Deconstructing the Bright Future of STEAM and Design Thinking

References

• Allina, B. (2018). The development of STEAM educational policy to promote student creativity and social empowerment. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 77–87.
   Google Scholar
• Ambrose, G., & Harris, P. (2010). Design thinking. London, UK: Fairchild Books.
   Google Scholar
• Arendt, H. (1961). Between past and future. New York, NY: Viking.
   Google Scholar
• Atkinson, D. (2017). Some thoughts on the finitude and infinitude of learning and teaching in the context of art in education. In j. jagodzinski (Ed.), What is art education? (pp. 127–159). New York, NY: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, S. (2016). Designing for the futures of art education. Art Education, 69(6), 16–20.
   Google Scholar
• Biesta, G. (2018). What if: Art education beyond expression and creativity. In C. Naughton, G. Biesta, & D. Cole (Eds.), Art, artists, and pedagogy (pp. 11–30). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T. (2009). Change by design. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
   Google Scholar
• Burnett, B., & Evans, D. (2016). Designing your life: How to build a well-lived, joyful life. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
   Google Scholar
• Costantino, T. (2018). STEAM by another name: Transdisciplinary practice in art and design education. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 100–106.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, N. (2011). Design thinking: Understanding how designers work. New York, NY: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• d.School. (2019). Stanford d.School. [Website]. Retrieved from https://dschool.stanford.edu/
   Google Scholar
• Davis, B., Sumara, D., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2015). Engaging minds (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York, NY: Perigree.
   Google Scholar
• Dickerman, L. (2009). Bauhaus fundamentals. In B. Bergdoll& L. Dickerman(Eds.), Bauhaus: Workshop for modernity (pp. 14–40). New York, NY: Museum of Modern Art.
   Google Scholar
• Dion, M. (n.d.). Interview: Science and aesthetics. Art 21 PBS. Retrieved from https://art21.org/read/mark-dion-science-and-aesthetics
   Google Scholar
• Francis, B., Graham, M. A., & Barney, D. T. (2018). Pretending to be an art teacher. Visual Arts Research, 44(2), 78–86.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, L. (2017, September 10). Can design thinking redesign higher ed? Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com/article/Can-Design-Thinking-Redesign/241126
   Google Scholar
• Graham, M. A. (2011). The art of collecting, material culture, and place-based education. In P. Bolin & D. Blandy (Eds.), Matter matters (pp. 64–73). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, M. A. (2014). The meditation collection space. Visual Arts Research, 40(1), 49–53.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Henriksen, D. (2017). Creating STEAM with design thinking: Beyond STEM and arts integration. The STEAM Journal, 3(1), 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Horvath, L., & Marshall, J. (2014). The natural sciences. In J. Marshall & D. Donahue (Eds.), Art-centered learning across the curriculum (pp. 35–88). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• jagodzinski, j. (2010). Visual art and education in an era of designer capitalism. New York, NY: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• jagodzinski, j. (2012). The terror of creativity: Art education after postmodernism. The Journal of Social Theory in Art Education, 32, 14–28.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, S. (2010). Where good ideas come from. New York, NY: Riverhead.
   Google Scholar
• Kalin, N. M. (2019). Decreating entrepreneurialized art education. Art Education, 72(6), 44–45.
   Google Scholar
• Katz-Buonincontro, J. (2018). Gathering STE(A)M: Policy, curricular, and programmatic developments in arts-based science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education [Introduction to special STEAM issue]. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 73–76.
   Google Scholar
• Knochel, A. (2017). DigiFab kits: Mini mobile makerspace design in the arts curriculum. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 8(1), 52–56.
   Google Scholar
• Knochel, A. (2018). An object-oriented curriculum theory for STEAM: Boundary shifters, materiality, and per(form)ing 3D thinking. International Journal of Education Through Art, 14(1), 35–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knochel, A., & Patton, R. (2015). If art education then critical digital making: Computational thinking and creative code. Studies in Art Education, 57(1), 21–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahey, J. (2017, January 4). How design thinking became a buzzword at school. The Atlantic, 17–24.
   Google Scholar
• Liao, C. (2016). From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: An arts-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Education, 69(6), 44–49.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood, T. (2009). Forward. In T. Lockwood (Ed.), Design thinking (p. 312). New York, NY: Allworth.
   Google Scholar
• Maeda, J. (2013). STEM + art = STEAM. The STEAM Journal, 1 (1), 1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. (2014). Transdisciplinarity and art integration: Toward a new understanding of art-based learning across the curriculum. Studies in Art Education, 55(2), 104–127.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. (2019). Integrating the visual arts across the curriculum. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J., & Donahue, D. (2014). Art-centered learning across the curriculum. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, P. (2015, March 26). Is “Design Thinking” the new liberal arts? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com/article/Is-Design-Thinking-the-New/228779
   Google Scholar
• Norton, P., & Hathaway, D. (2015). In search of a teacher education curriculum: Appropriating a design lens to solve problems of practice. Educational Technology, 55(6), 3–14.
   Google Scholar
• Peppler, K., & Wohlwend, K. (2018). Theorizing the nexus of STEAM practice. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 88–99.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, D. (2006). A whole new mind. New York, NY: The Berkeley Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Pink, D. (2012). To sell is human. New York, NY: Riverhead.
   Google Scholar
• Rollins, J. (2016). Reinventing the STEAM engine for Art + Design education. Art Education, 69(4), 4–7.
   Google Scholar
• Sollins, S. (2009). Art: 21, volume 2: Art in the twenty-first century. New York, NY: PBS.
   Google Scholar
• Sollins, S. (2013). Art: 21, volume 6: Art in the twenty-first century. New York, NY: PBS.
   Google Scholar
• Sousa, D., & Pilecki, T. (2018). From stem to STEAM (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
   Google Scholar
• Strand, M. (1980). Selected poems. New York, NY: Atheneum.
   Google Scholar
• Vande Zande, R. (2017). Design education. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Vinsell, L. (2018, May 28). Design thinking is a boondogle. Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com/article/Design-Thinking-Is-a/243472
   Google Scholar
• Walter-Herrmann, J., & Büching, C. (2014). Notes on fablabs. In J. Walter-Herrmann & C. Büching (Eds.), Fablab of machines, makers, and inventors (pp. 8–23). Berlin, Germany: Deutsche Nationalbibliothek.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, A. (2016). Revving up the STEAM engine. Art Education, 69(4), 8–11.
   Google Scholar
• Wladawsky-Berger, I. (2016, November 6). Is design thinking the new liberal arts? The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://on.wsj.com/2eH8Crw
   Google Scholar
• Zwirn, S., & Vande Zande, R. (2015). Differences between art and design education—or differences in conceptions of creativity? Journal of Creative Behavior, 10(3), 1–15.
   Google Scholar