Introductory Engineering Design Research Articles

Investigating the relationship between mindfulness, stress and creativity in introductory engineering design

Abstract Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) for engineering design are promising for their stress management, cognition and well-being benefits. Prior work concluded that engineering design is stressful and that each engineering design stage has unique stressors. This non-randomized study investigated the effect of an MBI on students’ cognitive stress and final design creativity during a multistage, hands-on design assessment. Data were collected using surveys, project deliverables and follow-up interviews. While no significant increase was found in students’ measured state mindfulness due to the intervention, students in the MBI condition were more likely to perceive the intervention positively compared to students in the control condition (alternative use tasks). Students in both conditions were found to have similar levels of state stress, which indicates that the MBI had no observable effect on students’ measured stress during design. Although students in the MBI condition were found to produce higher-quality final designs, there were no differences in design creativity or novelty. When data were clustered to identify types of student experiences, state mindfulness was found to meaningfully contribute, but state stress was not. Future research should continue to investigate MBIs in engineering design as a potential approach to improve design education and outcomes.

Using workplace thriving theory to investigate first-year engineering students' abilities to thrive during the transition to online learning due to COVID-19.

BackgroundDuring the onset of the COVID‐19 crisis, universities rapidly pivoted to online formats and were often unable to adhere to the best practices of online learning highlighted in prior literature. It is well documented that a variety of barriers impeded “normal” educational practices.Purpose/HypothesisThe purpose of this paper is to investigate the perceptions of first‐year engineering students enrolled in an introductory engineering design course during the rapid transition to online working environments. We view students' perceptions through the theoretical lens of workplace thriving theory, a framework that allowed us to capture aspects of education required for students to thrive in non‐optimum learning settings.Design/MethodThis research employed semi‐structured interview methods with 13 students enrolled in an introductory engineering design course that relies on project‐based team learning. We analyzed interview transcripts using thematic analysis through an abductive approach and made interpretations through workplace thriving theory.ResultsResults indicated that students' abilities to thrive are related to four intersecting themes that demonstrate how workplace thriving theory manifests in this unanticipated online setting. These themes demonstrate elements that must be optimized for students to thrive in settings such as this: relationships with others, building and sharing knowledge through interactions, perceptions of experiential learning, and individual behaviors.ConclusionOur research, viewed through workplace thriving theory, highlights the mechanisms by which students tried to succeed in suboptimal environments. While not all our participants showed evidence of thriving, the factors required for thriving point to opportunities to harness these same factors in in‐person instruction environments.

The cognitive experience of engineering design: an examination of first-year student stress across principal activities of the engineering design process

AbstractThe engineering design process can produce stress that endures even after it has been completed. This may be particularly true for students who engage with the process as novices. However, it is not known how individual components of the design process induce stress in designers. This study explored the cognitive experience of introductory engineering design students during concept generation, concept selection and physical modelling to identify stress signatures for these three design activities. Data were collected for the design activities using pre- and post-task surveys. Each design activity produced distinct markers of cognitive experience and a unique stress signature that was stable across design activity themes. Rankings of perceived sources of stress also differed for each design activity. Students, however, did not perceive any physiological changes due to the stress of design for any of the design activities. Findings indicate that physical modelling was the most stressful for students, followed by concept generation and then concept selection. Additionally, recommendations for instructors of introductory engineering design courses were provided to help them apply the results of this study. Better understanding of the cognitive experience of students during design can support instructors as they learn to better teach design.

Large‐scale student programs increase persistence in STEM fields in a public university setting

AbstractBackgroundLouisiana State University's (LSU) STEM Talent Expansion Program (STEP) was established to increase students' persistence in first‐year, declared engineering majors (a project priority), in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) majors (an NSF goal), and in all majors at LSU (an institutional goal). Over 8 years, 3,097 (27%) engineering students participated in one or more STEP activities including a residential college, a student mentoring program, an introductory engineering design course, and a summer bridge camp for first‐year students.PurposeThis paper describes the influence of the STEP activities on persistence, while accounting for demographic and academic preparation variables.Design/MethodData collected over 8 years from first‐year engineering students include demographics, academic preparation, participation in STEP activities, and yearly status regarding major and graduation. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and multiple logistic regression determine which factors significantly impact persistence in engineering majors, in STEM majors, and in all majors at LSU.ResultsSTEP participants have higher persistence levels than nonparticipants by at least 11% in engineering, 9% in STEM, and 5% in all majors at LSU. Gender, ACT math scores, and, in some cases, ethnicity significantly impact persistence. Participation in the residential college, introductory course, and mentoring programs significantly increased persistence in engineering majors, in STEM majors, and at the university, while the summer bridge camp did not show as much influence on persistence overall.ConclusionSTEP was successful at increasing persistence in engineering and STEM majors. Specific STEP activities continue to evolve in the College of Engineering and should continue to reap positive results in the persistence of engineering students.

DESIGN OF AN INTRODUCTORY ENGINEERING DESIGN AND COMMUNICATION COURSE WHICH INTEGRATES FIRST SEMESTER COURSES


 Abstract - In their first semester at UWaterloo, Mechatronics Engineering students take a course which introduces them to their chosen discipline, and which has a focus on communication skills (MTE 100 – Mechatronics Engineering). In 2010, a multi-year refresh of MTE 100 was initiated to address shortcomings in both the course, and the semester as a whole. The first semester instructors have now completed the refresh of MTE 100. Multiple hands-on, integrative activities that connect the other first semester courses to MTE 100 were added throughout the first semester. The introduction of these integrative activities has improved the first semester of the Mechatronics program. Survey data and feedback from end of term course critiques show an increased appreciation of foundational courses like Chemistry. From focus groups conducted with upper year students, there is a strong desire for similar experiences in upper years.

'Studio' mathematics for undergraduate engineers

Applied Mathematics for Engineering is a second year undergraduate mathematics requirement for engineering majors at Harvey Mudd College in Claremont, California since 2011. It has been jointly designed and taught by the engineering and mathematics departments. The class aims to help students develop confidence in their skill in applying mathematics to solve engineering problems and perseverance for complicated problems; to improve facility at previously learned mathematical skills and to incorporate new tools; and to develop strategic competence and better judgment on the correctness of solutions. This article describes the design principles used in creating the class and some evidence of its effectiveness. References R. J. Beichner, J. M. Saul, D. S. Abbott, J. J. Morse, D. L. Deardorff, R. J. Allain, S. W. Bonham, M. H. Dancy, and J. S. Risley. The student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs (scale-up) project. In Research-Based Reform of University Physics, volume 1. Edward F. Redish and Patrick Cooney, April 2007. http://www.compadre.org/PER/items/detail.cfm?ID=4517. J. E. Froyd. Evidence for the efficacy of student-active learning pedagogies. Project Kaleidoscope: Pedagogies of Engagement, 2007. http://www.pkal.org/documents/BibliographyofSALPedagogies.cfm, accessed 1 Oct, 2013. P. Little and M. Cardenas. Use of ``studio'' methods in the introductory engineering design curriculum. J. Eng. Educ., 90:309–318, 2001. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2001.tb00610.x. M. Prince. Does active learning work? a review of the research. J. Eng. Educ., 93(3):223–231, 2004. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x. Project Kaleidoscope. What works in facilitating interdisciplinary learning in science and mathematics, 2011. http://www.aacu.org/pkal/interdisciplinarylearning/documents/KeckExecutiveSummary_001.pdf, accessed 1 Oct, 2013. L. Springer, M. E. Stanne, and S. S. Donovan. Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res., 69:21–51, 1999. doi:10.3102/00346543069001021.

3-105 熊本大学社会環境工学科エンジニアリング・デザイン導入教育向上プロジェクト((09)ものつくり教育-I,口頭発表)

3-105 熊本大学社会環境工学科エンジニアリング・デザイン導入教育向上プロジェクト((09)ものつくり教育-I,口頭発表)

Case Study on Course Plan of Introductory Engineering Design for Students Majoring Civil and Environmental Engineering

Case Study on Course Plan of Introductory Engineering Design for Students Majoring Civil and Environmental Engineering

Engineering Design Education through the CDIO Approach

CDIO is a framework for the engineering education curriculum. It is based on learning the design process through actual system and product development. Students learn to “Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate” within this framework. The CDIO standard needs not to be satisfied by every related subject independently. What is required is just satisfied as a whole. At Kanazawa Institute of Technology (KIT) , we have two introductory engineering design courses: Design Project 1 (PD1) and Design Project 2 (PD2) . PD1 is given in the first semester of the freshman year and PD2 in the second semester of the sophomore year. Standard PD1 and PD2 courses satisfy the “Conceive-Design” processes of the CDIO approach. The authors succeeded in expanding the processes of CDIO in PD2 course. This paper describes the details of engineering design education based upon the CDIO framework.

Assessing Creativity Specific to Engineering with the Revised Creative Engineering Design Assessment

BackgroundIn engineering, creativity is vital for innovation. The revised Creative Engineering Design Assessment (CEDA) also assesses Usefulness, unlike existing tools.Purpose (Hypothesis)The primary purpose was to test for convergent validity of the CEDA with other engineering creativity and engineering specific measures. The CEDA was administered with the Purdue Creativity Test (PCT), the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test‐Rotations (PSVT‐R), and a Systems Test that assessed rollercoaster design functionality. We hypothesized that the CEDA would be moderately related to the PCT and anticipated a slight relationship with the PSVT‐R and Systems Test. We also investigated gender differences to follow up on previous research.Design/MscethodParticipants were 259 engineering students (221 males and 38 females) in an introductory engineering design two‐course sequence who completed the CEDA and PCT (in a cross sectional design). We analyzed PVST‐R scores for Fundamentals of Engineering I and Systems Test scores for Fundamentals of Engineering II.ResultsThe CEDA showed high inter‐rater reliability. The CEDA and the PCT were significantly related to each other and the CEDA was modestly related to the PSVT‐R, both demonstrating convergent validity. Male and female engineering students did not significantly differ on the CEDA, PCT, PSVT‐R or Systems Test.ConclusionsThe CEDA showed high inter‐rater reliability. The CEDA and the PCT were significantly related to each other and the CEDA was modestly related to the PSVT‐R, both demonstrating convergent validity. Male and female engineering students did not significantly differ on the CEDA, PCT, PSVT‐R or Systems Test.

Creative Laboratory Model for Large Undergraduate Engineering Classes

Universities are under continual pressure to reduce the expense associated with the laboratory education of undergraduate engineering students. Many alternatives to traditional laboratory instruction have been tested to improve educational benefits and to reduce academic input. This paper describes the benefits of laboratory classes run in an interactive competitive framework to enhance the teaching of structural engineering and construction materials. A creative framework that defines limits and quantifies performance encourages student engagement and allows reasonable control without stifling creativity. Two examples are presented in this paper: a wood bridge competition as part of an introductory structural engineering design course and a concrete technology competition within a structural concrete course. The educational benefits of this broad-based approach are compared with other laboratory methods. Course surveys suggest that students view this method of laboratory education positively when it is w...

地域社会と連携した創造性工学教育

The purpose of this study is to document how students can be provided with a creative engineering education in collaboration with the local community. It is important for students to tackle the problems of local community. The involvement of young people, such as college students, in solving the problems of local communities will contribute to their revitalization. Kanazawa Institute of Technology (KIT) created two introductory engineering design courses : Engineer Design I (ED I) and Engineer Design II (ED II). ED I is taught in the freshman year, and ED II is taught in the sophomore year. KIT started a collaborative project with Nonoichi Town, where KIT campus is located. Officials of Nonoichi Town supplied KIT students in ED II with real project themes, to which solutions were needed, in order to improve the quality of town life. The officials provided students with valuable information and practical advice. As a result, students were able to generate excellent and viable design solutions.

5.3.2 Put Me in Coach; I'm Ready to Play!: A Discussion of an Evolving Curriculum in Systems Engineering

AbstractPrior to 1999, the Introduction to Systems Engineering Design course was taught late in the sequence of courses that the typical student took in the Department of Systems Engineering at the United States Military Academy. The normal progression of courses front‐loaded students with various modeling and analysis “toolkit” courses. Much later in the program students were taught the engineering design big picture. In 1999, the academic program was overhauled. The introductory engineering design course became the first course in the academic program. In addition, the program's courses were separated into “methods” courses that fill the student's toolkit and “formulation” courses that require students to synthesize various tools in formulating and solving small‐scale engineering problems. Finally, summer academic internship experiences were linked with a yearlong capstone design experience during the student's senior year. This paper discusses these changes and highlights advantages of this improved approach to teaching systems engineering.

Use of “Studio” Methods in the Introductory Engineering Design Curriculum

AbstractA number of themes, including interest in first year design courses, commitment to active learning approaches, and desires for changes in course structures and costs have come together in a variety of teaching approaches. Some of these approaches have been referred to as using “studio” methods, although the particular pedagogy appears to vary greatly. In this paper, some of these experiments are briefly reviewed and placed in a larger context of studio education in other disciplines. The paper seeks to differentiate studio education from other active learning approaches. An introductory engineering design course was taught using an architecture studio model for two semesters. The experiment demonstrated that the studio method can be very effective in teaching design concepts, but because students are likely to be unfamiliar with this approach, care must be taken to reassure students regarding grades and expectations.

The E4 Introductory Engineering Test, Design and Simulation Laboratory

AbstractAt a time when we can least afford it, mastery of experimentation among practicing engineers is fast becoming a lost art. Within the undergraduate engineering curriculum there has been a continuous decrease in emphasis in the study and practice of experimentation over the past several decades. The Introductory Engineering Test, Design and Simulation Laboratory is an important and unique component of the “Enhanced Educational Experience for Engineers,”—Drexel's E4 program—which attempts to reverse this trend in a substantial way. It is based on three premises: that experimentation is a critical and distinguishing element of the profession; that experimental skills require time to develop; and that entering students are interested in laboratory work. Thus it provides early, continuous and significant laboratory experiences for all students regardless of major throughout the freshman and sophomore years. The nature of the program and facilities are based on a perspective which recognizes the rich diversity of engineering experimentation yet emphasizes its common elements. The laboratory facilities and program can be incorporated in most lower‐division programs creating the potential for significant improvements in the upper division. The results of our experience since 1989 indicate that the laboratory provides a rich learning environment in which most students achieve or exceed the educational and performance objectives. Equally important, student response is enthusiastic and they have found the laboratory to be a place for them to have a lot of fun becoming engineers!