Division of Practice Advancement and Clinical Education, Center for Innovative Pharmacy Education and Research, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America.
Department of Health Behavior, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 24;17(3):e0265902. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265902. eCollection 2022.
A growing body of literature highlights the increasing demand on college graduates to possess the problem finding, problem framing, and problem-solving skills necessary to address complex real-world challenges. Design thinking (DT) is an iterative, human-centered approach to problem solving that synthesizes what is desirable, equitable, technologically feasible, and sustainable. As universities expand efforts to train students with DT mindsets and skills, we must assess faculty and student DT practices and outcomes to better understand DT course experiences. Understanding how DT is taught and experienced within higher education can help schools promote student learning and align their training programs with professional, personal, and civic needs. In this study, surveys were completed by 19 faculty and 196 students from 23 courses at four universities. DT teaching and learning was characterized by three DT practices and five outcomes. Statistically significant differences were found by discipline of study and student type (i.e., graduate vs undergraduate), but not by gender or race/ethnicity. These results can be used to inform the development of classroom-based DT teaching and learning strategies across higher education institutions and disciplines.
越来越多的文献强调,大学毕业生需要具备发现问题、构建问题框架和解决问题的能力,以应对复杂的现实世界挑战。设计思维(DT)是一种迭代的、以人为中心的问题解决方法,它综合了理想、公平、技术可行性和可持续性。随着大学加大力度培养具有 DT 思维和技能的学生,我们必须评估教师和学生的 DT 实践和成果,以更好地了解 DT 课程体验。了解 DT 在高等教育中的教学和体验方式,可以帮助学校促进学生学习,并使他们的培训计划与专业、个人和公民需求保持一致。在这项研究中,来自四所大学的 23 门课程的 19 名教师和 196 名学生完成了调查。DT 的教学和学习特点是三种 DT 实践和五种成果。研究发现,学科和学生类型(即研究生与本科生)存在显著差异,但性别和种族/族裔不存在差异。这些结果可用于为跨高等教育机构和学科的课堂 DT 教学和学习策略的发展提供信息。