  > 0.05, respectively (Table  5 ).

Qualitative findings

A total of 22 had participated in four focus groups, each group had 5–6 students. The qualitative framework analysis revealed three main findings; case analysis is a preferred assessment method to students when compared to MCQs, case analysis assesses students’ knowledge, and case analysis assesses students’ cognitive skills.

Qualitative Finding 1: case analysis is a preferred assessment method to students when compared to MCQs

Most of the students’ statements about the case analysis as an assessment method were positive. One student stated, “Previously, we have MCQs in clinical exams, but they look as if they are theory exams. This exam makes me deal with cases like a patient, which is good for clinical courses.” . At the same time, many students conveyed optimism about obtaining better grades with this exam format. A student stated, “Our grades, with case analysis format, will be better, … may be because we can write more in open-ended questions, so we can get some marks, in contrast to MCQs where we may get it right or wrong” . On the other hand, a few students suggested adding multiple-choice questions, deleting the emergency department section, and lessening the number of care plans in the ward section to secure better grades.

Although the case analysis was generally acceptable to students, they have repeatedly expressed a need to allocate more time for this type of exam. A student stated, “The limited time with the type of questions was a problem, …” . When further discussion was prompted to understand this challenge, we figured that students are not used to handwriting, which has caused them to be exhausted during the exam. An example is “writing is time-consuming and energy consuming in contrast to MCQs …” . These statements elucidate that the students don’t necessarily mind writing but recommend more practice as one student stated, “More experience of this type of examination is required, more examples during clinical practice are needed.” Some even recommended adopting this format with other clinical course exams by saying “It’s better to start this method from the first year for the new cohort and to apply it in all other courses.”

Mixed Methods Inference 1: Confirmation and Expansion

The abovementioned qualitative impression supports the high acceptability rate in quantitative analysis. In fact, there is a general agreement that the case analysis format surpasses the MCQs when it comes to the proper evaluation strategies for clinical courses. Expressions in the qualitative data revealed more details, such as the limited opportunities to practice handwriting, which negatively impacted the perceived adequacy of exam time.

Qualitative Finding 2: case analysis assesses students’ knowledge

Students conferred that they were reading more about the disease pathophysiology, lab values, and nursing care plans, which they did not usually do with traditional means of examination. Examples of statements include “… before we were not paying attention to the normal lab results but …in this exam, we went back and studied them which was good for our knowledge” and “we cared about the care plan. In previous exams, we were not bothered by these care plans”. Regarding the burden that could be perceived with this type of preparation, the students expressed that this has helped them prepare for the theory course exam; as one student said, “We also focus on theory lectures to prepare for this exam …. this was very helpful to prepare us for the theory final exam as well.” However, others have highlighted the risks of limiting the exam’s content to one case analysis. The argument was that some students may have not studied the case completely or been adequately exposed to the case in the clinical setting. To solve this risk, the students themselves advocated for frequent case group discussions in the clinical setting as stated by one student: “There could be some differences in the cases that we see during our clinical posting, for that I recommend that instructors allocate some time to gather all the students and discuss different cases.” Also, the participants advocated for more paper-based case analysis exercises as it is helpful to prepare them for the exams and enhance their knowledge and skills.

Mixed Methods Inferences 2: Confirmation and Expansion

The qualitative finding supports the quantitative data relevant to items 6, 7, and 8. Students’ expressions revealed more insights, including the acquisition of deeper knowledge, practicing concept mapping, and readiness for other course-related exams. At the same time, students recommended that faculty ensure all students’ exposure to common cases in the clinical setting for fair exam preparation.

Qualitative Finding 3. case analysis assesses students’ cognitive skills

Several statements conveyed how the case analysis format helped the students use their critical thinking and analysis skills. One student stated, “It, the case analysis format, enhanced our critical thinking skills as there is a case with given data and we analyze the case….” . Therefore, the case analysis format as an exam is potentially a valid means to assess the student’s critical thinking skills. Students also conveyed that the case analysis format helped them link theory to practice and provided them with the platform to think like real nurses and be professional. Examples of statements are: “…we connect our knowledge gained from theory with the clinical experience to get the answers…” and “The questions were about managing a case, which is what actual nurses are doing daily.” Another interesting cognitive benefit to case analysis described by the students was holistic thinking. For example, one student said, “Case analysis format helped us to see the case as a whole and not only from one perspective.”

Mixed Methods Inferences 3: Confirmation

The quantitative data indicated mutual agreement among the students that the case analysis enhanced their critical thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving skills. The students’ statements from the interviews, including critical thinking, linking theory to practice, and holistic thinking, further supported these presumptions.

This research presents the findings from a mixed methods study that explored undergraduate nursing students’ perceived efficacy of using case analysis as an assessment method. The perceived efficacy was reflected through acceptability and association with two core competencies: knowledge and cognitive skills. The study findings showed a high rate of perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method among nursing students. Additionally, three findings were extracted from the qualitative data that further confirmed the perceived efficacy: (1) case analysis is a preferred assessment method to students compared to MCQs, (2) case analysis assesses students’ knowledge, and (3) case analysis assesses students’ cognitive skills. Moreover, the qualitative findings revealed details that expanded the understanding of the perceived efficacy among nursing students.

Previous literature reported students’ preference for case analysis as a teaching method. A randomized controlled study investigated student’s satisfaction levels with case-based teaching, in addition to comparing certain outcomes between a traditional teaching group and a case-based teaching group. They reported that most students favored the use of case-based teaching, whom at the same time had significantly better OSCE scores compared to the other group [ 34 ]. As noted, this favorable teaching method ultimately resulted in better learning outcomes and academic performance. Although it may be challenging since no answer options are provided, students appreciate the use of case analysis format in their exams because it aligns better with the course objectives and expected clinical competencies. The reason behind students’ preference for case analysis is that it allows them to interact with the teaching content and visualize the problem, leading to a better understanding. When case analysis is used as an assessment method, students can connect the case scenario presented in the exam to their clinical training, making it more relevant.

In this study, students recognized the incorporation of nursing knowledge in the case analysis exam. They also acknowledged improved knowledge and learning abilities similar to those observed in case-based teaching. Boney et al. (2015) reported that students perceived increased learning gains and a better ability to identify links between different concepts and other aspects of life through case-based teaching [ 35 ]. Additionally, case analysis as an exam promotes students’ in-depth acquirement of knowledge through the type of preparation it entails. Literature suggested that case-based teaching promotes self-directed learning with high autonomous learning ability [ 34 , 36 ]. Thus, better achievement in the case analysis exam could be linked with a higher level of knowledge, making it a suitable assessment method for knowledge integration in nursing care.

The findings of this study suggest that case analysis can be a useful tool for evaluating students’ cognitive skills, such as critical thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving. A randomized controlled study implied better problem-solving abilities among the students in the case-based learning group compared to those in the traditional teaching methods group [ 12 ]. Moreover, students in our study conveyed that case analysis as an exam was an opportunity for them to think like real nurses. Similar to our findings, a qualitative study on undergraduate nutrition students found that case-based learning helped students develop professional competencies for their future practice, in addition to higher-level cognitive skills [ 37 ]. Therefore, testing students through case analysis allows educators to assess the student’s readiness for entry-level professional competencies, including the thinking process. Also, to evaluate students’ high-level cognitive skills according to Bloom’s taxonomy (analysis, synthesis, and evaluation), which educators often find challenging.

Case analysis as an assessment method for clinical courses is partially integrated in case presentation or OSCE evaluation methods. However, the written format is considered to be more beneficial for both assessment and learning processes. A qualitative study was conducted to examine the impact of paper-based case learning versus video-based case learning on clinical decision-making skills among midwifery students. The study revealed that students paid more attention and were able to focus better on the details when the case was presented in a paper format [ 38 ]. Concurrently, the students in our study recommended more paper-based exercises, which they believed would improve their academic performance.

This study has possible limitations. The sample size was small due to the limited experience of case analysis as a clinical written exam in the program. Future studies with larger sample sizes and diverse nursing courses are needed for better generalizability.

Implications

Little evidence relates to the efficacy of case analysis as an evaluation method, suggesting the novelty of this study. Despite the scarcity of case-based assessment studies, a reader can speculate from this study’s findings that there is a potential efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method in nursing education. Future research is warranted to validate the effectiveness of case-analysis assessment methods and investigate the effects of case-analysis exams on academic and clinical performance.

Overall, our findings are in accordance with the evidence suggesting students’ perceived efficacy of case analysis as a teaching method. This study adds a potential for the case analysis to be acceptable and relevant to the clinical competencies when used as an assessment method. Future research is needed to validate the effectiveness of case analysis exams in other nursing clinical courses and examine their effects on academic and clinical performance.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available fromthe Principal Investigator (BAY) upon reasonable request.

Iriarte-Roteta A, Lopez‐Dicastillo O, Mujika A, Ruiz‐Zaldibar C, Hernantes N, Bermejo‐Martins E, Pumar‐Méndez MJ. Nurses’ role in health promotion and prevention: a critical interpretive synthesis. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(21–22):3937–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15441

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Fukada M. Nursing competency: definition, structure and development. Yonago Acta Med. 2018;61(1):001–7. https://doi.org/10.33160/yam.2018.03.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Nabizadeh-Gharghozar Z, Alavi NM, Ajorpaz NM. Clinical competence in nursing: a hybrid concept analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;97:104728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2020.104728

Allande-Cussó R, Fernández-García E, Porcel-Gálvez AM. Defining and characterising the nurse–patient relationship: a concept analysis. Nurs Ethics. 2021;29(2):462–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/09697330211046651

Butts JB, Rich KL. Nursing ethics: across the curriculum and into practice. Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2019.

Chen W, Shah UV, Brechtelsbauer C. A framework for hands-on learning in chemical engineering education—training students with the end goal in mind. Educ Chem Eng. 2019;28:25–9.

Willman A, Bjuresäter K, Nilsson J. Newly graduated registered nurses’ self-assessed clinical competence and their need for further training. Nurs Open. 2020;7(3):720–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.443

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2021). The essentials: Core competencies for professional nursing education. In. Retrieved from n.d.). American Association of Colleges of Nursing. https://www.aacnnursing.org/Portals/0/PDFs/Publications/Essentials-2021.pdf

Kaur G, Rehncy J, Kahal KS, Singh J, Sharma V, Matreja PS, Grewal H. Case-based learning as an effective tool in teaching pharmacology to undergraduate medical students in a large group setting. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2020;7:2382120520920640.

Patiraki E, Katsaragakis S, Dreliozi A, Prezerakos P. Nursing care plans based on NANDA, nursing interventions classification, and nursing outcomes classification: the investigation of the effectiveness of an educational intervention in Greece. Int J Nurs Knowl. 2017;28:88–93.

Cui C, Li Y, Geng D, Zhang H, Jin C. The effectiveness of evidence-based nursing on development of nursing students ‘critical thinking: a meta-analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2018;65:46–53.

Bi M, Zhao Z, Yang J, Wang Y. Comparison of case-based learning and traditional method in teaching postgraduate students of medical oncology. Med Teach. 2019;41(10):1124–8.

Seshan V, Matua GA, Raghavan D, Arulappan J, Al Hashmi I, Roach EJ, Prince EJ. Case study analysis as an effective teaching strategy: perceptions of undergraduate nursing students from a Middle Eastern Country. SAGE Open Nurs. 2021;7:23779608211059265.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Slieman TA, Camarata T. Case-based group learning using concept maps to achieve multiple educational objectives and behavioral outcomes. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2019;6:2382120519872510.

Yu Z, Hu R, Ling S, Zhuang J, Chen Y, Chen M, Lin Y. Effects of blended versus offline case-centered learning on the academic performance and critical thinking ability of undergraduate nursing students: a cluster randomized controlled trial. Nurse Educ Pract. 2021;53:103080.

Chan AW, Chair SY, Sit JW, Wong EM, Lee DT, Fung OW. Case-based web learning versus face-to-face learning: a mixed-method study on university nursing students. J Nurs Res. 2016;24(1):31–40.

Hong S, Yu P. Comparison of the effectiveness of two styles of case-based learning implemented in lectures for developing nursing students’ critical thinking ability: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2017;68:16–24.

Shohani M, Bastami M, Gheshlaghi LA, Nasrollahi A. Nursing student’s satisfaction with two methods of CBL and lecture-based learning. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):1–5.

Tan KW. Using Teaching Cases for Achieving Bloom’s High-Order Cognitive Levels: An Application in Technically-Oriented Information Systems Course (2017). 2017 Proceedings. 1. http://aisel.aisnet.org/siged2017/1

Farashahi M, Tajeddin M. Effectiveness of teaching methods in business education: a comparison study on the learning outcomes of lectures, case studies and simulations. Int J Manage Educ. 2018;16(1):131–42.

Google Scholar  

Farha RJA, Zein MH, Al Kawas S. Introducing integrated case-based learning to clinical nutrition training and evaluating students’ learning performance. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2021;16(4):558–64.

Picciano AG. Theories and frameworks for Online Education: seeking an Integrated Model. Online Learn. 2017;213:166–90.

Bezanilla MJ, Fernández-Nogueira D, Poblete M, Galindo-Domínguez H. Methodologies for teaching-learning critical thinking in higher education: the teacher’s view. Think Skills Creativity. 2019;33:100584.

Immonen K, Oikarainen A, Tomietto M, Kääriäinen M, Tuomikoski A-M, Kaučič BM, Perez-Canaveras RM. Assessment of nursing students’ competence in clinical practice: a systematic review of reviews. Int J Nurs Stud. 2019;100:103414.

Oermann MH, Gaberson KB, De Gagne JC, NPD-BC C. Evaluation and testing in nursing education. Springer Publishing Company; 2024.

McCarty T. (2020). How to Build Assessments for Clinical Learners. Roberts Academic Medicine Handbook: A Guide to Achievement and Fulfillment for Academic Faculty, 83–90.

Gholami M, Changaee F, Karami K, Shahsavaripour Z, Veiskaramian A, Birjandi M. Effects of multiepisode case-based learning (CBL) on problem-solving ability and learning motivation of nursing students in an emergency care course. J Prof Nurs. 2021;37(3):612–9.

King N. (2016, April). Case-based exams for learning and assessment: Experiences in an information systems course [ Confeence presentation]. In 2016 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) , Abu Dhabi, UAE.

Pereira D, Flores MA, Niklasson L. Assessment revisited: a review of research in Assessment and evaluation in Higher Education. Assess Evaluation High Educ. 2016;41(7):1008–32.

Creswell JW, Poth CN. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. SAGE; 2016.

O’Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245–51.

Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-117

Fetters MD, Curry LA, Creswell JW. Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health Serv Res. 2013;48(6pt2):2134–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Liu L, Li M, Zheng Q, Jiang H. The effects of case-based teaching in nursing skill education: cases do matter. INQUIRY. J Health Care Organ Provis Financing. 2020;57:004695802096442.

Bonney KM. Case study teaching methods improve student performance and perceptions of learning gains. J Microbiol Biology Educ. 2015;16(1):21–8.

Rezaee R, Mosalanejad L. The effects of case-based team learning on students’ learning, self-regulation, and self-direction. Global J Health Sci. 2015;7(4):295.

Harman T, Bertrand B, Greer A, Pettus A, Jennings J, Wall-Bassett E, Babatunde OT. Case-based learning facilitates critical thinking in undergraduate nutrition education: students describe the big picture. J Acad Nutr Dietetics. 2015;115(3):378–88.

Nunohara K, Imafuku R, Saiki T, Bridges SM, Kawakami C, Tsunekawa K, Niwa M, Fujisaki K, Suzuki Y. (2020). How does video case-based learning influence clinical decision-making by midwifery students? An exploratory study. BMC Med Educ, 20 (1).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the nursing students at SQU who voluntarily participated in this study.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Sultan Qaboos University, Al Khodh 66, Muscat, 123, Oman

Basma Mohammed Al Yazeedi, Lina Mohamed Wali Shakman, Sheeba Elizabeth John Sunderraj, Harshita Prabhakaran, Judie Arulappan, Erna Judith Roach, Aysha Al Hashmi & Zeinab Al Azri

Oman College of Health Science, Norht Sharqia Branch, Ibra 66, Ibra, 124, Oman

Aysha Al Hashmi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Dr. Basma Mohammed Al Yazeedi contributed to conceptualization, methods, data collection, data analysis, writing the draft, and reviewing the final draft. Ms. Lina Mohamed Wali Shakman contributed to conceptualization, data collection, data analysis, writing the draft, and reviewing the final draft. Ms. Sheeba Elizabeth John Sunderraj contributed to conceptualization, methods, data collection, writing the draft, and reviewing the final draft.Ms. Harshita Prabhakaran contributed to conceptualization, data collection, writing the draft, and reviewing the final draft.Dr. Judie Arulappan contributed to conceptualization and reviewing the final draft.Dr. Erna Roach contributed to conceptualization writing the draft and reviewing the final draft.Ms. Aysha Al Hashmi contributed to the conceptualization and reviewing the final draft. Dr. Zeinab Al Azri contributed to data collection, data analysis, writing the draft, and reviewing the final draft.All auhors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscirpt.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zeinab Al Azri .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval was obtained from the Research and Ethics Committee of the College of Nursing, Sultan Qaboos University SQU (CON/NF/2023/18). All data was held and stored following the SQU data policy retention. Informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1:

The questionnaire used in this study is attached as a supplementary document.

Supplementary Material 2

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Yazeedi, B.M.A., Shakman, L.M.W., Sunderraj, S.E.J. et al. Perceived efficacy of case analysis as an assessment method for clinical competencies in nursing education: a mixed methods study. BMC Nurs 23 , 441 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02102-9

Download citation

Received : 07 April 2024

Accepted : 17 June 2024

Published : 28 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02102-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Case-analysis
• Clinical competency
• Nursing education

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Beware of fake email, SMS and WhatsApp messages: check before clicking. Read more

National Institute of Education (NIE)

How can we help you.

Financial Matters

Student Exchange

Student Life

Overseas exchanges

Course finder

Alumni events

Alumni stories

Professional development

Alumni discounts

Research Focus

Research Hub

Academic partners

Research collaborations.

Information for Suppliers

Suppliers User Guide for Ariba

Singapore researcher’s innovative approach to sustainability education.

“Research unlocks data and new information, allowing us to better understand our world better, make more informed decisions, and ultimately benefit society and nature.”

Meet Dr Tricia Seow, a geography educator and researcher at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore (NIE NTU Singapore). Her research interests include creating board games that facilitate student learning through reflective and critical thinking.

“I have always found that stepping outside of just “doing” work, to investigate more deeply why we do this work, and how or what we do can be (re)framed and understood, is deeply enriching and fuels my ongoing passion for my work at NIE,” shares Dr Seow.

Indeed, this philosophy guides her approach to research, where she investigates the types of curricula and classroom strategies that can better engage students’ hearts and minds regarding sustainability issues. As a result, Dr Seow’s passion in both the classroom and the field sees her marrying sustainability and environmental education with geographical inquiry.

Take for example, in recent years, Dr Seow observed that many students who live in urban settings like Singapore feel little connection to nature. According to Dr Seow, they often disengage from sustainability challenges due to a sense of hopelessness and a misconception about their lack of agency as individuals to effect change. From the perspective of a researcher, this interestingly presented Dr Seow with the opportunity to study how curriculum can foster nature-connectedness in students and encourage self-efficacy and hope in the classroom. 

“Nature has aesthetic and recreational value to our urban youth, but there is little appreciation for biodiversity that is a crucial part of nature,” highlights Dr Seow.

By co-developing a game,  haBEEtat , that teaches students about the role that local honeybees play in an urban ecosystem, Dr Seow also hopes that students will be educated about the threats bees face, and the decisions that individuals can take to protect bees when they move into residential spaces.

“I believe that education can play an important role in nurturing informed and active citizens with the knowledge, skills and dispositions to want to rise to the challenges of the day,” says Dr Seow.

On a broader scale, Dr Seow has also developed and conducted workshops based on a climate policy game that helps learners understand the tradeoffs that must be made in transiting to a carbon neutral world. “In both of these instances, I found research into the affordances of card and board games to support self-directed learning and foster emotional affinity with these topics helpful,” smiles Dr Seow. In addition, she believes that her research on developing critical thinking through inquiry-based learning and creating a dialogic classroom culture also supported the facilitation of the games to encourage critical and reflective thinking in learners.

Furthermore, Dr Seow reveals that the games and accompanying workshops and resources have been welcomed by educators in schools across Southeast Asia, and government agencies and statutory boards in Singapore. “This gives me a sense of satisfaction as I have seen how my research projects have come together to support and promote sustainability education,” says Dr Seow.

When asked what she might have done differently if she could start over again as a researcher, Dr Seow reflects thoughtfully, “I would not. Every piece of work I have done helps me to be a better education researcher and has its place and time in my personal growth as a researcher.”

And to those who aspire to become a researcher, Dr Seow has this to advise – Graduate research can be a deeply rewarding journey if one has a sense of purpose for doing research and is deeply committed to using research to better the world.

If you share Dr Seow’s interest in sustainability and sustainability education, consider taking a step towards making an impact in real-world practice. The Humanities and Social Studies Academic Department (HSSE) at NIE is home to the Sustainability Learning Lab (SLL) in Singapore where content experts who work in the science of sustainability and education experts who research curriculum, learning and assessment come together to contribute to teaching and learning.

To find out more about Dr Tricia Seow and the research by HSSE at NIE, please visit  https://www.ntu.edu.sg/nie/about-us/academic-groups/humanities-and-social-studies-education

NIE is currently accepting applications for Graduate Programmes by Research until 25 July 2024. Apply today  https://ntu.sg/NIEGradProgIntake  and join in the journey to bring research to life!

NIE is an autonomous institute under the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. It is ranked among the world’s top 15 universities and Asia’s top three education institutions by the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) ranking by subjects.

Read the original article here .

Related stories

NTU professor explores complexity of emotions in learning and research

NTU毕业生 | NIE让我成长：不为人生设限，坚持自己的节奏

NTU毕业生 | NIE：我圆梦艺术追求的浪漫之地

Returning to school to become a better educator and leader

askST Jobs: Work-study, specialist, advanced, postgraduate – which diploma variant to pick?

Overseas Graduate Scholarship

How IBM helps Wimbledon use generative AI to drive personalised fan engagement

This collaboration with Wimbledon teams extends beyond the fan-facing digital platform, into enterprise-wide transformation.

Authentication vs. authorization: What’s the difference?

6 min read - Authentication verifies a user’s identity, while authorization gives the user the right level of access to system resources.

Applying generative AI to revolutionize telco network operations 

5 min read - Learn the many potential applications that operators and suppliers are capitalizing on to enhance network operations for telco.

Re-evaluating data management in the generative AI age

4 min read - A good place to start is refreshing the way organizations govern data, particularly as it pertains to its usage in generative AI solutions.

Top 7 risks to your identity security posture

5 min read - Identity misconfigurations and blind spots stand out as critical concerns that undermine an organization’s identity security posture.

June 27, 2024

IBM announces new AI assistant and feature innovations at Think 2024

June 26, 2024

A major upgrade to Db2® Warehouse on IBM Cloud®

June 25, 2024

Increase efficiency in asset lifecycle management with Maximo Application Suite’s new AI-power...

Achieving operational efficiency through Instana’s Intelligent Remediation

June 24, 2024

Manage the routing of your observability log and event data 

Best practices for augmenting human intelligence with AI

2 min read - Enabling participation in the AI-driven economy to be underpinned by fairness, transparency, explainability, robustness and privacy. 

Microcontrollers vs. microprocessors: What’s the difference?

6 min read - Microcontroller units (MCUs) and microprocessor units (MPUs) are two kinds of integrated circuits that, while similar in certain ways, are very different in many others.

Mastering budget control in the age of AI: Leveraging on-premises and cloud XaaS for success 

2 min read - As organizations harness the power of AI while controlling costs, leveraging anything as a service (XaaS) models emerges as strategic.

Highlights by topic

Use IBM Watsonx’s AI or build your own machine learning models

Automate IT infrastructure management

Cloud-native software to secure resources and simplify compliance

Run code on real quantum systems using a full-stack SDK

Aggregate and analyze large datasets

Store, query and analyze structured data

Manage infrastructure, environments and deployments

Run workloads on hybrid cloud infrastructure

Responsible AI can revolutionize tax agencies to improve citizen services

Generative AI can revolutionize tax administration and drive toward a more personalized and ethical future.

Intesa Sanpaolo and IBM secure digital transactions with fully homomorphic encryption

6 min read - Explore how European bank Intesa Sanpaolo and IBM partnered to deliver secure digital transactions using fully homomorphic encryption.

What is AI risk management?

8 min read - AI risk management is the process of identifying, mitigating and addressing the potential risks associated with AI technologies.

How IBM and AWS are partnering to deliver the promise of responsible AI

4 min read - This partnership between IBM and Amazon SageMaker is poised to play a pivotal role in shaping responsible AI practices across industries

Speed, scale and trustworthy AI on IBM Z with Machine Learning for IBM z/OS v3.2 

4 min read - Machine Learning for IBM® z/OS® is an AI platform made for IBM z/OS environments, combining data and transaction gravity with AI infusion.

The recipe for RAG: How cloud services enable generative AI outcomes across industries

4 min read - While the AI is the key component of the RAG framework, other “ingredients” such as PaaS solutions are integral to the mix

Rethink IT spend in the age of generative AI

3 min read - It's critical for organizations to consider frameworks like FinOps and TBM for visibility and accountability of all tech expenditure.

IBM Newsletters