Design Thinking as a Commitment to Voice in Education

In an era where schools are increasingly asked to solve complex, real-world problems, design thinking offers more than a framework—it offers a posture. In the work of Dr. Amanda Unger and Dr. Simeon Frang, design thinking is not simply a process to be implemented, but a commitment to centering the voices of those most affected by educational systems. Their leadership demonstrates how empathy, iteration, and shared ownership can transform not only decisions, but the very culture of schooling.

At its core, design thinking begins with empathy. For Dr. Unger, this principle was sharpened during her research amid the Flint water crisis. In that context, she developed a tool intended to better surface and respond to the lived experiences of affected families. While the broader implementation and impact of that tool remain unclear, the work itself underscores a critical insight: solutions are often limited not by effort, but by how well they account for the realities of those they aim to serve. Design thinking, in this sense, insists that any meaningful response must be grounded in listening. Empathy is not a preliminary step; it is the foundation upon which all meaningful problem-solving rests.

Yet empathy alone is insufficient without redefining how problems themselves are understood. Both Unger and Frang emphasize that education systems often misdiagnose challenges because they do so at a distance. Design thinking resists this by requiring deep engagement before problem definition. This shift is subtle but profound: rather than asking, “What is the issue?” leaders begin to ask, “How is this experienced?” In doing so, they move from abstract problem-solving to human-centered design.

Dr. Frang extends this work through a sustained focus on student voice. Across varied school contexts—ranging from high-poverty public schools to affluent and private settings—his research revealed a consistent truth: when students are meaningfully included in decision-making, systems become stronger. This is not about symbolic inclusion, but about redistributing power. Creating structures where student perspectives shape outcomes challenges traditional hierarchies, yet it leads to deeper engagement, stronger relationships, and more responsive schools.

Importantly, both leaders acknowledge the tension between compliance and commitment. Schools operate within layers of mandates, policies, and accountability structures. Design thinking does not eliminate these constraints; instead, it reframes how leaders navigate them. For Frang, the question becomes how to remain committed to inclusive, human-centered practices while still meeting external requirements. The answer lies in embedding empathy and voice throughout the process—not as an add-on, but as a guiding principle.