Design Thinking in Education: An Approach through Systematic Literature Review Tools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53591/3gv35902Keywords:
Design, Thinking, education, tools, creativityAbstract
Design Thinking (DT) is a teaching methodology that fosters soft skills in students. To explore new lines of research regarding its application, it is important to rely on high-quality Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs), which must be developed using appropriate methodological tools. The objective is to analyze the application of SLR tools to DT in education. A qualitative, documentary, exploratory, and descriptive approach was used, employing the databases Scopus, Dimensions, and SciELO, with research lines focused on DT and education. The results identify PRISMA, SPIDER, SALSA, and MMAT as the most commonly used tools in SLRs, though not specifically in DT. The use of MMAT in mixed-method studies on DT is recommended for future research.
References
Alvarado, L. (2025). Design thinking as an active teaching methodology in higher education: A systematic review. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1462938
Álvarez, J.-F. (2022). Active methodologies among secondary STEM teachers. Use and perceptions. Human Review. International Humanities Review / Revista Internacional de Humanidades, 11. https://doi.org/10.37467/revhuman.v11.3860
Barbosa, G. M., & Estupiñán, B. L. (2023). La metodología activa Design Thinking para mejorar y transformar los procesos de enseñanza y aprendizaje. Ibero-American Journal of Education & Society Research, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.56183/iberoeds.v3i1.600
Bathla, A., Chawla, G., & Gupta, A. (2025). Design Thinking in Education: Reviewing the Past for Setting Future Research. Journal of the Knowledge Economy. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02387-w
Benavides, K. M., Aguilar, G. P., & Benavides, Y. M. (2021). Aplicación de Design Thinking como metodología para el aprendizaje en cursos universitarios. Accedacris ULPGC. https://accedacris.ulpgc.es/handle/10553/113228
Bent, M., Velazquez-Godinez, E., & Jong, F. D. (2023). Systematic Literature Review With PRISMA and NLP on Co-Creative Learning in Higher Education. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of the Learning Sciences - ICLS 2023. https://doi.org/10.22318/icls2023.644003
Brown, T., & Wyatt, J. (2010). Design Thinking for Social Innovation. Development Outreach, 12(1), 29-43. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3353133
Cabanillas, J. L. (2025). The Application of Active Methodologies in Spain: An Investigation of Teachers’ Use, Perceived Student Acceptance, Attitude, and Training Needs Across Various Educational Levels. Education Sciences, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020210
Castro, P. A., & Vargas, F. A. (2024). Aula Invertida, Revisión Sistemática y Prospectiva en el Contexto de la Educación Física. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar, 8(4), 6386-6409. https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v8i4.12835
Codina, L. (2020, Julio 24). Cómo hacer revisiones bibliográficas con bases de datos académicas: Preguntas y respuestas. Lluís Codina. https://www.lluiscodina.com/revisiones-bibliograficas-bases-de-datos/
Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: The SPIDER Tool for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1435-1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938
Dam, R. F., & Siang, T. Y. (2022, May 20). The History of Design Thinking. The Interaction Design Foundation. https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/design-thinking-get-a-quick-overview-of-the-history
Deng, Y., & Liu, W. (2023). How to Develop Engineering Students as Design Thinkers: A Systematic Review of Design Thinking Implementations in Engineering Education. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/how-to-develop-engineering-students-as-design-thinkers-a-systemat
Elsman, E. B. M., Butcher, N. J., Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Tricco, A., Gagnier, J. J., Aiyegbusi, O. L., Barnett, C., Smith, M., Moher, D., & Offringa, M. (2022). Study protocol for developing, piloting and disseminating the PRISMA-COSMIN guideline: A new reporting guideline for systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments. Systematic Reviews, 11(1), 121. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-01994-5
Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., Rousseau, M.-C., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2018). La Herramienta de Evaluación de Métodos Mixtos (MMAT) versión 2018 para profesionales de la información e investigadores. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221
Gustavsen, N. (2022). LibGuides: Qualitative Research: Developing a Mixed-Methods Question: SPIDER. Gonzaga University. https://researchguides.gonzaga.edu/qualitative/spider
Hong, Q., Pluye, P., Fabregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., & Cargo, M. (2018). Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018 User Guide. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT). https://www.nccmt.ca/knowledge-repositories/search/232
Hutton, B., Salanti, G., Caldwell, D. M., Chaimani, A., Schmid, C. H., Cameron, C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Moher, D. (2015). The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M14-2385
Lacárcel, A., Zaragoza, J. M. V., & Lacárcel, F. J. S. (2022). Main innovative methodologies currently being applied in higher education. Teaching innovation in university education: Case studies and main practices (pp. 1-17). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-4441-2.ch001
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A., diSessa, A., Graesser, A., Benson, L., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. (2019). Design and Design Thinking in STEM Education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 2(1), 93-104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-019-00020-z
Man, M. Z. G., Hidayat, R., Kashmir, M. K., Suhaimi, N. F., Adnan, M., & Saswandila, A. (2022). Design Thinking in mathematics education for primary school: a systematic literature review. Alifmatika: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran Matematika, 4(1), 17-36. https://doi.org/10.35316/alifmatika.2022.v4i1.17-36
Manterola, C., Rivadeneira, J., Delgado, H., Sotelo, C., & Otzen, T. (2023). ¿Cuántos Tipos de Revisiones de la Literatura Existen? Enumeración, Descripción y Clasificación. Revisión Cualitativa. International Journal of Morphology, 41(4), 1240-1253. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022023000401240
Matamoros, L., & Cubillo, B. (2025). Modelos educativos en la formación en Educación Especial, Universidad de Costa Rica (1996-2023). Actualidades Investigativas en Educación, 25(1), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.15517/aie.v25i1.60740
Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Legese, G. (2020). Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX, 7, 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339, b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
Nurhayati, P., Widodo, A., & Syamsudin, A. (2023). The Review of Fundamental Framework for Reflective Thinking and Practice in Science Education: Implications for
Transformative Science Learning. Journal of Innovative Science Education, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.15294/jise.v12i3.78189
Oliveira, G., Aredes, N. D. A., Cecilio, J. O., Oliveira, F. S. E., Cavalcante, A. M. R. Z., & Campbell, S. H. (2025). Active methodologies in teaching the nursing process: Scoping review. Nurse Education in Practice, 83, 104274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104274
Orbe, G. A. S., Barrera, M. E. C., & Gaona, J. G. C. (2025). Creative Thinking: A Systematic Review of The Literature of The Last Five Years. Revista de Gestão Social e Ambiental, 19(1), e010684. https://doi.org/10.24857/rgsa.v19n1-017
Pace, R., Pluye, P., Bartlett, G., Macaulay, A. C., Salsberg, J., Jagosh, J., & Seller, R. (2012). Testing the reliability and efficiency of the pilot Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) for systematic mixed studies review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 49(1), 47-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.07.002
Pacheco, R. J. P., Miranda, L. C. B., Sánchez, R. A. T., Caicedo-Quiroz, R., Maqueira-Caraballo, G., & Barzola-Monteses, J. (2025). PRISMA Guidelines: Methodological Adaptation for Systematic Reviews in Education. Data and Metadata, 4, 698. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2025698
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pernecky, T. (2007). Immersing in Ontology and the Research Process: Constructivism the Foundation for Exploring the (In)Credible OBE? The critical turn in tourism studies: Innovative research methods (pp. 211-226). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080470986-16
Pluye, P., Gagnon, M.-P., Griffiths, F., & Johnson-Lafleur, J. (2009). A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(4), 529-546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.01.009
Rahman, A., Santosa, T. A., Sofianora, A., Oktavianti, F., Alawiyah, R., Putra, R., & Ilwandri, I. (2023). Systematic Literature Review: TPACK-Integrated Design Thinking in Education. International Journal of Education and Literature, 2(1), 57. https://ijel.asia/index.php/ijel/article/view/57
Rodríguez, D. M. (2020). Design Thinking para la docencia universitaria en bibliotecología. Bibliotecas, 38(2), 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.15359/rb.38-2.1
Rodríguez, F. J., Pérez, M. E., & Ulloa, Ó. (2021). Aula invertida y su impacto en el rendimiento académico: Una revisión sistematizada del período 2015-2020. EDMETIC, 10(2), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v10i2.13240
Samaniego, M., Usca, N., Salguero, J., & Quevedo, W. (2024). Creative Thinking in Art and Design Education: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences, 14(2), 192. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020192
Scott, C. L. (2015). Investigación y prospectiva en la educación (Reporte No. ED.2015/WS/23). UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000242996_spa
Sell, R. (2018, Junio 29). Design Thinking: A Beginner’s Guide to the History, Terminologies and Methodologies. Medium. https://blog.prototypr.io/design-thinking-a-beginners-guide-to-the-history-terminologies-and-methodologies-e527f7afdcd1
Shahzad, S., Kairuz, T., Thiruchelvam, K., & Din Babar, Z. U. (2020). Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis in Pharmacy Practice. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis in pharmacy practice (pp. 237-250). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2993-1_12
Souto, R. Q., Khanassov, V., Hong, Q. N., Bush, P. L., Vedel, I., & Pluye, P. (2015). Systematic mixed studies reviews: Updating results on the reliability and efficiency of the mixed methods appraisal tool. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 52(1), 500-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.08.010
Sun, Y., Wang, C., & Hu, S. (2023). An Overview of the Literature on Design Thinking in Education and Educational Research. Journal of Education and Educational Research, 2(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.54097/jeer.v2i3.7745
Szczepanska, J. (2017). Design thinking origin story plus some of the people who made it all happen. Medium. https://szczpanks.medium.com/design-thinking-where-it-came-from-and-the-type-of-people-who-made-it-all-happen-dc3a05411e53
Tapia, V. O. (2025). Liderazgo educativo en crisis durante la pandemia por Covid-19 en América Latina. Revista Enfoques Educacionales, 22(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5354/2735-7279.2025.77490
Urrútia, G., & Bonfill, X. (2010). Declaración PRISMA: Una propuesta para mejorar la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis. Medicina Clínica, 135(11), 507-511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medcli.2010.01.015
Welch, V. A., Petticrew, M., Petkovic, J., Moher, D., Waters, E., Howard, W., & Tugwell, P. (2016). Extending the PRISMA statement to equity-focused systematic reviews (PRISMA-E 2012): Explanation and elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 77, 68-75. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19439342.2015.1113196
Withell, A., & Haigh, N. (2013, May 14). Developing Design Thinking Expertise in Higher Education. DRS // CUMULUS 2013: International Conference for Design Education Researchers. https://doi.org/10.21606/learnxdesign.2013.160
Zhang, H. B., Xiong, X., Zhu, P. L., & Kong, F. R. (2014). Research of a new theoretical model of innovative design methodology. Advanced Materials Research, 853, 565-570. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.853.565
Zhao, B., Hu, K., Zeng, X., Kwong, J., Tian, G., Xion, J., Zhaoxia, L., Junqiang, N., Mingyue, J., Yang, J. W., Chen, L., Juangua, Z., & Bin, M. (2016). Development of a reporting guideline for systematic reviews of animal experiments in the field of traditional Chinese medicine. Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 9(4), 231-240. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12480
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 PhD. Patricio Medina Chicaiza, Lilibeth Fonseca Balseca
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
