Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{196623,
        author = {Nirali Piyushkumar Patel and Prof. Dr. Alka J. Macwan},
        title = {Design Thinking–Based STEM Instruction through a Neuroeducational Framework: A PRISMA-Based Review},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {12},
        number = {11},
        pages = {3770-3799},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=196623},
        abstract = {As secondary education increasingly pivots toward interdisciplinary and process-oriented learning, Design Thinking (DT) has emerged as a transformative pedagogical catalyst for STEM reform. This systematic literature review critically examines and synthesizes contemporary empirical research on DT-based STEM instruction, with a specific emphasis on integrating cognitive, affective, and neuroeducational perspectives. Following a rigorous selection process, 21 peer-reviewed studies published between 2022 and 2025 were analysed and categorized into seven thematic dimensions: effectiveness in STEM, learning outcomes and skills, subject domain trends, pedagogical approaches, neuroeducational gaps, moderating variables, and methodological status. The findings reveal that the EDIPT (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test) model remains the dominant instructional framework, demonstrating significant efficacy in secondary-level biology and physics for enhancing conceptual mastery, scientific reasoning, and intrinsic motivation. Students engaged in DT-driven environments consistently report heightened STEM self-efficacy and a resilient “fail-forward” mindset, which effectively lowers psychological barriers to complex problem-solving. Despite these pedagogical successes, the synthesis identifies a significant “neuroeducational paradox”: while the iterative nature of DT aligns theoretically with known principles of neural plasticity and executive function, empirical evidence is predominantly limited to conventional achievement-focused measures. A critical “black box” remains regarding the internal cognitive and neural infrastructure of the learner, with a notable scarcity of direct neuro-physiological measurements such as EEG or eye-tracking data to validate claims of cognitive development. Furthermore, the review highlights the underrepresentation of critical moderating variables, specifically metacognition and cognitive load, which significantly influence student performance during high-demand prototyping and testing phases. The implications of these findings suggest a necessary shift from traditional instructional designs toward “brain-informed” design-based learning environments. Sustainable integration of DT in secondary STEM requires systemic reform in assessment practices prioritizing the design process over the final scientific product and the implementation of teacher professional development programs grounded in Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE) science. By consolidating fragmented evidence, this review provides a robust foundation for future research to bridge the gap between design-based pedagogy and the neural dynamics of the learning mind, ultimately preparing students for the cognitive and creative complexities of the 21st-century scientific landscape.},
        keywords = {Design Thinking (DT), STEM Instruction, Neuroeducation, Secondary Education, Systematic Review, EDIPT Framework, Cognitive Load, Metacognition, Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE).},
        month = {April},
        }