Abstract
Engineering design courses are fundamental components of undergraduate programs. Students in these courses solve realistic design problems in an "authentic" setting. But do these adapted professional activities serve a more important pedagogical role than increasing authenticity? In this paper, we investigate this question by describing an ethnographic study of Biomedical Engineering (BME) 201, an engineering design course for sophomores at a large Midwestern university. We examine two activities for their pedagogical significance: the weekly design meeting and the student design notebook. We show how these activities develop both practical skills and reflective thinking of professional engineering
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
