Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3976
https://doi.org/10.69639/arandu.v12i3.1604
Enhancing University EFL Learners' Speaking Skills through
Design Thinking: Preliminary Findings
Mejora de las habilidades de expresión oral de estudiantes universitarios de inglés como
lengua extranjera mediante la técnica diseño de pensamiento: resultados preliminares
Laura Mariscal Touzard
laura.mariscalt@ug.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7418-2797
Facultad de FilosofÃa, Letras y Ciencias de la Educación
Universidad de Guayaquil
Martha Castillo Noriega
marthacastillo@uees.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7867-7463
Facultad de Educación / Universidad de Especialidades EspÃritu Santo
Alexis Contreras Falcones
alexiscontreras@uees.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3958-0953
Facultad de Educación / Universidad de Especialidades EspÃritu Santo
Albania Cadena Aguilar
alcadena@espol.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1766-380X
Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral
Alison Herrera Conforme
aliliher@espol.edu.ec
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7636-0606
Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral
ArtÃculo recibido: 18 agosto 2025 - Aceptado para publicación: 28 septiembre 2025
Conflictos de intereses: Ninguno que declarar.
ABSTRACT
In the 21st century, university programs must respond to the demands of the job market, which
increasingly requires professionals capable of adapting to dynamic environments and generating
innovative ideas. The development of critical and creative thinking, the promotion of collaborative
learning, and preparation to face future challenges are essential to address complex problems and
achieve professional success. In this context, Design Thinking (DT), a methodology focused on creative
problem-solving, offers a promising strategy for integration into higher education, particularly in the
teaching of English as a Foreign Language (EFL). This study examines the impact of a DT-based project
on the development of speaking skills in 86 students from a public university in Ecuador, divided into
a control group (n = 43) and an experimental group (n = 43). Quantitative data were analyzed using
descriptive and inferential statistics, while qualitative responses were examined through thematic
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3977
coding. The findings indicate that the implementation of DT improved the speaking performance of the
experimental group by 0.4 points and fostered the development of both cognitive and emotional
competencies, such as problem-solving, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, cognitive structuring, and
teamwork. However, participants reported challenges related to time organization, and lack of
confidence at the beginning of the project. Overall, the results support DT as an effective
methodological approach to promote context-based oral communication. The authors recommend
creating Design Thinking experiences based on students' professional interests to develop meaningful
language skills to apply in real-world situations.
Keywords: design thinking, oral expression, creative problem-solving skills
RESUMEN
En el siglo XXI, los programas universitarios deben responder a las demandas del mercado laboral, el
cual requiere cada vez más profesionales capaces de adaptarse a entornos dinámicos y generar ideas
innovadoras. El desarrollo del pensamiento crÃtico y creativo, la promoción del aprendizaje colaborativo
y la preparación para enfrentar los desafÃos futuros son esenciales para abordar problemas complejos y
alcanzar el éxito profesional. En este contexto, el Design Thinking (DT), una metodologÃa centrada en
la resolución creativa de problemas, ofrece una estrategia prometedora para su integración en la
educación superior, especialmente en la enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera (EFL, por sus
siglas en inglés). Este estudio examina el impacto de un proyecto basado en DT en el desarrollo de las
habilidades de expresión oral en 86 estudiantes de una universidad pública en Ecuador, divididos en un
grupo de control (n = 43) y un grupo experimental (n = 43). Los datos cuantitativos fueron analizados
utilizando estadÃsticas descriptivas e inferenciales, mientras que las respuestas cualitativas se
examinaron mediante codificación temática. Los resultados muestran que implementar Design
Thinking (DT) mejoró en 0,4 puntos el rendimiento oral del grupo experimental y potenció
competencias cognitivas y socioemocionales: resolución de problemas, motivación intrÃnseca y
extrÃnseca, estructuración cognitiva y trabajo en equipo. Surgieron dificultades de gestión del tiempo y
baja confianza inicial. En conjunto, la evidencia respalda al DT como un enfoque eficaz para promover
la comunicación oral situada. Se recomienda diseñar experiencias de DT alineadas con los intereses
profesionales, a fin de desarrollar habilidades lingüÃsticas significativas y transferibles a contextos del
mundo real.
Palabras clave: design thinking, expresión oral, resolución creativa de problemas
Todo el contenido de la Revista CientÃfica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo licencia
Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
coding. The findings indicate that the implementation of DT improved the speaking performance of the
experimental group by 0.4 points and fostered the development of both cognitive and emotional
competencies, such as problem-solving, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, cognitive structuring, and
teamwork. However, participants reported challenges related to time organization, and lack of
confidence at the beginning of the project. Overall, the results support DT as an effective
methodological approach to promote context-based oral communication. The authors recommend
creating Design Thinking experiences based on students' professional interests to develop meaningful
language skills to apply in real-world situations.
Keywords: design thinking, oral expression, creative problem-solving skills
RESUMEN
En el siglo XXI, los programas universitarios deben responder a las demandas del mercado laboral, el
cual requiere cada vez más profesionales capaces de adaptarse a entornos dinámicos y generar ideas
innovadoras. El desarrollo del pensamiento crÃtico y creativo, la promoción del aprendizaje colaborativo
y la preparación para enfrentar los desafÃos futuros son esenciales para abordar problemas complejos y
alcanzar el éxito profesional. En este contexto, el Design Thinking (DT), una metodologÃa centrada en
la resolución creativa de problemas, ofrece una estrategia prometedora para su integración en la
educación superior, especialmente en la enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera (EFL, por sus
siglas en inglés). Este estudio examina el impacto de un proyecto basado en DT en el desarrollo de las
habilidades de expresión oral en 86 estudiantes de una universidad pública en Ecuador, divididos en un
grupo de control (n = 43) y un grupo experimental (n = 43). Los datos cuantitativos fueron analizados
utilizando estadÃsticas descriptivas e inferenciales, mientras que las respuestas cualitativas se
examinaron mediante codificación temática. Los resultados muestran que implementar Design
Thinking (DT) mejoró en 0,4 puntos el rendimiento oral del grupo experimental y potenció
competencias cognitivas y socioemocionales: resolución de problemas, motivación intrÃnseca y
extrÃnseca, estructuración cognitiva y trabajo en equipo. Surgieron dificultades de gestión del tiempo y
baja confianza inicial. En conjunto, la evidencia respalda al DT como un enfoque eficaz para promover
la comunicación oral situada. Se recomienda diseñar experiencias de DT alineadas con los intereses
profesionales, a fin de desarrollar habilidades lingüÃsticas significativas y transferibles a contextos del
mundo real.
Palabras clave: design thinking, expresión oral, resolución creativa de problemas
Todo el contenido de la Revista CientÃfica Internacional Arandu UTIC publicado en este sitio está disponible bajo licencia
Creative Commons Atribution 4.0 International.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3978
INTRODUCTION
In today’s interconnected world, speaking English fluently has become not only an important
academic objective but also a crucial professional and social skill. As the primary language of global
communication, English places increasing demands on students in public universities, particularly in
non-English-speaking contexts like Ecuador, where limited classroom time and minimal real-world
exposure create significant barriers to oral proficiency (Salomone, 2022). Although pedagogical
approaches such as role-plays, group presentations, and dialogue tasks have been introduced, many
learners continue to struggle with speaking. Common difficulties include fear of making mistakes,
restricted vocabulary, insufficient speaking opportunities, and low self-confidence.
One of the most pervasive problems faced by non-native English learners in public universities
is the lack of confidence when speaking. This insecurity often stems from a fear of making grammatical
or pronunciation mistakes in front of others, which may lead to embarrassment or criticism. Many
students have been conditioned through traditional, test-focused language instruction, where accuracy
is emphasized over fluency, and errors are penalized rather than treated as part of the learning process.
As a result, learners frequently hesitate to participate in oral tasks or avoid speaking altogether (Alazeer
& Ahmed, 2024). This fear of failure limits their ability to practice, experiment with the language, and
develop fluency, ultimately creating a cycle of silence and low performance in speaking skills. In large
classrooms with limited individual attention, students may feel even more exposed and unsupported
when trying to communicate in English, reinforcing their reluctance to speak.
Another major obstacle in the development of oral skills is the absence of authentic and
meaningful interaction in English (Hwang, et. al, 2024). In many general English programs offered in
public universities, speaking activities are often limited to controlled, scripted dialogues or repetition
exercises that do not reflect real-life communication (Durán & GarcÃa, 2021). This lack of real-world
application makes it difficult for learners to engage with the language in a purposeful way;
consequently, they fail to develop communicative competence. Students frequently report that they do
not have enough opportunities to practice English outside the classroom or even within it, especially in
environments where classmates and instructors also share the same native language. The limited
exposure to spontaneous conversations, problem-solving discussions, or collaborative tasks in English
results in low oral fluency levels, poor listening comprehension, and struggles to express ideas clearly
and effectively in real situations (Granda, Parra, et al., 2024). Language learning, therefore, remains
theoretical rather than practical without opportunities for meaningful interaction.
A third significant barrier to speaking development is the absence of learner autonomy in many
classrooms, where students are not allowed to make choices or take responsibility for their learning. In
traditional settings, learners get used to following rigid instructions and heavily rely on the teacher to
validate their performance (Rahmasari et al., 2025). This teacher-centered model discourages learner
initiative, self-correction, and decision-making skills that are essential for real communicative success.
INTRODUCTION
In today’s interconnected world, speaking English fluently has become not only an important
academic objective but also a crucial professional and social skill. As the primary language of global
communication, English places increasing demands on students in public universities, particularly in
non-English-speaking contexts like Ecuador, where limited classroom time and minimal real-world
exposure create significant barriers to oral proficiency (Salomone, 2022). Although pedagogical
approaches such as role-plays, group presentations, and dialogue tasks have been introduced, many
learners continue to struggle with speaking. Common difficulties include fear of making mistakes,
restricted vocabulary, insufficient speaking opportunities, and low self-confidence.
One of the most pervasive problems faced by non-native English learners in public universities
is the lack of confidence when speaking. This insecurity often stems from a fear of making grammatical
or pronunciation mistakes in front of others, which may lead to embarrassment or criticism. Many
students have been conditioned through traditional, test-focused language instruction, where accuracy
is emphasized over fluency, and errors are penalized rather than treated as part of the learning process.
As a result, learners frequently hesitate to participate in oral tasks or avoid speaking altogether (Alazeer
& Ahmed, 2024). This fear of failure limits their ability to practice, experiment with the language, and
develop fluency, ultimately creating a cycle of silence and low performance in speaking skills. In large
classrooms with limited individual attention, students may feel even more exposed and unsupported
when trying to communicate in English, reinforcing their reluctance to speak.
Another major obstacle in the development of oral skills is the absence of authentic and
meaningful interaction in English (Hwang, et. al, 2024). In many general English programs offered in
public universities, speaking activities are often limited to controlled, scripted dialogues or repetition
exercises that do not reflect real-life communication (Durán & GarcÃa, 2021). This lack of real-world
application makes it difficult for learners to engage with the language in a purposeful way;
consequently, they fail to develop communicative competence. Students frequently report that they do
not have enough opportunities to practice English outside the classroom or even within it, especially in
environments where classmates and instructors also share the same native language. The limited
exposure to spontaneous conversations, problem-solving discussions, or collaborative tasks in English
results in low oral fluency levels, poor listening comprehension, and struggles to express ideas clearly
and effectively in real situations (Granda, Parra, et al., 2024). Language learning, therefore, remains
theoretical rather than practical without opportunities for meaningful interaction.
A third significant barrier to speaking development is the absence of learner autonomy in many
classrooms, where students are not allowed to make choices or take responsibility for their learning. In
traditional settings, learners get used to following rigid instructions and heavily rely on the teacher to
validate their performance (Rahmasari et al., 2025). This teacher-centered model discourages learner
initiative, self-correction, and decision-making skills that are essential for real communicative success.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3979
When students are not trained to take ownership of their learning or make decisions independently, they
struggle with speaking tasks that require planning, creativity, or spontaneity. In project-based or
interactive learning environments, these students may experience discomfort or confusion, as they are
unaccustomed to the roles of active participant or co-creator of their own prompts. This lack of
autonomy limits oral practice and prevents students from building confidence, setting personal goals,
or engaging meaningfully with peers in English (Li, et al., 2024).
These persistent problems suggest a gap between the teaching strategies employed and the
learners’ personal needs, emotional readiness, and communicative realities. The challenge is not only
about creating opportunities to speak, but also about designing meaningful, supportive learning
experiences with authentic interaction in the English language that would help these present university
students to make decisions later as a job team member in professional settings. In this context, Design
Thinking (DT) emerges as a promising approach to address the complex and interconnected challenges
that English learners face in developing oral communication skills. Design Thinking fosters empathy,
collaboration, creativity, assertive communication, and reflection—all of which are essential to
overcome fear of speaking, encourage authentic interaction in real-life settings, and promote learner
autonomy to resume student accountability (Cleminson & Cowie, 2021). Unlike traditional pedagogies,
DT sets the learner at the core of the process and emphasizes a human-centered and iterative process
through its five structured stages: Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, and Test, students engage in
tasks that simulate real-world communication, require peer collaboration, and support a growth mindset
as active problem-solvers. (Baird & Dilger, 2023)
Therefore, this study aims to examine the impact of implementing DT on speaking skills among
EFL students in a public university in Ecuador. It seeks to answer the following research questions: (a)
To what extent does the implementation of the Design Thinking approach improve the oral expression
skills of EFL students compared to those who follow traditional instruction in a public university
setting? (b) What perceived benefits do EFL students identify after participating in a Design Thinking-
based speaking project? (c) What challenges do students face when integrating the Design Thinking
approach into the EFL curriculum at the university level?
Design Thinking
Design Thinking is a human-centered problem-solving approach that emphasizes creativity,
empathy, and iterative learning (Brown, 2009). It was popularized in the early 2000s by David Kelley,
founder of the design company IDEO and the Stanford school. The process typically includes five key
stages: Empathize, where designers seek to understand users' needs and experiences; Define, where the
core problem is clearly articulated; Ideate, which involves generating a wide range of creative solutions;
Prototype, where simple, low-cost versions of the best ideas are built; and Test, where these prototypes
are evaluated with users and improved based on feedback. This iterative cycle helps refine both
understanding of the problem and the solutions.
When students are not trained to take ownership of their learning or make decisions independently, they
struggle with speaking tasks that require planning, creativity, or spontaneity. In project-based or
interactive learning environments, these students may experience discomfort or confusion, as they are
unaccustomed to the roles of active participant or co-creator of their own prompts. This lack of
autonomy limits oral practice and prevents students from building confidence, setting personal goals,
or engaging meaningfully with peers in English (Li, et al., 2024).
These persistent problems suggest a gap between the teaching strategies employed and the
learners’ personal needs, emotional readiness, and communicative realities. The challenge is not only
about creating opportunities to speak, but also about designing meaningful, supportive learning
experiences with authentic interaction in the English language that would help these present university
students to make decisions later as a job team member in professional settings. In this context, Design
Thinking (DT) emerges as a promising approach to address the complex and interconnected challenges
that English learners face in developing oral communication skills. Design Thinking fosters empathy,
collaboration, creativity, assertive communication, and reflection—all of which are essential to
overcome fear of speaking, encourage authentic interaction in real-life settings, and promote learner
autonomy to resume student accountability (Cleminson & Cowie, 2021). Unlike traditional pedagogies,
DT sets the learner at the core of the process and emphasizes a human-centered and iterative process
through its five structured stages: Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, and Test, students engage in
tasks that simulate real-world communication, require peer collaboration, and support a growth mindset
as active problem-solvers. (Baird & Dilger, 2023)
Therefore, this study aims to examine the impact of implementing DT on speaking skills among
EFL students in a public university in Ecuador. It seeks to answer the following research questions: (a)
To what extent does the implementation of the Design Thinking approach improve the oral expression
skills of EFL students compared to those who follow traditional instruction in a public university
setting? (b) What perceived benefits do EFL students identify after participating in a Design Thinking-
based speaking project? (c) What challenges do students face when integrating the Design Thinking
approach into the EFL curriculum at the university level?
Design Thinking
Design Thinking is a human-centered problem-solving approach that emphasizes creativity,
empathy, and iterative learning (Brown, 2009). It was popularized in the early 2000s by David Kelley,
founder of the design company IDEO and the Stanford school. The process typically includes five key
stages: Empathize, where designers seek to understand users' needs and experiences; Define, where the
core problem is clearly articulated; Ideate, which involves generating a wide range of creative solutions;
Prototype, where simple, low-cost versions of the best ideas are built; and Test, where these prototypes
are evaluated with users and improved based on feedback. This iterative cycle helps refine both
understanding of the problem and the solutions.
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3980
Each step encourages active participation, collaboration, and critical thinking, making Design
Thinking particularly suitable for educational contexts. When applied in the classroom, especially in
language learning, it can engage students in meaningful tasks that require communication, problem-
solving, and reflection, which are essential for developing oral skills in English.
Design Thinking and EFL
Design Thinking, though originally developed in the fields of engineering and product design,
has found meaningful applications in education, including the teaching of EFL. Its emphasis on
empathy, creativity, collaboration, and iterative learning aligns well with communicative language
teaching approaches (Liedtka, 2018). In the EFL classroom, Design Thinking can foster engaging, real-
world tasks where learners use the target language to define problems, brainstorm ideas, and present
solutions, activities that naturally promote speaking practice. According to Richards (2006) and Brown
(2007), language learning is most effective when it is interactive, student-centered, and embedded in
real communication, which mirrors the core principles of Design Thinking. Puccio et al. (2011) also
emphasize how creativity and innovation, central to Design Thinking, can enhance learners’
engagement and communicative competence.
Numerous studies have explored this intersection. For instance, Jones (2024) highlights how
Design Thinking supports 21st-century skills in language learning, particularly critical thinking and
communication. Similarly, Cleminson, & Cowie (2021) demonstrate how applying Design Thinking in
EFL contexts encourages deeper learner involvement and sustained motivation. Through group
collaboration, idea development, and peer feedback activities built into the Design Thinking cycle,
learners can improve fluency, vocabulary usage, and confidence in speaking English.
Theories Behind Design Thinking
A key theory that supports Design Thinking is Constructivim. Particularly rooted in Jean Piaget
and Lev Vygotsky and later increased in scope by Seymour Papert. The authors Schcolnik et al. (2006)
explain that constructivism views the mind as an active agent seeking knowledge as it is constructed
through interaction with the environment, not merely transferred. This interaction is developed through
activities, culture and specific contexts where learners build meaningful knowledge through
construction and evaluation. While Piaget focused on cognitive structures, Vygotsky remarked on the
social origins of cognition. Therefore, this theory can reshape educational practices, highlighting active
knowledge construction.
Seymour Papert’s (1982) theory, which is closely aligned with Design Thinking, is called
Constructionism, an evolution of Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s Constructivism. While Constructivism
highlights how people construct knowledge, Constructionism adds that learning happens most
effectively when people are actively making things in the world. This theory emphasizes student-
centered, discovery-based learning where learners build on prior knowledge through hands-on
experiences and creative problem-solving. Often described as "learning-by-making," it encourages
students to draw their own conclusions by creating meaningful, social artifacts. Teachers act as
Each step encourages active participation, collaboration, and critical thinking, making Design
Thinking particularly suitable for educational contexts. When applied in the classroom, especially in
language learning, it can engage students in meaningful tasks that require communication, problem-
solving, and reflection, which are essential for developing oral skills in English.
Design Thinking and EFL
Design Thinking, though originally developed in the fields of engineering and product design,
has found meaningful applications in education, including the teaching of EFL. Its emphasis on
empathy, creativity, collaboration, and iterative learning aligns well with communicative language
teaching approaches (Liedtka, 2018). In the EFL classroom, Design Thinking can foster engaging, real-
world tasks where learners use the target language to define problems, brainstorm ideas, and present
solutions, activities that naturally promote speaking practice. According to Richards (2006) and Brown
(2007), language learning is most effective when it is interactive, student-centered, and embedded in
real communication, which mirrors the core principles of Design Thinking. Puccio et al. (2011) also
emphasize how creativity and innovation, central to Design Thinking, can enhance learners’
engagement and communicative competence.
Numerous studies have explored this intersection. For instance, Jones (2024) highlights how
Design Thinking supports 21st-century skills in language learning, particularly critical thinking and
communication. Similarly, Cleminson, & Cowie (2021) demonstrate how applying Design Thinking in
EFL contexts encourages deeper learner involvement and sustained motivation. Through group
collaboration, idea development, and peer feedback activities built into the Design Thinking cycle,
learners can improve fluency, vocabulary usage, and confidence in speaking English.
Theories Behind Design Thinking
A key theory that supports Design Thinking is Constructivim. Particularly rooted in Jean Piaget
and Lev Vygotsky and later increased in scope by Seymour Papert. The authors Schcolnik et al. (2006)
explain that constructivism views the mind as an active agent seeking knowledge as it is constructed
through interaction with the environment, not merely transferred. This interaction is developed through
activities, culture and specific contexts where learners build meaningful knowledge through
construction and evaluation. While Piaget focused on cognitive structures, Vygotsky remarked on the
social origins of cognition. Therefore, this theory can reshape educational practices, highlighting active
knowledge construction.
Seymour Papert’s (1982) theory, which is closely aligned with Design Thinking, is called
Constructionism, an evolution of Piaget’s and Vygotsky’s Constructivism. While Constructivism
highlights how people construct knowledge, Constructionism adds that learning happens most
effectively when people are actively making things in the world. This theory emphasizes student-
centered, discovery-based learning where learners build on prior knowledge through hands-on
experiences and creative problem-solving. Often described as "learning-by-making," it encourages
students to draw their own conclusions by creating meaningful, social artifacts. Teachers act as
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3981
facilitators rather than direct instructors, guiding students to explore and support each other’s
understanding. One key method, problem-based learning, challenges students with multiple problems,
promoting deep engagement—especially effective in subjects like mathematics, where diverse
problem-solving strategies stimulate critical thinking.
Design Thinking (DT) offers an innovative, student-centered approach that complements well-
established EFL theories such as Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Task-Based Language
Teaching (TBLT), and Constructivism. CLT emphasizes meaningful communication and learner
interaction (Richards, 2006), both of which are core elements of the DT process. In DT, students engage
in real-world problem-solving tasks that require collaboration, empathy, and language use for authentic
purposes (Brown, 2006). This aligns with TBLT, which values tasks as the central unit of planning and
instruction, encouraging learners to use the language to accomplish specific goals (Ellis, 2003). Design
Thinking’s iterative process—empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test—mirrors the kind of
learning cycles found in constructivist classrooms, where learners build knowledge through exploration,
reflection, and adaptation (Schön, 1983; Puccio et al., 2011). By integrating these theoretical
foundations, DT offers a pedagogical framework that enhances communicative competence and learner
engagement in EFL settings.
In the EFL classroom, applying DT means moving beyond textbook dialogues to experiential
learning, where students co-create solutions, engage in peer feedback, and present ideas using English.
These practices foster autonomy, creativity, and higher motivation. As Richards (2006) and Brown
(2007) argue, language acquisition flourishes in environments that are interactive, meaningful, and
socially constructed. Design Thinking supports this by framing language use within relevant,
collaborative challenges. Moreover, scholars like Batubara et al. (2024) emphasize that integrating
creativity and innovation through DT can significantly enhance learners' communicative competence,
especially in speaking. Thus, Design Thinking is not just a methodology for design fields—it is a robust
framework that enriches EFL pedagogy by deepening student engagement and promoting authentic
language use.
Implementing DT to improve speaking
Design Thinking (DT) has emerged as a valuable pedagogical approach to enhance speaking
skills in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts. Cleminson, & Cowie (2021) emphasize that
the integration of DT into classroom instruction significantly improves learners’ oral fluency and
confidence. This is largely due to the interactive and student-centered nature of DT, which engages
learners in meaningful communication throughout its core phases—empathizing, ideating, prototyping,
and testing. The structure of DT encourages students to explore real-life issues that are relevant to their
lives, promoting a stronger sense of ownership over their learning. As a result, students are not only
more motivated but also more engaged in language tasks that are purposeful and personal.
In addition to fostering motivation, DT supports the development of critical thinking and
collaborative skills that enhance oral communication. Granda et al. (2024) note that students are
facilitators rather than direct instructors, guiding students to explore and support each other’s
understanding. One key method, problem-based learning, challenges students with multiple problems,
promoting deep engagement—especially effective in subjects like mathematics, where diverse
problem-solving strategies stimulate critical thinking.
Design Thinking (DT) offers an innovative, student-centered approach that complements well-
established EFL theories such as Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Task-Based Language
Teaching (TBLT), and Constructivism. CLT emphasizes meaningful communication and learner
interaction (Richards, 2006), both of which are core elements of the DT process. In DT, students engage
in real-world problem-solving tasks that require collaboration, empathy, and language use for authentic
purposes (Brown, 2006). This aligns with TBLT, which values tasks as the central unit of planning and
instruction, encouraging learners to use the language to accomplish specific goals (Ellis, 2003). Design
Thinking’s iterative process—empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test—mirrors the kind of
learning cycles found in constructivist classrooms, where learners build knowledge through exploration,
reflection, and adaptation (Schön, 1983; Puccio et al., 2011). By integrating these theoretical
foundations, DT offers a pedagogical framework that enhances communicative competence and learner
engagement in EFL settings.
In the EFL classroom, applying DT means moving beyond textbook dialogues to experiential
learning, where students co-create solutions, engage in peer feedback, and present ideas using English.
These practices foster autonomy, creativity, and higher motivation. As Richards (2006) and Brown
(2007) argue, language acquisition flourishes in environments that are interactive, meaningful, and
socially constructed. Design Thinking supports this by framing language use within relevant,
collaborative challenges. Moreover, scholars like Batubara et al. (2024) emphasize that integrating
creativity and innovation through DT can significantly enhance learners' communicative competence,
especially in speaking. Thus, Design Thinking is not just a methodology for design fields—it is a robust
framework that enriches EFL pedagogy by deepening student engagement and promoting authentic
language use.
Implementing DT to improve speaking
Design Thinking (DT) has emerged as a valuable pedagogical approach to enhance speaking
skills in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts. Cleminson, & Cowie (2021) emphasize that
the integration of DT into classroom instruction significantly improves learners’ oral fluency and
confidence. This is largely due to the interactive and student-centered nature of DT, which engages
learners in meaningful communication throughout its core phases—empathizing, ideating, prototyping,
and testing. The structure of DT encourages students to explore real-life issues that are relevant to their
lives, promoting a stronger sense of ownership over their learning. As a result, students are not only
more motivated but also more engaged in language tasks that are purposeful and personal.
In addition to fostering motivation, DT supports the development of critical thinking and
collaborative skills that enhance oral communication. Granda et al. (2024) note that students are
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3982
encouraged to reflect on ideas, articulate thoughts clearly, and engage with peers in meaningful
discussion. These experiences help learners to use English in functional ways, improving both fluency
and clarity. Guaman-Quintanila et al. (2020) further argue that the DT process promotes teamwork and
interpersonal communication, as learners co-construct solutions and provide mutual feedback. This
collaborative environment fosters a psychologically safe space, enabling students to take speaking risks
without fear of judgment.
Perhaps most significantly, DT helps to reduce students’ anxiety when speaking in front of others.
As learners become more comfortable through repeated interaction, peer support, and iterative
feedback, their fear of public speaking decreases. Gregersen and Horwitz (2002) explain that speaking
anxiety is a significant barrier in EFL contexts, and lowering it is key to improving performance. The
DT framework addresses this by allowing students to gradually build their confidence across multiple
stages, from initial brainstorming to final presentations. By the time they reach the testing stage, many
students report feeling far more relaxed and secure in expressing themselves in English. This increased
comfort leads to better oral outcomes and a more positive language learning experience overall.
METHODOLOGY
Context
This study was conducted at the Language Center in a public university in Ecuador with an
enrollment of over 10,000 students, all of whom are required to take English modules as part of their
academic curricula. It is developing students’ communicative skills in foreign languages, especially
English. The program is structured into five progressive modules aligned with the Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): Module 1 corresponds to level A1, Module 2 to A2,
Module 3 to B1, Module 4 to B1+, and Module 5 to B2. Each module focuses on strengthening listening,
reading, speaking, and writing skills, preparing students to communicate effectively in both academic
and professional contexts.
Research approach and method
A mixed-method approach with an exploratory sequential design study was applied. It is a
research design used to assess the impact of an intervention or treatment in situations where random
assignment is not feasible (Creswell, 2012). In this study, participants were assigned to different groups
by convenience, as the researcher was immersed in the learning process, and to respect the ethical
procedures of this public Institution.
Participants
The participants of this study are enrolled in a blended B1 course during a semester where they
have 56 in-person hours and 56 autonomous learning hours. This study involved 43 students with an
intermediate level of English proficiency in the intervention group. Over a 10-week semester, these
participants engaged in the implementation of the Design Thinking approach aimed at enhancing their
speaking skills. In parallel, a control group of 43 students with the same proficiency level followed the
encouraged to reflect on ideas, articulate thoughts clearly, and engage with peers in meaningful
discussion. These experiences help learners to use English in functional ways, improving both fluency
and clarity. Guaman-Quintanila et al. (2020) further argue that the DT process promotes teamwork and
interpersonal communication, as learners co-construct solutions and provide mutual feedback. This
collaborative environment fosters a psychologically safe space, enabling students to take speaking risks
without fear of judgment.
Perhaps most significantly, DT helps to reduce students’ anxiety when speaking in front of others.
As learners become more comfortable through repeated interaction, peer support, and iterative
feedback, their fear of public speaking decreases. Gregersen and Horwitz (2002) explain that speaking
anxiety is a significant barrier in EFL contexts, and lowering it is key to improving performance. The
DT framework addresses this by allowing students to gradually build their confidence across multiple
stages, from initial brainstorming to final presentations. By the time they reach the testing stage, many
students report feeling far more relaxed and secure in expressing themselves in English. This increased
comfort leads to better oral outcomes and a more positive language learning experience overall.
METHODOLOGY
Context
This study was conducted at the Language Center in a public university in Ecuador with an
enrollment of over 10,000 students, all of whom are required to take English modules as part of their
academic curricula. It is developing students’ communicative skills in foreign languages, especially
English. The program is structured into five progressive modules aligned with the Common European
Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR): Module 1 corresponds to level A1, Module 2 to A2,
Module 3 to B1, Module 4 to B1+, and Module 5 to B2. Each module focuses on strengthening listening,
reading, speaking, and writing skills, preparing students to communicate effectively in both academic
and professional contexts.
Research approach and method
A mixed-method approach with an exploratory sequential design study was applied. It is a
research design used to assess the impact of an intervention or treatment in situations where random
assignment is not feasible (Creswell, 2012). In this study, participants were assigned to different groups
by convenience, as the researcher was immersed in the learning process, and to respect the ethical
procedures of this public Institution.
Participants
The participants of this study are enrolled in a blended B1 course during a semester where they
have 56 in-person hours and 56 autonomous learning hours. This study involved 43 students with an
intermediate level of English proficiency in the intervention group. Over a 10-week semester, these
participants engaged in the implementation of the Design Thinking approach aimed at enhancing their
speaking skills. In parallel, a control group of 43 students with the same proficiency level followed the
Vol. 12/ Núm. 3 2025 pág. 3983
regular curriculum without the Design Thinking intervention. Prior to this intervention, a pre-survey
was administered to the 117 students at the same proficiency level during the previous semester to
explore the perceived need and feasibility of introducing a new instructional strategy for developing
oral communication skills.
Techniques and instruments to collect information
This study employed a combination of data collection tools, including pre-tests, post-tests, pre-
surveys, post-surveys, and interviews, to systematically gather, analyse, and interpret data in response
to the research questions. These instruments contributed to ensuring the study’s credibility, validity,
and reliability. In the exploratory phase, a pre-survey to B1+ 117 was applied to collect information on
students’ prior experiences and perceptions related to oral English use, teaching strategies perceptions,
and speaking challenges. Cohen et al. (2018) state that pre-surveys serve as diagnostic tools to explore
participants’ prior knowledge, beliefs, or attitudes before an intervention. They help researchers identify
needs, tailor instruction, and establish baseline data for measuring impact.
As noted by Guskey (2015), in the context of social research, these tools are practical when
assessing the academic progress of students during a particular period. In this research, the pre- and
post-tests played a central role in measuring the impact of the design thinking approach on students’
speaking performance, wherein it was required to deliver a 3-minute problem-solving oral presentation.
As part of the implementation, the teacher introduced the topic, explained the expected structure, and
provided prior guidance to support students in their preparation. The evaluation criteria were
communicated through a rubric, which assigned specific weight to each component: Pronunciation
(12.5%), Fluency (12.5%), Grammar and Vocabulary (25%), Delivery (15%), Structure (10%), and
Content (25%). (Table 1). The given structure is this one: (1) Introduction: hook, significance, and
presenter's name and purpose. (2) Problem Explanation: Identification of the problem and
consequences. (3) Proposed Solution: Multiple Solutions and Benefits. (4) Conclusion: Recap, Call
Attention, and Closing.
Following the implementation of the pre-test and pre-survey, the instructor presented the Design
Thinking methodology to the experimental group and outlined the collaborative nature of the upcoming
project. Students were tasked with identifying a challenge associated with learning English and
designing an innovative solution. They were grouped according to similar learning difficulties and
chose a common topic to work on collaboratively. Over ten weeks, students engaged in both
synchronous and asynchronous collaboration through a shared PowerPoint presentation, which served
as a platform for the teacher and students to offer ongoing feedback.
The students followed the five key stages of Design Thinking:
1. Empathize: Students aimed to identify a real problem and understand the needs and experiences
of other learners. They conducted both secondary and first research by reading relevant articles
in terms of their project topic and creating and applying first interviews with their classmates at
the university. The objective of primary research is to collect original data directly from sources,
regular curriculum without the Design Thinking intervention. Prior to this intervention, a pre-survey
was administered to the 117 students at the same proficiency level during the previous semester to
explore the perceived need and feasibility of introducing a new instructional strategy for developing
oral communication skills.
Techniques and instruments to collect information
This study employed a combination of data collection tools, including pre-tests, post-tests, pre-
surveys, post-surveys, and interviews, to systematically gather, analyse, and interpret data in response
to the research questions. These instruments contributed to ensuring the study’s credibility, validity,
and reliability. In the exploratory phase, a pre-survey to B1+ 117 was applied to collect information on
students’ prior experiences and perceptions related to oral English use, teaching strategies perceptions,
and speaking challenges. Cohen et al. (2018) state that pre-surveys serve as diagnostic tools to explore
participants’ prior knowledge, beliefs, or attitudes before an intervention. They help researchers identify
needs, tailor instruction, and establish baseline data for measuring impact.
As noted by Guskey (2015), in the context of social research, these tools are practical when
assessing the academic progress of students during a particular period. In this research, the pre- and
post-tests played a central role in measuring the impact of the design thinking approach on students’
speaking performance, wherein it was required to deliver a 3-minute problem-solving oral presentation.
As part of the implementation, the teacher introduced the topic, explained the expected structure, and
provided prior guidance to support students in their preparation. The evaluation criteria were
communicated through a rubric, which assigned specific weight to each component: Pronunciation
(12.5%), Fluency (12.5%), Grammar and Vocabulary (25%), Delivery (15%), Structure (10%), and
Content (25%). (Table 1). The given structure is this one: (1) Introduction: hook, significance, and
presenter's name and purpose. (2) Problem Explanation: Identification of the problem and
consequences. (3) Proposed Solution: Multiple Solutions and Benefits. (4) Conclusion: Recap, Call
Attention, and Closing.
Following the implementation of the pre-test and pre-survey, the instructor presented the Design
Thinking methodology to the experimental group and outlined the collaborative nature of the upcoming
project. Students were tasked with identifying a challenge associated with learning English and
designing an innovative solution. They were grouped according to similar learning difficulties and
chose a common topic to work on collaboratively. Over ten weeks, students engaged in both
synchronous and asynchronous collaboration through a shared PowerPoint presentation, which served
as a platform for the teacher and students to offer ongoing feedback.
The students followed the five key stages of Design Thinking:
1. Empathize: Students aimed to identify a real problem and understand the needs and experiences
of other learners. They conducted both secondary and first research by reading relevant articles
in terms of their project topic and creating and applying first interviews with their classmates at
the university. The objective of primary research is to collect original data directly from sources,