skip to main content

Title: A Pilot Program in Open-Ended Problem Solving and Project Management
This research is motivated by the need for students’ early exposure to work readiness skills that promote effectiveness in dealing with complex open-ended technical problems as may be encountered in senior capstone projects or professional practice. This paper presents preliminary work in the use of building Rube Goldberg machines as student projects to foster some of these skills. Design of Rube Goldberg machines may be employed in a number of settings as a vehicle for teaching basic engineering skills. These designs require students to creatively consider a variety of unconventional approaches to solve simple problems. The Rube Goldberg paradigm allows students to communicate and to advance their ideas in a low-pressure environment where brainstorming is highly valued and where prior technical expertise affords no specific advantage. As such, projects based on Rube Goldberg machines are an effective way for freshmen and sophomore students, who may lack extensive technical skills, to acquire greater proficiency in some of the non-technical skills. This research gives results from a pilot study in project management using the Rube Goldberg model. The goal of this study is to determine the perceived efficacy of a proposed teaching vehicle for project management concepts that could strengthen the early more » stages of an existing series of Project Based Learning (PBL) oriented undergraduate engineering courses at the host institution, which currently make use of more closed-ended and single-solution design projects. In the study, a cohort of 27 engineering and engineering technology students participated in a sequence of extracurricular sessions in which they undertook progressively challenging open-ended project assignments. Each project introduced new constraints that required the students to address additional aspects of project management. Results from an end-of-year survey show that the participants had strongly positive impressions of their experiences related to these exercises. A majority of students felt that they had enhanced skills that would be valuable in professional life (96%), improved their leadership skills (92%), and had gained appreciation for the value of project planning (100%) and technical documentation (96%). It is anticipated that lessons learned from the project sequence will provide the framework for cross-disciplinary freshman and sophomore assignments in host institution’s PBL curriculum in the future. « less
Authors:
; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1355872
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10067334
Journal Name:
American Society for Engineering Education
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. This paper describes the structure, project initiatives, and early results of the NSF S-STEM funded SPIRIT: Scholarship Program Initiative via Recruitment, Innovation, and Transformation program at Western Carolina University (WCU). SPIRIT is a scholarship program focused on building an interdisciplinary engineering learning community involved in extensive peer and faculty mentoring, vertically-integrated Project Based Learning (PBL), and undergraduate research experiences. The program has provided twenty-six scholarships and academic resources to a diverse group of engineering and engineering technology students. Results from several project initiatives have been promising. Recruitment efforts have resulted in a demographically diverse group of participants whose retention ratesmore »within the program have held at 82%. A vibrant learning community has organically developed where participants are provided both academic and non-academic support across several majors and grade classes. Since May 2014, SPIRIT undergraduate research projects have resulted in forty-five presentations at seven different undergraduate and professional conferences. Twenty-seven PBL and five integrated open-ended design challenges have been completed, involving several corporate sponsors and encompassing a wide-range of engineering topics. Results from a ninety-question participant survey revealed several perceived program strengths and areas of possible improvement. Overall, the participants agreed or strongly agreed that the program had been a positive experience (4.0/4.0) and had helped them to prepare for a career in engineering (3.8/4.0). Undergraduate research activities conducted through the program have helped the participants to understand the steps involved in research processes (3.8/4.0), to appreciate the need for a combination of analysis and hands-on skills (4.0/4.0), and to become more resilient toward academic challenges and obstacles (3.8/4.0). The program’s learning community helped participants build relationships with other students outside of their major (3.1/4.0) as compared to normal course communities. Several participants believed that they were more comfortable with seeking advice from upper class students within the program (3.7/4.0) as compared to upper class students outside the program (2.7/4.0). Vertically-integrated PBL activities helped participants in understanding project management techniques (3.8/4.0), teaming techniques (3.7/4.0), and to assume a leadership role on projects (3.6/4.0). Indicated areas of program improvement included the desire and need for a system of peer-review for the students’ undergraduate research papers; a perceived hindrance to benefit from “journaling” about their program experiences (3.6/4.0); and a need for continued strengthening of activities associated with graduate school application processes as well as preparations for job interviews and applications. This paper presents details of the program initiatives, a compilation of survey results with necessary discussion, and areas of possible improvement going forward.« less
  2. Electrical and computer engineering technologies have evolved into dynamic, complex systems that profoundly change the world we live in. Designing these systems requires not only technical knowledge and skills but also new ways of thinking and the development of social, professional and ethical responsibility. A large electrical and computer engineering department at a Midwestern public university is transforming to a more agile, less traditional organization to better respond to student, industry and society needs. This is being done through new structures for faculty collaboration and facilitated through departmental change processes. Ironically, an impetus behind this effort was a failed attemptmore »at department-wide curricular reform. This failure led to the recognition of the need for more systemic change, and a project emerged from over two years of efforts. The project uses a cross-functional, collaborative instructional model for course design and professional formation, called X-teams. X-teams are reshaping the core technical ECE curricula in the sophomore and junior years through pedagogical approaches that (a) promote design thinking, systems thinking, professional skills such as leadership, and inclusion; (b) contextualize course concepts; and (c) stimulate creative, socio-technical-minded development of ECE technologies. An X-team is comprised of ECE faculty members including the primary instructor, an engineering education and/or design faculty member, an industry practitioner, context experts, instructional specialists (as needed to support the process of teaching, including effective inquiry and inclusive teaching) and student teaching assistants. X-teams use an iterative design thinking process and reflection to explore pedagogical strategies. X-teams are also serving as change agents for the rest of the department through communities of practice referred to as Y-circles. Y-circles, comprised of X-team members, faculty, staff, and students, engage in a process of discovery and inquiry to bridge the engineering education research-to-practice gap. Research studies are being conducted to answer questions to understand (1) how educators involved in X-teams use design thinking to create new pedagogical solutions; (2) how the middle years affect student professional ECE identity development as design thinkers; (3) how ECE students overcome barriers, make choices, and persist along their educational and career paths; and (4) the effects of department structures, policies, and procedures on faculty attitudes, motivation and actions. This paper will present the efforts that led up to the project, including failures and opportunities. It will summarize the project, describe related work, and present early progress implementing new approaches.« less
  3. Generally, the focus of undergraduate engineering programs is on the development of technical skills and how they can be applied to design and problem solving. However, research has shown that there is also a need to expose students to business and society factors that influence design in context. This technical bias is reinforced by the available tools for use in engineering education, which are highly focused on ensuring technical feasibility, and a corresponding lack of tools for engineers to explore other design needs. One important contextual area is market systems, where design decisions are made while considering factors such asmore »consumer choice, competitor behavior, and pricing. This study examines student learning throughout a third-year design course that emphasizes market-driven design through project-based activities and assignments, including a custom-made, interactive market simulation tool. To bridge the gap between market-driven design and engineering education research, this paper explores how students think about and internally organize design concepts before and after learning and practicing market-driven design approaches and tools in the context of an engineering design course. The central research question is: In what ways do student conceptions of product design change after introducing a market-driven design curriculum? In line with the constructivism framework of learning, it is expected that student conceptions of design should evolve to include more market considerations as they learn about and apply market-driven design concepts and techniques to their term projects. Four different types of data instruments are included in the analysis: Concept maps generated by the students before and after the course, open-ended written reflection assignments at various points in the semester, surveys administered after learning the market simulation tool and at the end of the course, and final project reports in which student teams listed their top 3-5 lessons learned in the course. Using the changes between the pre- and post-course concept maps as the primary metric to represent evolving design conceptions, data from the reflections, surveys, and reports are evaluated to assess their influence on such learning. Because market-driven design is a multi-faceted topic, a market-driven design is hierarchically decomposed into specific sub-topics for these evaluations. These include profitability (which itself encompasses pricing and costs), modeling and simulation, and market research (which encompasses consumers and competition). For each topic, correlation analyses are performed and regression models are fit to assess the significance of different factors on learning. The findings provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of the course’s market-driven design curriculum and activities on influencing student conceptions of design.« less
  4. Many university engineering programs require their students to complete a senior capstone experience to equip them with the knowledge and skills they need to succeed after graduation. Such capstone experiences typically integrate knowledge and skills learned cumulatively in the degree program, often engaging students in projects outside of the classroom. As part of an initiative to completely transform the civil engineering undergraduate program at Clemson University, a capstone-like course sequence is being incorporated into the curriculum during the sophomore year. Funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation’s Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (RED) program, this departmental transformation (referred to asmore »the Arch initiative) is aiming to develop a culture of adaptation and a curriculum support for inclusive excellence and innovation to address the complex challenges faced by our society. Just as springers serve as the foundation stones of an arch, the new courses are called “Springers” because they serve as the foundations of the transformed curriculum. The goal of the Springer course sequence is to expose students to the “big picture” of civil engineering while developing student skills in professionalism, communication, and teamwork through real-world projects and hands-on activities. The expectation is that the Springer course sequence will allow faculty to better engage students at the beginning of their studies and help them understand how future courses contribute to the overall learning outcomes of a degree in civil engineering. The Springer course sequence is team-taught by faculty from both civil engineering and communication, and exposes students to all of the civil engineering subdisciplines. Through a project-based learning approach, Springer courses mimic capstone in that students work on a practical application of civil engineering concepts throughout the semester in a way that challenges students to incorporate tools that they will build on and use during their junior and senior years. In the 2019 spring semester, a pilot of the first of the Springer courses (Springer 1; n=11) introduced students to three civil engineering subdisciplines: construction management, hydrology, and transportation. The remaining subdisciplines will be covered in a follow-on Springer 2 pilot.. The project for Springer 1 involved designing a small parking lot for a church located adjacent to campus. Following initial instruction in civil engineering topics related to the project, students worked in teams to develop conceptual project designs. A design charrette allowed students to interact with different stakeholders to assess their conceptual designs and incorporate stakeholder input into their final designs. The purpose of this paper is to describe all aspects of the Springer 1 course, including course content, teaching methods, faculty resources, and the design and results of a Student Assessment of Learning Gains (SALG) survey to assess students’ learning outcomes. An overview of the Springer 2 course is also provided. The feedback from the SALG indicated positive attitudes towards course activities and content, and that students found interaction with project stakeholders during the design charrette especially beneficial. Challenges for full scale implementation of the Springer course sequence as a requirement in the transformed curriculum are also discussed.« less
  5. The Engineer of 2020 recognizes creativity, invention, and innovation as indispensable qualities for engineering. It may be argued, however, that traditional engineering programs do not inherently foster these qualities in engineering students, and with limited resources and time, adding innovation-fostering experiences to already over-packed curricula may seem like an insurmountable challenge. Longitudinal studies carried out by the authors have shown that makerspaces can foster improvement in engineering students’ design self-efficacy, and three-part phenomenological interviews have shown that students in makerspaces engage in non-linear, open-ended, student-driven projects that require hands-on designing, prototyping, modeling, and testing. These studies provide initial evidence thatmore »makerspaces may have the potential to enhance students’ deep learning of engineering and engineering design. To arrive at the more complex cultural factors related to student involvement and success related to participation in makerspaces, we describe the processes of ethnographic methodologies we are using to study the intersections between the structure of an engineering curriculum and the learning that occurs outside of the classroom in makerspaces. Ethnographic methodologies of participant observation, unstructured and semi-structured interviews enable exploration of how students (1) interact within and construct the culture of makerspaces; (2) talk about maker space culture as important to their commitment to engineering; (3) learn within maker spaces; and (4) choose the type and direction of projects. This paper specifically describes the ethnographic methodologies used to track four different undergraduate student teams participating in a two-year senior capstone project, as well as three different student teams participating in a sophomore design class in which they use makerspaces to build a human powered vehicle for a client with a disability. Initial interpretations are presented that inform our understanding of the complex cultural system in which learning occurs, ultimately helping us to consider ways to improve university makerspaces.« less