MIDDLE school students, DESIGN failures, DESIGN thinking, SUSTAINABLE engineering, BENEFIT performances, and RAPID prototyping

Background: Design thinking, with its emphasis on iterative prototyping and mantra of "fail early and often," stands in stark contrast to the typical one‐and‐done, failure‐averse culture of the classroom. Iterative prototyping and fail‐forward mindsets could promote valuable iterative practices and positive reactions to failure, but little research has examined their impact in K‐12 contexts. Purpose: In two studies, we investigated the effect of a brief prototyping intervention on students' iterative knowledge, desires, and behaviors; self‐reported reactions to failure; and performance on a design challenge. Design/Method: Study participants included 78 and 89 students in grades five and six, respectively. Students in an iterative prototyping condition (Prototype) were taught the process and fail‐forward mindset of iterative prototyping. In a comparative, content‐focused condition (Content), students focused on using science and math concepts in design. Results: In both studies, Prototype students gained greater knowledge of iterative prototyping, reported a greater desire to iterate, and engaged in more iterative behaviors on a novel, unsupported design challenge than Content students. In Study 2, students in the Prototype condition reported more positive affect and actions in reaction to failure and produced more successful designs than their Content counterparts. However, regardless of condition, students who iterated earlier created more successful designs. Conclusions: These studies provide an existence proof that instruction on the iterative prototyping process and mindset can encourage students to try early and often and promote healthier reactions to failure. This work also demonstrated a performance benefit to testing one's design early in the design process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

POPULATION health, PUBLIC health, RAPID prototyping, HEALTH behavior, and MEDICAL policy

In the era of precision medicine, where sequencing genome technology is emerging and extending to the general public, a question remains unclear: Can we bridge policies and programs to foster a human‐centered focus on public health and wellness using personalized medical technology? Public health wellness is a byproduct of the social determinants of health and genetic factors. Research has shown that our epigenetic influences impact our health and well‐being more significantly than what is in our genetic code. How might we design our health and wellness efforts to achieve a healthier population? This commentary highlights the application of design thinking as a driver toward a human‐centered approach in developing policy by maximizing our understanding of genetic code and new technology in the context of human needs and values for population health. Using the parameters of a design thinking theoretical approach, this paper suggests using a logic model framework to assess and evaluate the impact of precision medicine initiatives on public health and public wellness. By applying the core principles of design thinking: (i) empathy, (ii) observation, (iii) ideation, (iv) prototyping, and (v) experimentation in a system framework, we can foster a collaborative, collective approach to transforming public health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Future Studies Research Journal: Trends & Strategies is the property of Future Studies Research Journal: Trends & Strategies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

CONSTRUCTION materials, TELEOLOGY, GREEN technology, RAPID prototyping, CASE studies, ARCHITECTURAL designs, and SUSTAINABLE development

Choosing building materials is usually the stage that follows design in the architectural design process, and is rarely used as a main input and driver for the design of the whole building's geometries or structures. As an approach to have control over the environmental impact of the applied building materials and their after-use scenarios, an approach has been initiated by the author through a series of research studies, architectural built prototypes, and green material developments. This paper illustrates how sustainable building materials can be a main input in the design process, and how digital fabrication technologies can enable variable controlling strategies over the green materials' properties, enabling adjustable innovative building spaces with new architectural typologies, aesthetic values, and controlled martial life cycles. Through this, a new type of design philosophy by means of applying sustainable building materials with closed life cycles is created. In this paper, three case studies of research pavilions are illustrated. The pavilions were prefabricated and constructed from newly developed sustainable building materials. The applied materials varied between structural and non-structural building materials, where each had a controlled end-of-life scenario. The application of the bio-based building materials was set as an initial design phase, and the architects here participated within two disciplines: once as designers, and additionally as green building material developers. In all three case studies, Design for Deconstruction (DfD) strategies were applied in different manners, encouraging architects to further follow such suggested approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

NEW product development, DESIGN thinking, PREDICTIVE validity, and MARKETING management

This research focuses on the understanding of a team creative process (or co-creative process) by adding design and management inputs to the marketing approach. It proposes and empirically tests a co-creative process based on the three stages of the design thinking method: (1) need definition, (2) idea generation, and (3) solution prototyping. This model also includes the influence of individual variables –empathy, domain-relevant familiarity, and task involvement –at different stages of the co-creative process. The results validate the mediating role of idea generation between need definition and solution prototyping and the influence of the selected individual variables. The predictive validity of the co-creative process has been tested via the evaluation of the solution by experts. Several actions are proposed at each stage of the co-creative process to enable organizations to stimulate the creativity of their new product development teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DESIGN thinking, DIVERGENT thinking, and IDEOLOGY

Design thinking—at times described as a mind-set, practice, process, method, methodology, tool, heuristic, and more—is a productive, iterative approach used to engage divergent thinking. Often made up of stages incorporating empathy, definition, ideation, prototyping, and testing, design thinking provides a framework for identifying and approaching problems. Design thinking, however, generally lacks a critical–rhetorical–methodological structure that makes room for what Rebecca Burnett called "substantive conflict," or "conflict that deals with critical issues of content and rhetorical elements." This article situates design thinking across the professional and academic spaces in which it is heralded and implemented in order to explore how it can be used in collaborative contexts to support substantive, productive dissensus. The authors lean on the ways in which they engage in design thinking in their different roles to situate the good, the bad, and the ugly of design thinking. They conclude by suggesting a rhetorical methodology for cultivating design thinking that facilitates dissensus, addresses resistance, and considers ideological variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

HACKATHONS, ACADEMIC libraries, NEW product development, HEALTH literacy, MEDICAL librarianship, LIBRARY orientation, and CASE studies

Librarians can utilize design-thinking practices to develop instructional materials, in the development of new products and services, and in prototyping novel solutions to problems. This paper will explore the role of design thinking in teaching and learning via the use of the Blended Librarians Adapted Addie Model (BLAAM), and will illustrate how well-designed learning approaches can be used to create inclusive learning environments. It will present a case study showcasing how an academic health sciences librarian utilized a design-thinking process to create a health data literacy instruction service that encourages diverse participation in healthcare hackathons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this “Tools From the Field” paper, we report our experiences using human-centered design (HCD), a process for using innovation as a means of developing more effective marketing offerings. The context for our use of HCD tools was a partnership with a new community committee. We combined elements of our previous social marketing frameworks -Community-Based Prevention Marketing (CBPM) for Program Development; CBPM for Policy Development–into a version better suited to address complex, dynamic problems that require a whole-systems perspective. Our product development work for this next iteration of the CBPM framework incorporated several HCD tools adapted from the prolific design firm, IDEO. The HCD process consists of three phases: inspiration (e.g., learning from those that one is designing for), ideation (e.g., brainstorming and prototyping), and implementation (e.g., building partnerships and launching a business model). In this paper, we describe “tools” for the application of HCD within the context of rapidly prototyping and testing CBPM framework activities for use with our community committee partners; we provide practical advice for the use of these tools (“process points”); and we present a real-world application from development of our new CBPM framework (“tools in action”). Overall, the HCD tools from IDEO helped us see new opportunities for our framework, transform insights into actionable ideas, and increase the speed of producing a minimum viable product and gathering feedback on it from our customers. We believe that HCD tools are worth exploring when it comes to the social marketing planning process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DESIGN thinking, HIGHER education, FACULTY-college relationship, INSTRUCTIONAL systems design, and ART

Traditionally, university students' education is siloed into disconnected courses and programs. Increasingly, however, there is a trend toward providing interdisciplinary learning experiences to help students develop meaningful skills for becoming more successful in their chosen careers. In this paper, we describe an instructional design project in which we engaged to develop an interdisciplinary minor in design thinking at a university in the western United States. This effort involved uniting faculty from the colleges of education, business, fine arts and communications, and engineering and technology. After reviewing our needs analysis process, we describe the structure of the minor itself, and how it was designed to respond to our analysis. We also discuss the following lessons learned throughout our project: (1) common vision is the beginning, not the end, of interdisciplinary design thinking; (2) personal relationships are crucially important in interdisciplinary design thinking; and (3) iterative prototyping improves interdisciplinary design thinking. Using principles such as those discussed in this paper, we believe the field of instructional design can help lead the way in the development of additional interdisciplinary learning experiences in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

DESIGN thinking, PERFORMANCE technology, OFFICE politics, BUSINESS planning, and STAKEHOLDERS

Business professionals experiencing high‐risk games of business politics while completing job requirements must find several ways to solve problems. One method of solving them is through the design‐thinking method. Design thinking includes five iterative, nonlinear steps: empathizing, defining and reframing, ideating, prototyping, and testing. This article is meant mostly for HPT professionals who work in large organizations that are undergoing a major change implementation or for decision makers in small businesses that serve large organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]