Paper ID #12879Exploring the Impact of Cognitive Preferences on Student Receptivity to De-sign ThinkingMs. Jessica Menold Menold, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Jessica Menold is a second year graduate student interested in entrepreneurship, the design process, and innovativeness of engineering graduates and professionals. She is currently working as a student mentor in the Lion Launch Pad program, where she works to support student entrepreneurs. Jessica is currently conducting her graduate research with Dr. Kathryn Jablokow on a project devoted to the development of a psychometric instrument that will
experienced engineersWe first recruited and interviewed 19 engineers who have developed novel technologies and‘matched’ their technologies to problems. The details of the systematic qualitative analysis canbe found in our work [29]. The interviews focused on discussing specific projects they haveworked on, which led to the commercialization of their technologies. Example interviewquestions are shown in Table 1. 3Table 1. Example interview questions Interview Focus Area Example Question Developing technology From the beginning to the end, can you tell me
their courses. Second, administrative processes atuniversities make adding new courses and/or updating current offerings to incorporate socially engaged designcontent a long, difficult process that requires significant investment from faculty members. Third, non-traditionalengineering skills may not fit sequentially into engineering curricula. Students are typically most motivated toacquire these skills when confronted with the challenges of specific design projects, which they may encounterthrough both traditional coursework and co-curricular opportunities. Because of these factors, educationalprograms related to socially engaged design need not only to be accessible to faculty for incorporation into theirexisting courses, but also accessible
data collection are useful and valid, they also constrain participants’ responses to fixedoptions in the case of Likert-type scales and multiple-choice questions, and to verbal expressionsin the case of open-ended prompts. Few examples of other types of reflection activities (e.g.,graphing, sketching) have been presented or studied in the engineering education literature. In this project, which is part of a larger investigation into high performance design teams, weexplored the use of graphing and other visual techniques for recording designers’ perceptions oftheir design processes and products. Our primary aim was to introduce greater richness into theevaluation of designers’ behaviors and outcomes as we posed research questions about
Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Florida Polytechnic University (Florida Poly). He joined the University in 2016 after spending 6-years as an Assistant Professor of Mechanical En- gineering at the University of Louisville (UofL). Bohm’s research examines the intersection of 3 distinct areas, engineering design, engineering education, and big data. Currently, Bohm has an active NSF grant under the Division of Undergraduate Education to examine the effects of systems modeling paradigms with respect to design outcomes and systems thinking and understanding. While at UofL, Bohm was primarily responsible for overseeing the Mechanical Engineering Department’s capstone design program. Prior to his position at UofL, Bohm
after spending 6-years as an Assistant Professor of Mechanical En- gineering at the University of Louisville (UofL). Bohm’s research examines the intersection of 3 distinct areas, engineering design, engineering education, and big data. Currently, Bohm has an active NSF grant under the Division of Undergraduate Education to examine the effects of systems modeling paradigms with respect to design outcomes and systems thinking and understanding. While at UofL, Bohm was primarily responsible for overseeing the Mechanical Engineering Department’s capstone design program. Prior to his position at UofL, Bohm was a visiting researcher at Oregon State University (OSU) after completing his PhD at the Missouri University of
skills intoengineering curricula. As a result, engineering education is starting to change.One major area of change in engineering education is in design. Although design is widely considered asthe most distinguishing and fundamental activity of engineering [1], most curricula have it either isolatedin the senior year or sometimes also in the first year. Now, as the engineering curriculum has progressed,first year design courses, known as the cornerstone engineering courses, and fourth year design courses,referred to as capstone courses, have seen increased development as well [1]. However, these capstonecourses serve as the only standard opportunity across engineering education for undergraduateengineering students to showcase their engineering
directly from page 9. This short introductory video to creativity included a quick activity to encourage them to think outside the box. III. Team construction | As part of the class, students were grouped for their team projects in groups of 2-5. While all data for this study was collected on an individual basis, students were instructed to dissect different products than their teammates. IV. Concept Introduction | Students were introduced to the inventive concept they would be brainstorming and discussing with their teammates. For the graduate students, they would be discussing the design of a novel alarm clock for those that have a difficult time waking up
theirsources of intellectual contributions to their design.It was theorized by the authors that presenting an exemplar prior to setting the students onto adesign project could alter, if not hinder, the number and type of creative solutions generated bythe students. Of particular interest is whether the presence of a prototype exemplar contaminatesthe design process for novice designers. That is, does the prototype exemplar cause novicedesigners to fixate on particular design features thereby limiting creativity or does it help them toimprove the performance of their designs?The concept of designers fixating on particular design features is not new to the study ofengineering design. Jansson and Smith1 were among the first who “clearly and
, Millennium Project. University of Michigan.13. Ericsson K.A. (1999). Creative expertise as superior reproducible performance: Innovative and flexible aspects of expert performance. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 329-333.14. Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of Page 15.151.18 expert performance. Psychological Review, 100, 363-406.15. Fitts, P.M., & Posner, M.I. (1967). Human Performance. Belmont, CA: Brookes Cole.16. Guilford, J.P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.17. Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991
). Page 26.871.6Data CollectionStudents agreed to participate in a one-hour data collection session, with 30 minutes devoted toeach participant’s concept. Each participant was asked to bring a previously defined concept forthe project they were engaged in within their course, and all students had been previouslyrequired to complete some form of user or market research to inform their project. The entireexercise was audio and video recorded (Figure 2), and all sketches and notes the participantsgenerated were retained and scanned for further analysis.The empathic walkthrough method was conducted twice for each dyad, with each participant’sconcept serving as an encapsulated use of the method, approximately 30 minutes in duration.Dyad A was used as
AC 2012-4544: INOCULATING NOVICE SOFTWARE DESIGNERS WITHEXPERT DESIGN STRATEGIESDavid R. Wright, North Carolina State University David Wright earned his Ph.D. in computer science from North Carolina State University. He is currently a Research Associate in the Computer Science Department, overseeing the day-to-day operations of four different research projects. Wright has taught a variety of undergraduate courses at NCSU and other local institutions. His research interests include software design and engineering education, focusing on ways to help students think more like engineering professionals than students, as well as developing teaching and learning tools and strategies that help keep students interested in
engineers—those who have developed the competencies to create value through the realization of complex engineered systems.Dr. Dirk Ifenthaler, University of FreiburgProf. Zahed Siddique, University of Oklahoma Dr. Siddique is currently a professor at the School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering of Uni- versity of Oklahoma. His research interests are in areas of product design, product platform design, and engineering education. He is the faculty advisor of the Sooner Racing Team (FSAE) and coordinator of the Mechanical Engineering Capstone Program. Page 23.480.1 c American Society