Page 10 - 2022_Jour_89-1

The last phase of design thinking involves implementing and testing the solution
with the users of the innovation. However, the design process may not be complete
because designers still need to gather information about their solutions. They
may gather feedback through questionnaires or conversations. Designers take this
information and continue to iterate for continuous improvement.

Design Thinking in K–12 and Higher Education
According to IDEO (2012), educators often face challenges around the design and
development of learning experiences (curriculum), learning environments (spaces),
school programs and experiences (processes and tools), and system strategies, goals,
and policies (systems). For example, if entry into a building is chaotic when the first
bell rings, the morning routine system (or lack thereof) is creating this issue and can
be redesigned to produce a safe and orderly routine. Design thinking can help make
it so…and if the new routine is still not perfect, evaluation and more iteration can
improve it further.
Instructors can use design thinking as a pedagogy to move students beyond
learning theory and memorizing content. Design thinking incorporates informed
improvisation, risk-taking, and action as students prototype, test, and evaluate
possible solutions. In this user-centered approach, students must consider the
perspectives of those for whom they are designing. Finally, design thinking can
be an approach to equity because the process itself focuses on minimizing power
structures by expecting participation from different stakeholders, designing with the
user in mind, examining the bias of the designers through reflection, and allowing
divergent voices and ideas to emerge (Sellers, 2018).

Using Liberatory Design Thinking in an Educational Leadership
Preparation Program
As part of my efforts to implement action-oriented pedagogies that help aspiring
school leaders move beyond the theory of social justice leadership and be prepared
to implement solutions that help create more equitable outcomes for students, I
created and implemented a design-thinking unit for my graduate class on the school
principalship. Numerous disparities exist in outcomes for White students as compared
to their minoritized peers, such as a 10% gap in the national graduation rates between
White and Black students (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2022a).
At a time when 54% of students in public schools are from minoritized populations
(NCES, 2022b) and the current system is producing and reproducing disparities in
outcomes, social-justice leaders are needed in schools across the United States.
Social-justice leaders are those who “advocate, lead, and keep at the center of
their practice and vision issues of race, class, gender, disability, sexual orientation,
and other historically and currently marginalizing conditions in the United States”
(Theoharis, 2007, p. 223). Today’s school leaders are charged with creating equitable
and inclusive schools. Yet, addressing inequalities and injustices found in schools
requires “deep changes in the overall structure and operation of schools” (Faircloth,
2018, p. 58).
In addition to reading about and discussing transformative and culturally
responsive social-justice leadership, I wanted graduate students to reconceptualize
the inequitable structures in today’s schools and generate solutions that might lead
to more equitable outcomes for historically marginalized and underserved students.
I created a unit in which students were presented with the design challenge of “How

8 The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin: International Journal for Professional Educators