Design thinking is widely adopted in engineering education to develop human-centred design capabilities, yet practices remain fragmented due to varied implementations, organisational barriers, and persistent gaps between theory and application. This literature review examines how design thinking has been conceptualised, implemented, and evaluated in higher engineering education from 2003 to 2023, analysing 76 empirical studies through a HOW (implementation strategies)–WHAT (core elements)–WHY (adoption rationales) framework. Findings reveal rapid growth after 2018, consolidation around three primary definitional sources, and widespread adoption of Stanford's five-stage model. Integration remains predominantly course-based rather than programme-wide. Four core competencies emerge across studies: creativity, collaboration, empathy, and problem-solving. Such consistency across institutional contexts and engineering disciplines underscores design thinking's potential to address persistent gaps in traditional curricula. Assessment approaches demonstrate methodological pluralism, though direct observation remains rare. This review offers evidence-based guidance for implementing design thinking in engineering education’.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Deng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: