Eksplorasi Potensi Design Thinking Dalam Implementasi PjBL di Sekolah Dasar

Eky Ayu Larasati, Isniatun Munawaroh

Abstract


This study aimed to analyse the potential of Design Thinking in supporting Deep Learning and students’ critical thinking skills through the implementation of Project-Based Learning (PjBL) in elementary schools in Yogyakarta. The study employed a qualitative exploratory case study approach. The research was conducted in two elementary schools actively implementing project-based learning practices. Data were collected through non-intervention participatory observations, in-depth interviews, and documentation studies. Data analysis involved data reduction, thematic categorisation, and conclusion drawing through methodological triangulation. The findings indicate that PjBL implementation encouraged active student participation; however, such engagement did not always result in deep learning processes. One school demonstrated a false active learning phenomenon, where students appeared physically active yet lacked reflective and metacognitive engagement. In contrast, the second school demonstrated that teacher-facilitated dialogue, reflection, and idea exploration supported deeper cognitive engagement among students. The findings suggest that Design Thinking possesses strong potential to strengthen PjBL implementation through empathy-building, problem exploration, reflective learning, and iterative solution development, thereby supporting deep learning and critical thinking development in elementary education.

Keywords


design thinking; project-based learning; deep learning; critical thinking; elementary school

References


Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415.

Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811.

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27– 40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027.

Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: How design thinking creates new alternatives for business and society. Harvard Business Press.

Carroll, M., Goldman, S., Britos, L., Koh, J., Royalty, A., & Hornstein, M. (2010). Destination, imagination and the fires within: Design thinking in a middle school classroom. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2010.01632.x.

Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. McGraw-Hill.

Facione, P. A. (2020). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts (6th ed.). Insight Assessment.

Fullan, M., Quinn, J., & McEachen, J. (2018). Deep learning: Engage the world change the world. Corwin.

Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford. (2017). An introduction to design thinking: Process guide. Stanford University.

Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: A creative approach to educational problems of practice. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 26, 140–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001.

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.

Kemendikbudristek. (2021). Profil Sekolah Penggerak. Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi.

Kemendikbudristek. (2022). Panduan pembelajaran dan asesmen Kurikulum Merdeka. Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On Qualitative Differences in Learning: I—Outcome and Process. British Journal of Educational Psychology.

Mergendoller, J. R., Maxwell, N. L., & Bellisimo, Y. (2006). The effectiveness of problem-based instruction: A comparative study of instructional methods and student characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(2), 49–69. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1026.

Markham, T. (2011). Project based learning: A bridge just far enough. Teacher Librarian, 39(2), 38–42.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014).Qualitative data analysis. Sage.

OECD. (2018). The future of education and skills 2030. OECD Publishing.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage.

Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. J. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429.

Sumardi, L., Rohman, A., & Wahyudiati, D. (2020). Does the teaching and learning process in primary schools correspond to the characteristics of 21st century learning? International Journal of Instruction, 13(3), 357–370. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13325a.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications. Sage.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15548/alawlad.v16i1.13968

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2026 eky ayu larasati

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.