Iteration and Communication During the Development of a Smartphone Endoscope Adapter

This work-in-progress research paper focusses on comparing changes in students’ learning outcomes in engineering design and entrepreneurship courses. Recent national calls to reform undergraduate engineering education has led to extensive research in the identification and development of effective instructional strategies. Project-based learning (PBL) is one instructional strategy that has received empirical and anecdotal support for its ability to instill professional skills in addition to technical content knowledge in engineering graduates. Engineering programs have increasingly adopted PBL in the form of capstone engineering design courses, entrepreneurship courses, and co-curricular experiences. However, PBL is broadly defined in the literature, and as such, these adaptations are often nuanced in their design, structure, and pedagogical approaches; and consequently, may have differing impact on student learning outcomes.Engineering design and entrepreneurship courses are two commonly used avenues in which engineering students are exposed to PBL. In design courses, students often work in teams to complete tasks that lead to devising an engineering solution to a given ‘real-world’ problem. Most, if not all, engineering students gain exposure to PBL via capstone design courses that are often required in the engineering curriculum. In addition to design courses, entrepreneurship courses also expose engineering students to PBL by engaging them in entrepreneurial projects in which students work in teams, often conceptualizing and designing products. While the engineering design process is more focused on the outcome solution to the problem, entrepreneurship design processes tend to emphasize the front end of the design process, specifically opportunity identification and validation. Students engage in customer discovery and develop prototype solutions. Although nuanced, we hypothesize that due to these different approaches, engineering design and entrepreneurship will have varied impact on student learning outcomes. In our presented work, we investigate these differences by examining changes in students’ perceived risk-taking abilities, creative self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial self-efficacy in engineering design and entrepreneurship practicum courses. Preliminary results show that entrepreneurial self-efficacy increases in both design and entrepreneurship courses. However, differences in the magnitude of change for its subconstructs are noted between the two courses. In contrast, increase in risk-taking and creative self-efficacy is only found in the entrepreneurship course and not in the engineering design course. Future work will focus on analyzing the pre-post survey data for statistically significant changes.

In the engineering design course, the experiential learning project is an effective approach to teach students about hands-on experiments as an engineer. However, the factor for motivation that was lacking in these projects was competition amongst student teams. We had incorporated project-based activities and engineering design competitions that would motivate the interest of engineering students. A theoretical model of creating the value in experiential learning project through contest was developed and applied at the Hung Yen University of Technology and Education. So, what was the real value of experiential learning project through a contest in engineering design course? This study used the questionnaire method with 107 students at the Hung Yen University of Technology and Education who participated in the ABU Robocon 2018 project. The new finding of this study provided some surprises: (1) the prize money of contest was not the major factor for the motivations in students' learning; (2) the attractiveness of a contest theme, more than one way of solving the problem and using high technology were the major factors that motivate students to learn; (3) the experiential learning project through contest had the greatest impact of development on the theoretical knowledge of engineering design, and the skills, experiences and abilities to use technologies, and the power of teamwork to make decisions.

This exploratory study investigates the design and impacts of a curated Living-Learning Community (LLC) piloted at a large student residence for a large (1000+ student) first-year engineering design course. Alongside the live-in Faculty-in-Residence (FiR), the research includes surveying first-year engineering students participating in this program and understanding the impacts on the lived student experience, and student motivation. The first-year engineering design, teamwork, and communication course is central to engineering education at this large institution. The course offers opportunities for students to work in multidisciplinary teams, applying term knowledge to authentic engineering applications, in a problem-based learning environment. The goal of the LLC is to create opportunities for interaction and scaffolded connection between like-minded students taking similar courses and inspire learning within the students living environment; an entire floor of the Residence is assigned to be an LLC for the 2022 academic year, with support from the Don, ResLife Office, and the Faculty-in-Residence (an engineering faculty member). The purpose of this study is to observe and report on the student experience throughout the duration of the course. We aim to learn how participating in the Living-Learning community can affect the perception of confidence in students’ learning of course concepts, and inter-team relations. In order to do so, students will be surveyed at multiple check points throughout the semester. Furthermore, additional relevant information will be gathered from the Living-Learning Community Don, teaching assistants, and the course instructors. The outcome of this analysis has the potential to educate us on the positive and negative connotations that come along with close-quarters learning. The applications of the results found with this study can be vast, from influencing future residence programs and the first-year engineering education experience. This study focuses on the student’s perception of their experience. Understanding how the perception of manageability of workload [1] can affect student mental health leads the curiosity of how close-quarters learning can affect the student experience, to what degree, and how this understanding can help influence future programming. A positive experience that improves student confidence of understanding and course material has the potential to positively improve mental health and engagement in education; we hope that this research brings together the academic and lived-experiences of students through this work.

The ocean engineering design and marine field projects (MFP) courses at Florida Tech are a unique combination of classroom, laboratory, and field work. These two one-semester courses provide the upper-level comprehensive engineering design content required by the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET). In addition, the MFP course also provides at-sea field work experience during a one-week offshore research cruise on the R/V Delphinus, Florida Tech's 20-meter ocean-going research vessel. Unlike most university undergraduate engineering curricula in the United States, the senior-level engineering design course is taken in the spring semester of the junior year instead of the fall term of the senior year, with the construction of the design during the following summer term (instead of the following spring term). This allows the students to devote 100% of their efforts to the construction of their project during the summer term, without having to take additional courses during that term. Many additional benefits result from the ocean engineering design and MFP courses at Florida Tech. These include the design and construction of equipment that can be used at Florida Tech for teaching and research, participation by students in international competitions, press coverage of many of the projects, and industry support of some of the student projects. The Division of Marine and Environmental Systems at Florida Tech is continually exploring improvements and additions to these courses, which are the capstone courses in the ocean engineering program.

Assessments For Three Performance Areas In Capstone Engineering Design

The primary purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between engineering students’ year of study, gender and grit level. This study also aims to assess whether there is any relationship between students’ peer assessment scores in a collaborative project-based learning course and their goal orientation — either towards performance goals or learning goals — and their grit level. The study design is a quasi-experimental design, and the methods used in this study are quantitative. Student grit level was measured using a 12-item scale. The questionnaire was administered in three engineering design courses at different levels of study. The first course is an introduction to engineering design course for firstyear engineering and computer sciences students; the second is an introduction to engineering design course for second-year engineering and computer science students; and the third is a computer-aided design/computer-aidedmanufacturing (CAD/CAM) engineering design capstone course for fourth-year mechanical engineering students. Data collection occurred during the fall semester of 2018- 2019 academic year. Students’ grit level was not found to be a predictor of students’ peer assessment scores, although their goal orientation predicted their level of contribution to their team project.

While prior work indicates that seniors near the end of their capstone design course know more about design than first-year students, it is unclear where this knowledge is gained. We study two possible sources of seniors’ greater design knowledge: coursework during sophomore and junior years and industrial experience. The design process knowledge of seniors at the beginning of their capstone class was assessed and information about their industrial experience obtained. These data were compared to assessment data of first-year students at the end of an introduction to engineering design course. The results indicate that industrial experience greatly increases students’ recognition that documentation needs to occur throughout the design process. Seniors with industrial experience, however, are less aware that idea generation is an important part of design and are less able to allot time to different design activities than first-year students at the end of a hands-on introduction to engineering design course. For the remaining four aspects of design process knowledge assessed—namely, identifying the requirements for a project at the project’s outset, making decisions with a systematic process based on analysis, building and testing prototypes and final designs, and the overall layout of design including iteration—no differences are found between seniors with industrial experience and first-year students at the end of an introduction to engineering design course. One explanation for why industrial experience does not impact student’s design process knowledge positively in more areas than documentation is that students on internships only experience a small portion of a design process. Due to this “snapshot” experience, either (1) students are not able to learn a significant amount about the bigger picture design concepts or (2) students each learn about different aspects of design but, as a population, do not show any significant increase in design process knowledge. The one activity that all interns will experience is the necessity to document their work. Furthermore, seniors without industrial experience scored no differently than first-year students on any single aspect of design process knowledge measured. This indicates that analysis-heavy sophomore and junior classes do not impact design process knowledge.

First-year engineering design courses are fundamental component to most engineering programs, and they provide the backbone for the introduction of engineering students to engineering practice and profession. First-year engineering design courses are also essential to begin the development of an engineering mindset. The purpose of this study is to complete a comparative examination of first-year engineering design courses across Canada. The work was inspired by an interactive workshop delivered at CEEA-ACEG 2022. The workshop was based on a comparative examination of the curriculum and delivery of three first-year design courses at different engineering institutions, including number of students and credits, project types, content integration, resources, and logistics. Informed by the discussion in the workshop, this study expands on the work by surveying instructors of first-year engineering design courses. The preliminary results are presented from a subset of the data collected and demonstrate similarities and differences among the different programs. These results provide a foundation for meaningful analysis and discussion of educational practice in first-year engineering design courses.

Co-design increases the number of voices in a design project, which enhances the experience for all co-creators and produces a better product. A case study is presented of a ten-month co-design project-based learning experience between two engineering design students and two community partners during a first-year engineering design course, which resulted in the implementation of the device across campus. This paper evaluates the elements of co-design in the design process that was employed, documents the design product that was produced, and examines the experience of the community partners through a qualitative study. Through a retrospective examination of artifacts and files, the design process demonstrated an increase in the amount of collaboration between co-creators as the project progressed and identified 15 iterations of the design. Comparing the experience of community partners throughout the design process, five themes emerged from the semi-structured interviews: (1) emotional effects, (2) physical and mental effects, (3) productivity, (4) safety, and (5) job satisfaction. Documenting the experience of community partners throughout the design project can encourage educators to adopt co-design practices in project-based learning.

This paper analyzes the efficacy of a rapid, interdependent design sequence on student learning and engagement. The Rapid Product Design Cycle (RPDC) activity takes students through a three-part waterfall design sequence – problem formulation, conceptual design, and detailed design. Our objective was to give the students an appreciation of the challenges faced by interdependent teams across multiple different design stages within tight time constraints, and to encourage design work under the constraining pressures of time and stakeholder expectations. This paper first details the design of the RPDC activity, and then examines the administration and logistics, assessment, student engagement and learning, and student response to this highly accelerated product design cycle. The examination of the activity pays specific attention to the challenges posed by a high frequency of cognitive disruptions (3 different design tasks in 5 weeks) compounded by the requirement of working in small teams. 1. Design Context – Introduction A core premise of Praxis is that the perspectives, terminology, and tools of “engineering design” are transdisciplinary. In keeping with this premise, this engineering education paper has been structured as an engineering design report and uses engineering design terminology. Selected headings include both design-focused and education-focused terminology to assist the reader in navigating this structure. Institutional and Program The University of Toronto is a large, publicly funded, research-intensive Canadian university. The Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering offers undergraduate and graduate engineering programs, and admits approximately 1300 undergraduate students per year into one of 10 programs. All of these programs require that their students take a capstone engineering design course in their senior year, and a cornerstone engineering design and communication course in their freshman year. Our program, the Division of Engineering Science, admits approximately 320 undergraduate students each year and is distinguished from the other programs pedagogically, structurally, and in the destination of its graduates. The Engineering Science pedagogy privileges foundational principles and breadth of application, and expects that students will engage in additional exploration beyond that presented in the classroom. The program is structured such that all students take a common two-year foundational curriculum, followed by a two-year specialization in an engineering discipline. Approximately 50% of the students pursue an advanced degree. The remaining students tend to seek employment in entrepreneurial or consulting organizations. Nine years ago, we established a series of foundational design and communication courses known as Praxis. These courses were tasked with preparing students to practice engineering design in their other foundational courses, in any of the areas of specialization available to them, in their summer and internship experiences, and in their capstone design courses. The pair of cornerstone courses are in continuous (re)development and this paper reports on the design of a new assignment in the first course of the series.

Objectives: This review examined the effectiveness of telepharmacy in rural communities in Africa to identify the barriers that hinder its implementation and integration as well as highlight the gaps in the existing research on telepharmacy. Data Source: PubMed and Google Scholar search (2008-2023) was conducted using keywords related to telepharmacy, telemedicine, telehealth, and rural communities. Study Selection and Data Extraction: The inclusion criteria for the review include peer-reviewed articles published in English language and studies that focus on the implementation and evaluation of telepharmacy in rural communities. Data Synthesis: In all articles used, access to quality health care in rural communities has been a persistent challenge in Africa. Digital technologies such as telemedicine, telepharmacy, and artificial intelligence were reported to have emerged as promising solutions to improve health care access and outcomes in rural communities. Telepharmacy, in particular, has the potential to provide medication-related services to patients irrespective of one's location. However, the implementation of telepharmacy in Africa has been slow, and there are several barriers affecting its integration and adoption in rural communities that include access to technology, limited infrastructure, and regulatory challenges. Gaps and limitations in the existing research on telepharmacy in rural communities were highlighted from the articles. Conclusion: Telepharmacy can improve health care access and outcomes in rural communities by bridging the gap between pharmacists and patients. However, the lack of infrastructure, inadequate funding, and regulatory challenges pose significant barriers to its implementation. Future research should focus on addressing these challenges and exploring the potential of telepharmacy to improve health care in rural communities in Africa.

This paper explores and proposes the evaluation criteria of design projects in the entry-level design course. In the entry-level engineering design course the students proceeds various design projects to understand the concept of engineering design process and to develop the creativity. The evaluation criteria of design projects is very important component because the outcome of students in the engineering design course are effected from the evaluation criteria that enforces the students to focus on doing their task. According to this case study the evaluation criteria can be good solution to evaluate the design projects. By the outcome standard of ABEEK on the entry-level engineering design course the evaluation criteria was selected with the results of design projects such as design plan, report, handicrafts, objectives.

The Introduction to Engineering Design (IED) course must be a down-to-earth, meaningful and engaging encounter for the students, must meet the academic needs of the program, and must be manageable and affordable, all within a three or four credit hour framework. Commonly, this course is taken once in either the freshman or sophomore year. We are in the planning stages to split the IED course over our two-years, rather than keeping it in its current single-year form. The current IED will be combined with an existing one-hour Freshman Seminar (FS) course, required of freshman and meant to expose new students to college life in general, and to the engineering educational requirements. This FS course will be expanded to overlap some of the work done in the more-involved IED, allowing both our first- and second-year students to work together in each of their two years. The FS course will continue to introduce freshman to college, but will also have them work on current projects with sophomore students in IED as part of the design teams. Each project will have a layered team of the more experienced 2 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">nd</sup> year students working with the newer 1 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">st</sup> year students, more reflective of the situation in industry. Time in the 2 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">nd</sup> year will be spent without the freshmen from FS, to allow a more in-depth look at engineering management, ethics, and economics for the sophomores.

Engineering design and communication courses are typically dynamic, active learning spaces that bring together a complex array of knowledge and skills. Their ambiguous nature has allowed, often contentiously, subjects such as language and communication, the arts, the humanities, and the social sciences to enter the discourse of engineering in a newly meaningful way. This article considers this development in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and, in particular, how the creativity and imagination required to succeed in engineering design might be cultivated in emergency distance learning. I consider a plethora of sources for guidance, with a special interest in how language and communication facilitates collaborative learning, creativity, and intersubjectivity and how that mediation is further mediated by educational technology in distance learning. I focus on the challenges faced and the resulting importance of training for both instructors and students. Finally, I argue that, despite our difficult circumstances, we should aim to encourage our students to exercise their imaginations, both independently and collaboratively, through our selection, framing, and facilitation of team design projects during the pandemic.

Engineering design and communication courses are typically dynamic, active learning spaces that bring together a complex array of knowledge and skills. Their ambiguous nature has allowed, often contentiously, subjects such as language and communication, the arts, the humanities and the social sciences to enter the discourse of engineering in a newly meaningful way. This paper considers this development in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular how the creativity and imagination required to succeed in engineering design might be cultivated in emergency distance learning. I consider a plethora of sources for guidance, with a special interest in how language and communication facilitates collaborative learning, creativity, and intersubjectivity and how that mediation is further mediated by educational technology in distance learning. I focus on the challenges faced, and the resulting importance of training for both instructors and students. Finally, I argue that despite our difficult circumstances, we should aim to encourage our students to exercise their imaginations, both independently and collaboratively, through our selection, framing and facilitation of team design projects during the pandemic.