View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Incubating Ideas: A Typology of Design Thinking Academic Centers in American Higher Education

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Incubating Ideas: A Typology of Design Thinking Academic Centers in American Higher Education
Language: English
Authors: Margaret T. Konkel (ORCID 0000-0001-5356-3577)
Source: New Directions for Higher Education. 2025 (212):41-51.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 11
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: Higher Education, Design, Thinking Skills, Concept Formation, Creative Thinking, Institutes (Training Programs), Classification, Educational Change, Institutional Mission
DOI: 10.1002/he.20520
ISSN: 0271-0560
1536-0741
Abstract: Twenty years after the founding of the Hasso-Plattner Institute of Design (the d.School) at Stanford University, a wide range of academic centers and institutes have been established to prioritize innovation, creativity, and design thinking. This qualitative study presents a typology of these centers across the United States, drawing on "About Us" language from 44 entities. Typologies drawn from the data analysis position the centers as innovators in engaging design to: reimagine higher education, cultivate a strong societal purpose or mission, develop the student as an entrepreneur, develop the student as a designer, confront problems and create solutions, support making as a learning experience, and develop the field of design.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2026
Accession Number: EJ1495611
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwF7LB60uCHgW7osNzCtLYTLAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDOKI20jgxovNaVJBSgIBEICBm1pjm8-feB5Gv7cA4bXK7G8JFInhrAT24tzum4pOhbnL5IQuesbBODS5zu54wI_d3JJn2fp9wNOEHMKdL94emSMs2SdwRJD00MK-7Bl7I6zeCgEBrzWTakrgVARNDn_pqYXUgKnvK0gqttmomV_Jmk--9-7u-pfiEDwRUqlXFNoK2BZL2LdwMV9k72VSnZscECoe2un9PEqWkKGM
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0191257111;ndh01dec.25;2026Feb03.01:56;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0191257111-1">Incubating Ideas: A Typology of Design Thinking Academic Centers in American Higher Education </title> <p>Twenty years after the founding of the Hasso–Plattner Institute of Design (the d.School) at Stanford University, a wide range of academic centers and institutes have been established to prioritize innovation, creativity, and design thinking. This qualitative study presents a typology of these centers across the United States, drawing on "About Us" language from 44 entities. Typologies drawn from the data analysis position the centers as innovators in engaging design to: reimagine higher education, cultivate a strong societal purpose or mission, develop the student as an entrepreneur, develop the student as a designer, confront problems and create solutions, support making as a learning experience, and develop the field of design.</p> <p>Keywords: academic center; design thinking; higher education</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-2">Introduction</hd> <p>There is an ongoing call for radical transformation in higher education in response to the knowledge era (Kivunja [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref1">18</reflink>]; Mishra and Kereluik [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref2">24</reflink>]; Selznick [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref3">32</reflink>]). In part, this demand originates with employers looking for students to develop capacities in innovative thinking, creativity, and problem‐solving (Schwab and Zahidi [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref4">30</reflink>]; Staff [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref5">13</reflink>]); others center innovation on the transformative experience that higher education promises (Grabill, Gretter, and Skogsberg [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref6">12</reflink>]; Staley [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref7">34</reflink>]). Design thinking, a human‐centered, empathy‐driven approach to addressing complex social problems, is proposed as a viable contributor to this transformation (Bell [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref8">3</reflink>]; Cavagnaro and Fasihuddin [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref9">8</reflink>]; Gilbert, Crow, and Anderson [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref10">11</reflink>]; McLaughlan et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref11">23</reflink>]; Vaugh et al. [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref12">40</reflink>]) as its practices can cultivate the very capacities in high demand (Schweitzer, Groeger, and Sobel [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref13">31</reflink>]).</p> <p>Since the founding of the Hasso–Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford University in 2004, numerous academic centers have been established to explore this value proposition, launching curricular and co‐curricular programming that prioritizes innovation, creativity, and design. Twenty years later, it is important to assess the landscape of these academic entities to appreciate their contribution to institutional innovation. The purpose of this multi‐part, qualitative research study is to explore the landscape of US academic centers and institutes using design thinking to innovate learning models, to understand how they position themselves internally and externally, and to propose a typology that captures the range of approaches being employed.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-3">Literature Review</hd> <p>The drive for innovating higher education can be traced to key global trends: the knowledge economy guiding economic development; technological innovation changing key economic sectors; and reduction in government funding of higher education (Brennan et al. [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref14">5</reflink>]; Tierney and Farmer [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref15">37</reflink>]). Employers of new graduates prioritize innovation skills and abilities, and higher education institutions are confronting a reality for which their pedagogical practices were not designed (Selznick [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref16">32</reflink>]; Tierney and Farmer [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref17">37</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-4">Summary</hd> <p></p> <ulist> <item> A majority of centers position themselves as innovators of higher education, targeting transformative student learning experiences and proposing new models for undergraduate education</item> <p></p> <item> Clarity of typology may support center leaders in developing appropriate impact evaluation programs</item> <p></p> <item> Typologies could enable productive donor cultivation for higher education institutions aiming to establish new centers for design and innovation</item> </ulist> <p>Pedagogies of "active learning, interdisciplinarity, collaborative work and the development of metacognitive and socioemotional skills" (Carvalho et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref18">7</reflink>], 196) are understood to be the engines of educational innovation, yet it is difficult to innovate higher education from within the classroom. Scholarship of teaching and learning is limited in describing reliable replicable practices (Supiano [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref19">36</reflink>]), and institutional headwinds resist change to the core business of teaching (Carvalho et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref20">7</reflink>]; Gaudelli [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref21">10</reflink>]).</p> <p>Given its role in the innovation economy, design thinking may be a powerful pedagogy to "equip learners with the skills and mindsets they will need to tackle daunting challenges" (Cavagnaro and Fasihuddin [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref22">8</reflink>], 8) facing the world. Grounded in the teaching model of the design studio, design thinking incorporates many pedagogies considered best practice for innovative teaching and learning (Carvalho et al. [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref23">7</reflink>]; McLaughlan et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref24">23</reflink>]). Current scholarship explores the case that design thinking benefits students throughout their educational careers across a range of disciplines (McLaughlan et al. [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref25">23</reflink>]); that it can promote collaboration, creativity, problem‐solving, and empathy (Guaman‐Quintanilla et al. [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref26">14</reflink>]; Konkel [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref27">19</reflink>]); that it engages constructivist learning paradigms through active learning (Stompff et al. [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref28">35</reflink>]); and that it can build capacity for students and faculty in developing open, exploratory mindsets, and participatory approaches to world issues (Beligatamulla et al. [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref29">2</reflink>]).</p> <p>Higher education leaders also recognize the innovation capacity‐building potential of campus‐wide efforts, including pitch competitions, makerspaces, and academic centers with robust programming (Selznick [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref30">32</reflink>]). Academic centers sit at the intersection between the fixed structure of higher education and dynamic social and research trends (Stahler and Tash [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref31">33</reflink>]; Weber and Brunt [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref32">41</reflink>]). They are typically located outside departments, therefore outside systems of faculty governance (Weber and Brunt [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref33">41</reflink>]); whether centers are "of the university and not merely at it" (Ikenberry and Friedman [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref34">15</reflink>], 17) presents the key organizational challenge centers face.</p> <p>Inhabiting this interstitial space, academic centers and institutes are described as interdisciplinary, boundary‐spanning, and adaptive, often bridging the practice‐academy divide through outward‐facing programs to explore emerging fields (Ikenberry and Friedman [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref35">15</reflink>]; Larson and Long [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref36">20</reflink>]; Patterson [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref37">25</reflink>]). It is not surprising therefore that institutions exploring new approaches to teaching and learning through creativity and innovation do so through the framework of academic centers. They are credited with the flexibility to enable innovative research practices with limited investment by their home institution (Sá [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref38">28</reflink>]). Yet the very qualities that enable academic centers and institutes to dynamically explore new frontiers in higher education make it difficult to holistically assess their impact (Mallon [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref39">22</reflink>]; Wyllie [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref40">42</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-5">Method</hd> <p>To address the study purpose, the researcher utilized a multi‐step, qualitative design that combined website content analysis with one‐on‐one semi‐structured interviews with center leaders. This manuscript focuses on the website content analysis only.</p> <p>To assess the landscape of centers for design thinking in higher education, it was first necessary to identify those centers. The researcher conducted a series of online searches using two search terms: "design thinking and higher education" and "design thinking centers college university." This initial search identified 27 centers or institutes on US college campuses that foreground design, design thinking, or innovation on their website landing page.</p> <p>In August 2023, the researcher sent the list to the Future of Design in Higher Education (FDHE) listserv, requesting that members identify centers and institutes missed in the initial search; FDHE is a loose consortium of higher education professionals engaged with, and committed to, design thinking on their campuses. The compiled list of centers subsequently grew to 58. The researcher then transcribed verbatim the "About Us" language for each center; when an "About Us" page did not exist, key portions of the main website language that described the center's purpose were used.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-6">Inclusion Criteria for the Study</hd> <p>Inclusion criteria were needed to focus on the scope of the study. As noted, academic centers and institutes enjoy wide latitude in determining their mission, and the compiled list of centers demonstrated a broad interpretation of design, innovation, and entrepreneurship. Situating the study as a 20‐year response to Stanford's d.School, design thinking as applied in interdisciplinary programming became the primary criterion for inclusion. Therefore, the "About Us" language referenced one of the following terms: human‐centered thinking, design thinking, creative problem‐solving, empathy, or wicked problems. When those key terms were not referenced, the researcher reviewed program descriptions to identify consistent mention of design thinking or interdisciplinary creative problem‐solving. Centers or institutes not meeting these criteria were removed from the study; a total of 44 centers meeting the criteria were identified (Table 1, Figure 1).</p> <p>1 TABLE List of included centers, home institutions, and locations.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Center/Institute</th><th>Home institution</th><th>Location</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>DesignMatters</td><td>ArtCenter College of Design</td><td>Pasadena, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Design Center at the Millstein Center for Teaching and Learning</td><td>Barnard College</td><td>New York, NY</td></tr><tr><td>College of Innovation + Design</td><td>Boise State University</td><td>Boise, ID</td></tr><tr><td>BUild Lab IDG Capital Student Innovation Center</td><td>Boston University</td><td>Boston, MA</td></tr><tr><td>Geoffrey H. Radbill Center for College and Life Design</td><td>Bowling Green State University</td><td>Bowling Green, OH</td></tr><tr><td>Rick and Susan Sontag Center for Collaborative Creativity (The Hive)</td><td>Claremont Colleges</td><td>Claremont, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Creativity & Innovation</td><td>Colorado College</td><td>Colorado Springs, CO</td></tr><tr><td>Nancy Richardson Design Center</td><td>Colorado State University</td><td>Fort Collins, CO</td></tr><tr><td>Entrepreneurship Design Studio</td><td>Columbia University</td><td>New York, NY</td></tr><tr><td>Design Initiative at Dartmouth (DIAD)</td><td>Dartmouth College</td><td>Dartmouth, NH</td></tr><tr><td>Red Frame Lab</td><td>Denison University</td><td>Denison, OH</td></tr><tr><td>Elon by Design</td><td>Elon University</td><td>Greensboro, NC</td></tr><tr><td>Innovation Hub</td><td>Florida State University</td><td>Tallahassee, FL</td></tr><tr><td>Design Bloc</td><td>Georgia Tech University</td><td>Atlanta, GA</td></tr><tr><td>iLabs</td><td>Harvard University</td><td>Cambridge, MA</td></tr><tr><td>InLab@HCC</td><td>Hillsborough Community College</td><td>Plant City, FL</td></tr><tr><td>Hynes Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship</td><td>Iona University</td><td>New Rochelle, NY</td></tr><tr><td>Student Innovation Center</td><td>Iowa State University</td><td>Ames, IA</td></tr><tr><td>X‐Lab</td><td>James Madison University</td><td>Harrisonburg, VA</td></tr><tr><td>Design Innovation Hub</td><td>Kent State University</td><td>Kent, OH</td></tr><tr><td>HIVE</td><td>Lakeland Community College</td><td>Kirtland, OH</td></tr><tr><td>Baker Institute for Entrepreneurship</td><td>Lehigh University</td><td>Bethlehem, PA</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Design Thinking</td><td>Manhattanville University</td><td>Purchase, NY</td></tr><tr><td>Morningside Academy for Design</td><td>MIT</td><td>Cambridge, MA</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Design</td><td>Northeastern University</td><td>Boston, MA</td></tr><tr><td>Segal Design Institute</td><td>Northwestern University</td><td>Evanston, IL</td></tr><tr><td>Keller Center</td><td>Princeton University</td><td>Princeton, NJ</td></tr><tr><td>Design Thinking Initiative, Conway Center</td><td>Smith College</td><td>Northampton, MA</td></tr><tr><td>Hasso–Plattner Institute of Design (d.School)</td><td>Stanford University</td><td>Palo Alto, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Taylor Center for Social Innovation and Design Thinking</td><td>Tulane University</td><td>New Orleans, LA</td></tr><tr><td>Innovation for Justice</td><td>University of Arizona + University of Utah</td><td>Tuscon, AZ</td></tr><tr><td>Jacobs Institute for Design Innovation</td><td>University of California, Berkeley</td><td>Berkeley, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Innovation, Creativity & Design Practice</td><td>University of California, Berkeley, Haas School of Business</td><td>Berkeley, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Design Lab</td><td>University of California, San Diego</td><td>San Diego, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Design Innovation + Spatial Design Studio</td><td>University of North Carolina campuses</td><td>Winston‐Salem, NC</td></tr><tr><td>Siebel Center for Design</td><td>University of Illinois, Urbana‐Champaign</td><td>Champaign, IL</td></tr><tr><td>Academy for Innovation and Entrepreneurship</td><td>University of Maryland</td><td>College Park, MD</td></tr><tr><td>Creativity, Innovation, Entrepreneurship Initiative</td><td>University of Richmond</td><td>Richmond, VA</td></tr><tr><td>iZone</td><td>University of Rochester</td><td>Rochester, NY</td></tr><tr><td>Changemaker Hub</td><td>University of San Diego</td><td>San Diego, CA</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Integrated Design</td><td>University of Texas, Austin</td><td>Austin, TX</td></tr><tr><td>The Batten Institute for Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Technology</td><td>University of Virginia</td><td>Charlottesville, VA</td></tr><tr><td>The Wond'Ry</td><td>Vanderbilt University</td><td>Nashville, TN</td></tr><tr><td>DaVinci Center for Innovation</td><td>Virginia Commonwealth University</td><td>Richmond, VA</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/NDH/01dec25/he20520-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMMvl7ESepq84yOvsOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="he20520-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 US location map of included centers and institutes." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191257111-8">Data Analysis Procedures</hd> <p>Interpretive research calls for theory to be inductively and emergently drawn from data (Andrade [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref41">1</reflink>]; Savin‐Baden and Howell Major [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref42">29</reflink>]); informed by a cyclical and iterative process of coding, memoing, diagramming, and sorting. In this study, thematic analysis followed the recursive approach described by Braun and Clarke ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref43">4</reflink>]) using the design thinking technique of affinity clustering to uncover patterns and themes in large datasets, revealing commonalities amid complexity (LUMA Institute [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref44">21</reflink>]). Using the online whiteboarding platform MURAL (Figure 2), initial codes were generated following the transcription of over 300 unique sentence fragments; potential themes were generated and reviewed to develop thematic maps of the data through multiple iterations (Braun and Clarke [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref45">4</reflink>]).</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/NDH/01dec25/he20520-fig-0002.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMMvl7ESepq84yOvsOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="he20520-fig-0002.jpg" title="2 Thematic analysis process for "About Us" language." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191257111-10">Development of Typologies</hd> <p>Deductive coding applies established themes or theories to data for the purpose of generating a codebook (Deductive and Inductive Approaches to Coding [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref46">9</reflink>]) and is useful for establishing the extent to which any given dataset conforms to a set of Themes. In this study, deductive coding enabled the development of a set of typologies against which each design thinking center was evaluated. The researcher prompted ChatGPT to apply themes and sub‐themes derived in the affinity cluster to each center's transcribed "About Us" language (Figure 3 provides the full prompt); each analysis was generated via a new chat window to prevent cross‐contamination of data; each result was checked by an outside contributing researcher to determine validity.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/NDH/01dec25/he20520-fig-0003.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMMvl7ESepq84yOvsOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="he20520-fig-0003.jpg" title="3 ChatGPT prompt used for deductive coding." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191257111-12">Results</hd> <p>Design thinking is expanding beyond its traditional roots in innovation and enterprise (see Kimbell [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref47">16</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref48">17</reflink>]; VanPatter [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref49">39</reflink>]), and the breadth of its potential is evident in language that centers and institutes use to communicate their purpose. Themes drawn from the data analysis (Figure 4) position centers as innovators in the application of design thinking to higher education, describing their purpose as engaging design to: reimagine higher education, cultivate a strong societal purpose or mission, develop the student as an entrepreneur, develop the student as a designer, confront problems and create solutions, support making as a learning experience, and develop the field of design.</p> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/NDH/01dec25/he20520-fig-0004.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMMvl7ESepq84yOvsOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="he20520-fig-0004.jpg" title="4 Thematic analysis of "About Us" language." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0191257111-14">Using Design Thinking to Reimagine Higher Education</hd> <p>The dominant theme evident in the "About Us" language from centers in the study described harnessing design to reimagine higher education. Much of the language explored building connections across disciplines, facilitating cross‐disciplinary discourse, empowering creativity and innovation by encouraging intersection between disciplines, between practice and academy, between technical and liberal arts, to support a diversity of perspectives, ideas, and ways of knowing. For many, the purpose of building these cross‐disciplinary connections was to transform learning experiences, to <emph>break away from traditional education</emph>, and <emph>help create the future university</emph> (note: direct quotations from website data are italicized).</p> <p>Design centers today overtly <emph>focus on the pressing challenges of higher education</emph> and <emph>disrupt education with inspiration, exploration, and action</emph>, engaging students directly in the reinvention of higher education. Some focus on collaboration as a means to this end; some aim to grow an interdisciplinary research agenda, positioning themselves as agents of change in the landscape of higher education.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-15">Design as a Purpose and Mission in the World</hd> <p>More broadly, centers for design thinking in higher education openly acknowledge the power of design to create meaningful social impact, to make change in the world, to build community and foster inclusion, equity, and access. For many, design thinking has transformational power to reach beyond campus boundaries and bring positive change to local and global communities. Centers describe design as a way to <emph>equip students to become the next generation of global leaders</emph>, to <emph>drive positive change locally and worldwide</emph>, and to <emph>innovate for public good</emph>. Many specifically address inclusivity with respect to the potential for social change, cultivating <emph>open and inclusive studio space</emph> to <emph>provide equitable access to design</emph>. For many, design thinking is enacted internally and externally to make positive change in support of inclusive communities.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-16">Design to Develop the Student as an Entrepreneur—and—Designer</hd> <p>Many centers used language that channeled the transformative power of design to support student development of key skills and mindsets needed to thrive in the knowledge era. The theme of developing the student as an entrepreneur encourages students to <emph>develop innovation skills, transform ideas into something real</emph>, and <emph>get a taste of entrepreneurial thinking</emph>. These centers challenge students to use design thinking as a <emph>platform for venture creation</emph>, to <emph>help problem‐solvers move inventions and valuable ideas to the world faster</emph> and <emph>nurture an idea from creative spark to execution</emph>. Development of business and entrepreneurship practices is the direct outcome, <emph>framing customer problems</emph>, delving into <emph>the needs of market segments</emph>, and cultivating career preparation and leadership potential.</p> <p>Developing the student as designer functions similarly yet more holistically. Centers attribute design thinking to the development of new attitudes and ways of seeing things that will serve the student well in their lives. Persistent curiosity, exploratory playfulness, empathy, resilience, and <emph>reframing failure as a necessary learning tool</emph> are all cited as benefits of design thinking practice. Confidence gained by engaging with center programming will <emph>foster creativity, critical thinking, making, and collaboration</emph>, and <emph>prepare students to approach any challenge with flexibility, openness, and confidence</emph>. These attributes, centers point out, support leadership development and career preparation, helping students <emph>prepare for whatever the future holds</emph>, <emph>be a thought leader of [the] discovery economy</emph>, and <emph>graduate career‐ and life‐ready</emph>. This language positions design centers as pragmatic resources for post‐college life.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-17">Design to Confront Problems and Create Solutions</hd> <p>Another subset of language presents design thinking as a compelling approach to confronting problems and building solutions, particularly the kind of complex problems facing the world. Centers prioritizing this language suggest that design thinking <emph>teaches world‐class problem solvers how to be thoughtful problem framers</emph>, helps <emph>unlock solutions</emph> and <emph>engage in our increasingly complex world</emph>, reinforcing a long tradition connecting design thinking with complex or wicked problem solving (Buchanan [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref50">6</reflink>]; Rittel and Webber [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref51">27</reflink>]). Design is suggested as a useful approach to <emph>tackle messy and complex problems with serious creative thinking</emph>.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-18">Design as a Learning‐by‐Making Approach</hd> <p>A smaller subset of centers use language that emphasizes hands‐on making as a mechanism for learning. Making is described as an opportunity to experiment, play, build viable solutions, and use hands‐on work to think analytically about a problem. Centers using this language encouraged students to <emph>get ready to create</emph>, <emph>rapidly generate prototypes</emph>, and <emph>design, fabricate, test, and demonstrate ideas</emph>. In doing so, they describe themselves as hands‐on, <emph>interdisciplinary hub[s] for learning and making</emph> and as <emph>incubator[s] for creative making</emph> that <emph>cater to artisan tinkerers and tech geeks alike</emph>.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-19">Design to Develop the Field of Design</hd> <p>Some language analyzed describes the intention to strengthen and unify the design field, promote research, and practice, model, and teach design thinking. These centers aim to <emph>connect the actors of the design ecosystem</emph>, <emph>build a framework and tools to share insights and best practices with all</emph>, and <emph>improve the process of good design</emph>. This language diverges from other themes identified because it is centered on design by and for itself rather than directed toward individuals or institutions.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-20">A Typology of Design Thinking Centers in Higher Education</hd> <p>Using the themes identified in the analysis, it is possible to assess the range of centers that have been established across the United States. According to Petroni, the "About Us" page on a website is "a sort of multi‐modal self‐portrait or short autobiography" ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref52">26</reflink>], 268) created by the organization itself. In this way, "About Us" pages represent an exercise in self‐branding, enabling the organization to control its outward presentation (Petroni [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref53">26</reflink>]). The typology of design thinking centers and institutes presented (Table 2) distills the unique self‐branding for each individual center in the study to a set of types sharing key attributes across the larger represented phenomenon. Pairs of major themes (with sub‐themes noted, Table 2) form types that illuminate the institutional aspirations embedded in each center's founding. Viewed by typology (Table 3), design thinking centers embody distinct patterns of purpose across the range of higher education institutions invested in their work.</p> <p>2 TABLE A typology of design thinking centers in the United States.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Center/Institute</th><th>Type (theme/sub‐theme pairs)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>DesignMatters</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b, c, d)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Design Center at the Millstein Center for Teaching and Learning</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6d)Design as a learning‐by‐making approach (2)</td></tr><tr><td>College of Innovation + Design</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, b)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6c, d)</td></tr><tr><td>BUild Lab IDG Capital Student Innovation Center</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Design to develop the student as designer (5a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Geoffrey H. Radbill Center for College and Life Design</td><td>Design to develop the student as designer (5a, c)Using design to reimagine higher education* (1a, b)</td></tr><tr><td>Rick and Susan Sontag Center for Collaborative Creativity (The Hive)</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6d)</td></tr><tr><td>Creativity & Innovation</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, c)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, d)</td></tr><tr><td>Nancy Richardson Design Center</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1b, c)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Entrepreneurship Design Studio</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, d)</td></tr><tr><td>Design Initiative at Dartmouth (DIAD)</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1b, c)Design as a purpose and mission in the world* (6a, b, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Red Frame Lab</td><td>Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, b)Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a)</td></tr><tr><td>Elon by Design</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, b)Design to develop the student as designer* (5a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Innovation Hub</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, e)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Design Bloc</td><td>Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6c, d)</td></tr><tr><td>iLabs</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6c, d)</td></tr><tr><td>InLab@HCC</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6b, d)</td></tr><tr><td>Hynes Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Design to develop the student as designer (5a, b)</td></tr><tr><td>Student Innovation Center</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1e)Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a)</td></tr><tr><td>X‐Lab</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7c)</td></tr><tr><td>Design Innovation Hub</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, e)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>HIVE</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a)</td></tr><tr><td>Baker Institute for Entrepreneurship</td><td>Design to cultivate the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b)</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Design Thinking</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education* (1a, c)Design to develop the student as designer (5a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Morningside Academy for Design</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, c, e)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b)</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Design</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, d, e)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, b, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Segal Design Institute</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, d)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Keller Center</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b)Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, e)</td></tr><tr><td>Design Thinking Initiative, Conway Center</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b, d)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7c)</td></tr><tr><td>Hasso‐Plattner Institute of Design (d.School)</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a)Design to develop the student as designer* (5a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Taylor Center for Social Innovation and Design Thinking</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b, c, d)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, b, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Innovation for Justice</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Jacobs Institute for Design Innovation</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, e)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6b, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Innovation, Creativity & Design Practice</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, c)Design to develop the student as designer (5b)</td></tr><tr><td>Design Lab</td><td>Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, d)</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Design Innovation + Spatial Design Studio</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, c)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a)</td></tr><tr><td>Siebel Center for Design</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, c)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Academy for Innovation and Entrepreneurship</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, b)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Creativity, Innovation, Entrepreneurship Initiative</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education* (1a, c)Design to develop the student as designer (5b)</td></tr><tr><td>iZone</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education* (1a, c)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Changemaker Hub</td><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6a, b)Design as a means to confront problems and create solutions (7a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>Center for Integrated Design</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, d)Design to develop the student as designer (5a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>The Batten Institute for Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Technology</td><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneur (3a, b)Using design to reimagine higher education (1a, d)</td></tr><tr><td>The Wond'Ry</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c, e)Design to develop the student as designer (5a, c)</td></tr><tr><td>DaVinci Center for Innovation</td><td>Using design to reimagine higher education (1c)Design as a purpose and mission in the world (6d)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note</emph>: * indicates typology revised from initial AI‐generated by outside researcher.</p> <p>3 TABLE Design thinking centers sorted by typology.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Typology (theme pairs)</th><th>Centers/Institutes</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Using design to reimagine higher educationDesign as a means to confront problems and create solutions</td><td>Nancy Richardson Design Center, Colorado State UniversityInnovation Hub, Florida State UniversityX‐Labs, James Madison UniversityDesign Innovation Hub, Kent State UniversityCenter for Design, Northeastern UniversitySegal Design Institute, Northwestern UniversityCenter for Design Innovation + Spatial Design Studio, University of North Carolina campusesSeibel Center for Design, University of Illinois, Urbana‐ChampaignAcademy for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, University of MarylandiZone, University of Rochester</td></tr><tr><td>Using design to reimagine higher educationDesign as a purpose and mission in the world</td><td>College of Innovation + Design, Boise State UniversityRick and Susan Sontag Center for Collaborative Creativity (The Hive), Claremont CollegesDesign Initiative at Dartmouth, Dartmouth CollegeHIVE, Lakeland Community CollegeMorningside Academy for Design, MITKeller Center, Princeton UniversityJacobs Institute for Design Innovation, University of California BerkeleyDaVinci Center for Innovation, Virginia Commonwealth University</td></tr><tr><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the worldDesign as a means to confront problems and create solutions</td><td>DesignMatters, ArtCenter College of DesignDesign Bloc, Georgia Tech UniversityDesign Thinking Initiative, Smith CollegeTaylor Center for Social Innovation and Design Thinking, Tulane UniversityInnovation for Justice, University of Arizona + University of UtahChangemaker Hub, University of San DiegoDesign Lab, University of California San Diego</td></tr><tr><td>Using design to reimagine higher educationDesign to develop the student as designer</td><td>Geoffrey H. Radbill Center for College and Life Design, Bowling Green State UniversityElon by Design, Elon UniversityCenter for Design Thinking, Manhattanville UniversityHasso‐Plattner Institute of Design, Stanford UniversityCreativity, Innovation, Entrepreneurship Initiative, University of RichmondCenter for Integrated Design, University of Texas AustinThe Wond'Ry, Vanderbilt University</td></tr><tr><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneurDesign to develop the student as designer</td><td>Build Lab IDG Capital Student Innovation Center, Boston UniversityHynes Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Iona UniversityInnovation, Creativity & Design Practice, University of California Berkeley, Haas School of Business</td></tr><tr><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneurDesign as a purpose and mission in the world</td><td>iLabs, Harvard UniversityInLab@HCC, Hillsboro Community CollegeBaker Institute for Entrepreneurship, Lehigh UniversityCreativity & Innovation, Colorado College</td></tr><tr><td>Design to develop the student as entrepreneurUsing design to reimagine higher education</td><td>Entrepreneurship Design Studio, Columbia UniversityStudent Innovation Center, Iowa State UniversityBatten Institute for Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Technology, University of Virginia</td></tr><tr><td>Design as a purpose and mission in the worldDesign as a learning‐by‐making approach</td><td>Design Center at the Millstein Center for Teaching and Learning, Barnard College</td></tr><tr><td>Design as a means to confront problems and create solutionsDesign to develop the student as entrepreneur</td><td>Red Frame Lab, Denison University</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0191257111-21">Conclusions</hd> <p>Global forces exerting pressure on higher education demand change at the pedagogical, organizational, and research levels (Tierney and Lanford [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref54">38</reflink>]). Centers in this study embrace the challenge, using language to position themselves as engines for dynamic change; more than half of the centers included in this study advocate design to transform learning experiences and reimagine higher education. The 20‐year trend in establishing centers for innovation, design, and creativity appears well established, yet it is uncertain whether these peripheral entities can effect the transformation they promote.</p> <p>Although the typology presented herein contributes to understanding the range of design centers in US higher education today, higher education administrators and leaders may use it in more pragmatic ways. It is common that these centers are launched by donor funds; working with the typology presented may facilitate practical conversations with donors to envision a new center's mission and purpose. Additionally, the typology may offer guidance to center leaders on impact evaluation; clarity as to a center's type may recommend certain evaluation approaches to ensure targeted and effective assessment.</p> <p>Limits to the self‐portrait portrayed in "About Us" language include the practical consideration of who wrote the language and when. Throughout the study, center leaders acknowledged that their websites needed updating and may not have been current; inferences made regarding available language may change as centers do routine website updates. One must also question the extent to which claims made regarding the potential for design thinking to transform learning are supported by evidence of impact. Further research connected to this study will examine this, along with the structural configurations of design thinking centers relative to university governance.</p> <p>Yet the moonshot (Cavagnaro and Fasihuddin [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref55">8</reflink>]) represented by the proliferation of centers for innovation, design thinking, and creativity holds promise, if not for the complete transformation of higher education, then for the important, unique transformation experienced by individual students and faculty. A continued holistic review of how these centers influence their home institutions will contribute to greater understanding of this 20‐year phenomenon in higher education.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-22">Author Contributions</hd> <p>Margaret Konkel is the sole author of this article. The research design, implementation, analysis, and communication are all attributable to her. Dr. Bruce Parsons served as an outside consultant to validate the ChatGPT results.</p> <hd id="AN0191257111-23">Acknowledgments</hd> <p>Dr. Bruce Parsons served as an outside reviewer for the AI‐generated thematic analysis in this study. I am grateful for his support and counsel.</p> <ref id="AN0191257111-24"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref41" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Andrade, A. D. 2009. " Interpretive Research Aiming at Theory Building: Adopting and Adapting the Case Study Design." Qualitative Report 14, no. 1 : 20.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref29" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Beligatamulla, G., J. Rieger, J. Franz, and M. Strickfaden. 2019. " Making Pedagogic Sense of Design Thinking in the Higher Education Context." Open Education Studies 1, no. 1 : 91 – 105. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu‐2019‐0006.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref8" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bell, S. 2010. "Design Thinking" and Higher Education. Inside Higher Ed. <ulink href="http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2010/03/02/design‐thinking‐and‐higher‐ed">www.insidehighered.com/views/2010/03/02/design‐thinking‐and‐higher‐ed</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref43" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. " Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology." Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, no. 2 : 77 – 101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref14" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Brennan, J., S. Ryan, M. Ranga, S. Broek, N. Durazzi, and B. Kamphuis. 2014. Study on Innovation in Higher Education: Final report (European Commission Directorate for Education and Training Study on Innovation in Higher Education). Luxembourg : Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/65992.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref50" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Buchanan, R. 1992. " Wicked Problems in Design Thinking." Design Issues 8, no. 2 : 5. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511637.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref18" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Carvalho, A., S. J. Teixeira, L. Olim, S. D. Campanella, and T. Costa. 2020. " Pedagogical Innovation in Higher Education and Active Learning Methodologies—A Case Study." Education + Training 63, no. 2 : 195 – 213. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET‐05‐2020‐0141.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref9" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Cavagnaro, L. B., and H. Fasihuddin. 2016. " A Moonshot Approach to Change in Higher Education." Liberal Education 63, no. 2 : 8 – 17.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref46" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Deductive and inductive approaches to coding. 2021. Delve. https://delvetool.com/blog/deductiveinductive.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gaudelli, W. 2024. User Designed Inquiry: An Effort to Reconceptualize Teaching and Learning at a US University. 10th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'24). Editorial Universitat Politecnica de Valencia. https://doi.org/10.4995/HEAd24.2024.17172.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gilbert, C. G., M. M. Crow, and D. Anderson. 2018. " Design Thinking for Higher Education." Stanford Social Innovation Review, Winter 16, no. 1 : 36 – 41.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grabill, J. T., S. Gretter, and E. Skogsberg. 2022. Design for Change in Higher Education. Baltimore, MD : Johns Hopkins University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gray, K. 2018. Employers want to see these attributes on students' resumes. NACE Center for Career Development and Talent Acquisition. https://<ulink href="http://www.naceweb.org/talent‐acquisition/candidate‐selection/employers‐want‐to‐see‐these‐attributes‐on‐students‐resumes/">www.naceweb.org/talent‐acquisition/candidate‐selection/employers‐want‐to‐see‐these‐attributes‐on‐students‐resumes/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guaman‐Quintanilla, S., P. Everaert, K. Chiluiza, and M. Valcke. 2023. " Impact of Design Thinking in Higher Education: A Multi‐Actor Perspective on Problem Solving and Creativity." International Journal of Technology and Design Education 33, no. 1 : 217 – 240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798‐021‐09724‐z.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ikenberry, S. O., and R. C. Friedman. 1972. Beyond Academic Departments: The Story of Institutes and Centers, 1st ed. San Francisco, CA : Jossey‐Bass.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kimbell, L. 2011. " Rethinking Design Thinking: Part I." Design and Culture 3, no. 3 : 285 – 306. https://doi.org/10.2752/175470811X13071166525216.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kimbell, L. 2012. " Rethinking Design Thinking: Part II." Design and Culture 4, no. 2 : 129 – 148. https://doi.org/10.2752/175470812X13281948975413.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kivunja, C. 2014. " Do You Want Your Students to be Job‐Ready With 21st Century Skills? Change Pedagogies: A Pedagogical Paradigm Shift From Vygotskyian Social Constructivism to Critical Thinking, Problem Solving and Siemens' Digital Connectivism." International Journal of Higher Education 3, no. 3 : p81. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n3p81.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Konkel, M. 2023. " Learning Orientation and Creativity: Design Mindsets in the First‐Year Experience." International Journal of Design Education 17, no. 2 : 45 – 64.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Larson, R. S., and R. F. Long. 2000. " Academic Centers: Moving Beyond the Periphery." Journal of Public Service & Outreach 5, no. 2 : 39 – 47.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LUMA Institute. 2012. Innovating for People: Handbook of Human‐Centered Design Methods. LUMA Institute.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mallon, W. 2004. " Disjointed Governance in University Centers and Institutes." New Directions for Higher Education 2004, no. 127 : 61 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.156.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McLaughlan, J. E., E. Chen, D. Lake, et al. 2022. " Design Thinking Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: Experiences Across Four Universities." PLOS ONE 17, no. 3 : e0265902. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265902.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mishra, P., and K. Kereluik. 2011. " What 21st Century Learning? A Review and Synthesis." In Proceedings of SITE 2011–Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, edited by M. Koehler and P. Mishra, 3301 – 3312. Nashville, Tennessee, USA : Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 25, 2024 from https://<ulink href="http://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/36828/">www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/36828/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Patterson, D. 2014. " How to Build a Bad Research Center." Communications of the ACM 57, no. 3 : 33 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1145/2566969.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Petroni, S. 2020. " How to Construct Corporate Identity and Reputation. Is the "About Us" Page a Micro‐Genre? " Lingue e Linguaggi 40 : 267 – 290. https://doi.org/10.1285/I22390359V40P267.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rittel, H. W. J., and M. M. Webber. 1973. " Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning." Policy Sciences 4 : 15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sá, C. M. 2008. " University‐Based Research Centers: Characteristics, Organization, and Administrative Implications." Journal of Research Administration XXXIX, no. 1 : 32 – 41.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Savin‐Baden, M., and C. Howell Major. 2013. Qualitative Research: The Essential Guide to Theory and Practice. New York, NY : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schwab, K., and S. Zahidi. 2020. The Future of Jobs Report 2020. Cologny, Switzerland : World Economic Forum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schweitzer, J., L. Groeger, and L. Sobel. 2016. " The Design Thinking Mindset: An Assessment of What We Know and What We See in Practice." Journal of Design, Business & Society 2, no. 1 : 71 – 93. https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs.2.1.71_1.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Selznick, B. S. 2019. " Developing Innovators: Preparing Twenty‐First Century Graduates for the Idea Economy." New Directions for Higher Education 2019, no. 188 : 81 – 90. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20348.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stahler, G. J., and W. R. Tash. 1994. " Centers and Institutes in the Research University: Issues, Problems, and Prospects." Journal of Higher Education 65, no. 5 : 540. https://doi.org/10.2307/2943777.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Staley, D. J. 2019. Alternative Universities: Speculative Design for Innovation in Higher Education. Baltimore, MD : Johns Hopkins University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stompff, G., A. Prince, M. Joosten, M. Claessens, W. Geurts, and A. Koppchen. 2022. " Touch Ground: Introducing Design Inquiry in Higher education." In DRS2022: Bilbao, edited by D. Lockton S. Lenzi P. Hekkert A. Oak J. Sadaba, and P. Lloyd. Bilbao, Spain. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2022.552.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Supiano, B. 2020. The Creativity Challenge: Teaching Students to Think outside the Box. Washington, DC : The Chronicle of Higher Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tierney, P., and S. M. Farmer. 2011. " Creative Self‐Efficacy Development and Creative Performance Over Time." Journal of Applied Psychology 96, no. 2 : 277 – 293. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020952.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tierney, W. G., and M. Lanford. 2016. " Conceptualizing Innovation in Higher Education." In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, edited by M. B. Paulsen, Vol. 31, 1 – 40. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐319‐26829‐3_1.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> VanPatter, G. 2020. Rethinking Design Thinking: Making Sense of the Future That Has Already Arrived. New York, NY : Humantific Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaugh, T., T. Finnegan‐Kessie, P. Donnellan, and T. Oswald. 2020. " The Potential of Design Thinking to Enable Change in Higher Education." All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 12, no. 3 : 21.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weber, P., and C. Brunt. 2022. " Building Nonprofit Management Education in the US: The Role of Centers in Supporting New Academic Disciplines." Journal of Public and Nonprofit Affairs 8, no. 1 : 96 – 121. https://doi.org/10.20899/jpna.8.1.96‐121.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wyllie, J. 2018. " Colleges Have Spent Big Money on Innovation Centers. Do They Work?" The Chronicle of Higher Education, https://<ulink href="http://www.chronicle.com/article/colleges‐have‐spent‐big‐money‐on‐innovation‐centers‐do‐they‐work/">www.chronicle.com/article/colleges‐have‐spent‐big‐money‐on‐innovation‐centers‐do‐they‐work/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Margaret T. Konkel</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref54"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1495611
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Incubating Ideas: A Typology of Design Thinking Academic Centers in American Higher Education
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Margaret+T%2E+Konkel%22">Margaret T. Konkel</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5356-3577">0000-0001-5356-3577</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22New+Directions+for+Higher+Education%22"><i>New Directions for Higher Education</i></searchLink>. 2025 (212):41-51.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 11
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Design%22">Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Thinking+Skills%22">Thinking Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Concept+Formation%22">Concept Formation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Creative+Thinking%22">Creative Thinking</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Institutes+%28Training+Programs%29%22">Institutes (Training Programs)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Classification%22">Classification</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Change%22">Educational Change</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Institutional+Mission%22">Institutional Mission</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/he.20520
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0271-0560<br />1536-0741
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Twenty years after the founding of the Hasso-Plattner Institute of Design (the d.School) at Stanford University, a wide range of academic centers and institutes have been established to prioritize innovation, creativity, and design thinking. This qualitative study presents a typology of these centers across the United States, drawing on "About Us" language from 44 entities. Typologies drawn from the data analysis position the centers as innovators in engaging design to: reimagine higher education, cultivate a strong societal purpose or mission, develop the student as an entrepreneur, develop the student as a designer, confront problems and create solutions, support making as a learning experience, and develop the field of design.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2026
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1495611
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1495611
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/he.20520
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 11
        StartPage: 41
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Thinking Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Concept Formation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Creative Thinking
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Institutes (Training Programs)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Classification
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Change
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Institutional Mission
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Incubating Ideas: A Typology of Design Thinking Academic Centers in American Higher Education
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Margaret T. Konkel
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0271-0560
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1536-0741
          Numbering:
            – Type: issue
              Value: 212
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: New Directions for Higher Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1