More Like this

1. Design Thinking in Engineering Course Design

   https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--30271  

   Fila, Nicholas; McKIlligan, Seda; Guerin, Kelly (June 2018, 2018 ASEE Annual Conference)

   Design thinking is a robust framework for creatively and effectively identifying and solving important human problems. While design thinking is commonly associated with fields like industrial design, it can be applied to many problem types. For example, several recent examples demonstrate the applicability of design thinking to the design and development of educational materials, courses, and systems. These results suggest that design thinking could be used as a framework to (re)design and develop effective engineering courses. The goal of this project is to understand how nine educators from different backgrounds did or did not use design thinking to redesign a sophomore-level electrical and computer engineering course. The primary source of data was 21 transcribed audio recordings of design meetings and is supplemented with interviews, reflections, and course artifacts. Thematic analysis revealed 10 themes that represent connections and disconnections between the process used and a common five-stage design thinking process (empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test). These themes demonstrate some of the opportunities and challenges related to design thinking within an engineering course design setting. In particular, they suggest that engineering course design is a relevant context for design thinking, but one to which design thinking methods do not always naturally translated. Future work should focus on better understanding unique applications of design thinking within engineering course design and methods that might to support more designerly behaviors among engineering educators. 

   more » « less
2. Design Educators’ Conceptions of Prototyping in Engineering Design Courses

   Ali, Hadi; Lande, Micah (June 2019, ASEE Annual Conference proceedings)

   This is a research study that investigates the range of conceptions of prototyping in engineering design courses through exploring the conceptions and implementations from the instructors’ perspective. Prototyping is certainly an activity central to engineering design. The context of prototyping to support engineering education and practice has a range of implementations in an undergraduate engineering curriculum, from first-year engineering to capstone engineering design experiences. Understanding faculty conceptions’ of the reason, purpose, and place of prototyping can help illustrate how teaching and learning of the engineering design process is realistically implemented across a curriculum and how students are prepared for work practice. We seek to understand, and consequently improve, engineering design teaching and learning, through transformations of practice that are based on engineering education research. In this exploratory study, we interviewed three faculty members who teach engineering design in project-based learning courses across the curriculum of an undergraduate engineering program. This builds on related work done by the authors that previously investigated undergraduate engineering students’ conceptions of prototyping activities and process. With our instructor participants, a similar interview protocol was followed through semi-structured qualitative interviews. Data analysis has been undertaken through an emerging thematic analysis of these interview transcripts. Early findings characterize the focus on teaching the design process; the kind of feedback that the educators provide on students’ prototypes; students’ behavior while working on design projects; and educators’ perspectives on the design course. Understanding faculty conceptions with students’ conceptions of prototyping can shed light on the efficacy of using prototyping as an authentic experience in design teaching and learning. In project-based learning courses, particular issues of authenticity and assessment are under consideration, especially across the curriculum. More specifically, “proportions of problems” inform “problem solving” as one of the key characteristics in design thinking, teaching and learning. More attention to prototyping as part of the study of problem-solving processes can be useful to enhance understanding of the impact of instructional design. Challenges for teaching engineering design exist, and may be due to difficulties in framing design problems, recognizing what expertise students possess, and assessing their expertise to help them reach their goals, all at an appropriate place and ambiguity with student learning goals. Initial findings show that prototyping activities can help students become more reflective on their design. Scaffolded activities in prototyping can support self-regulated learning by students. The range of support and facilities, such as campus makerspaces, may also help students and instructors alike develop industry-ready engineering students. 

   more » « less
3. The impact of an intensive design experience of self-efficacy, valuation of engineering design, and engineering identity in undergraduate engineering students

   Monye, U. (January 2020, ASEE Annual Conference)
4. Student Communication of Engineering Design Solutions

   Muller, A.; Garcia, L.; Skinner, R. K. (July 2021, 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access)

   null (Ed.)

   Communication of ideas involves the simultaneous efforts of verbal, physical and neurological processes (Sherr, 2008). In elementary classrooms where young students are in the process of developing their verbal capacities, gestures from both the teacher and students serve as a key component of communication of new ideas and the processing of social information (Foglia & Wilson, 2013). Thus far, research efforts to understand how students utilize gestures in the communication and understanding of ideas have focused primarily on mathematics and the physical sciences (see Nemirovsky & Ferrara, 2009; Nuñez, Edwards & Matos, 1999; Shapiro, 2014; Sherr, 2008). With the introduction of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS Lead States, 2013), students engineering is now included in K-12 instruction. Engineering education centers around designing and optimizing solutions to engineering challenges. The creation of a design solution differentiates engineering education from other classroom subject areas. Current work in engineering education focuses mostly on students’ words or drawings, leaving out gestures as an important component of students' communication of engineering designs. This study aimed to contribute to the general understanding of students’ use of gestures and manipulatives when discussing their engineering design solutions and is part of a larger NSF-funded project. Students participated in pre- and post-field trip classroom activities that extended learning done on an engineering-focused field trip to the local science center into the classroom. For this study, we focused on a module that challenged students to design a craft that either slowed the fall of a penny (classroom engineering design challenge) or hovered in a column of upward moving air (field trip engineering design challenge). We analyzed six videos (3 from the classroom and 3 from the field trip) of first-grade student explanations of their crafts to identify their use of gestures and prototyped craft design solutions in communicating. In this paper, we explore how student use of gestures and use of prototyped design solutions overlap and differentiate to understand how student sense-making can be understood through each. 

   more » « less
5. Perception of complexity in engineering design

   https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21574  

   Grogan, Paul_T (April 2021, Systems Engineering)

   Abstract This paper evaluates perception of complexity in a novel explanatory model that relates product performance and engineering effort. Complexity is an intermediate factor with two facets: it enables desired product performance but also requires effort to achieve. Three causal mechanisms explain how exponential growth bias, excess complexity, and differential perception lead to effort overruns. Secondary data from a human subject experiment validates the existence of perception of complexity as a context‐dependent factor that influences required design effort. A two‐level mixed effects regression model quantifies differences in perception among 40 design groups. Results summarize how perception of complexity may contribute to effort overruns and outline future work to further validate the explanatory model and causal mechanisms. 

   more » « less