Paper ID #11298Learning from Experiences: Examining Self-Reflection in Engineering De-sign CoursesJennifer Wegner, University of Michigan College of Engineering Jennifer Wegner is an Assistant Director in Engineering Student Affairs at the University of Michigan, with responsibilities including student organization development, leading unit strategic objectives, and supporting university and college co-curricular initiatives. Her teaching and facilitation experiences in- clude a mentorship/leadership course, LeaderShape R , first year seminars, and a university course on social psychology in residence settings. She is a
Service-Learning Design CourseAbstractThe development and skill of empathizing with others has become a necessity for successfuldesign engineers. To develop this skill, learning experiences are needed that encourageengineering students’ understanding of their users and stakeholders. Studies have shown an“authentic” experience involving real-world contexts reflecting the work of professionals helpsto develop and foster empathy. At Purdue University, a service-learning design program partnersmulti-disciplinary teams of students with community organizations to address needs and solvereal-world problems. In previous research on the program’s design process, findings showed howstudents perceive the human aspect of engineering design and how they
self evaluations Feedback based on those evaluations A Gantt chart to plan project tasks and timelines Peer mentors Reflections on teamwork topics Mid-semester progress meetingsIce Breaker and Communication Activity. Teams are revealed during lecture, at which pointstudents are encouraged to take seats near their new teammates and quickly exchange names andcontact information. After the teams have a few minutes to chat, we introduce a teaming activity:a logic grid puzzle with 30 written clues, divided as evenly as possible among the team memberson slips of paper. Our puzzle was adapted from [11], and we have made our version availableelectronically [12]. Generally, our students seem familiar with this type of
Concept Presentation 10 6 Final Design Presentation 15 10 Final Design Report 15 11 Individual Design Debate 5 0 Reflective Essay No.1 10 5 Reflective Essay No. 2 10 11Data Collection MethodsDEFT is a web-based system that facilitates frequent student reporting of their
spirit, we contend that in design, build, and test courses studentslearn when they are required to reflect on their experiences and identify theirlearning explicitly. Further, we posit that utilization of an assessment instrument,the learning statement (LS), can be used to both enable and assess studentlearning. In our course, AME4163: Principles of Engineering Design, a senior-level,pre-capstone, engineering design course, students learn by reflecting on doing bywriting statements anchored in Kolb’s experiential learning cycle. In Fall 2016we collected over 11,000 learning statements from over 150 students. To addressthe challenge of analyzing and gleaning knowledge from the large number oflearning statements we resorted to text mining
epistemology, teamwork and equity). While seminar goals aligned with the goals ofLA programs nationally, our seminar design team also articulated several values which guidedthe design of our seminar: a) helping LAs reframe their role as supporting growth rather thanevaluation, b) valuing a broad set of metrics of success from day one, c) celebrating that differentstudents bring in different expertise, and disrupting overly simplistic expertise/novicedichotomies, d) acknowledging that we all have different starting points and valuing a pluralityof goals, e) helping our students track their own progress through reflecting on concreterepresentations of their thinking, and f) supporting LAs in developing deep disciplinaryknowledge of design thinking. This
abilityto transfer the closed-ended skills used on a typical math problem to an open-ended problem.The Reflective Practitioner. A study by Valkenberg and Dorst discussed the use of descriptive andreflective practices in design [6]. This paper drew heavily on Schön’s paradigm of reflective practice [7].Schön contends that every design problem is necessarily a unique challenge. Teaching students the skillsto reflect on their design while innovating, in order to advance the design, is essential to teaching design.This also can lead to problems, since if every problem is unique, and the students want a single concreteroadmap for how a project should go, there is bound to be conflict. Valkenberg and Dorst discussed fourdifferent design activities
to improve such courses incrementally. In our course AME4163 –Principles of Engineering Design, a senior-level engineering DBT course, we haveincorporated David Kolb’s experiential learning construct into the fabric of courseactivities, assignments, and structured exercises. We now seek to additionallyleverage Piaget’s cognitive constructivism and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theoryinto structured learning exercises. One such exercise is the ‘Learning Statement,’(LS) a reflective exercise in which students directly translate experience intolearning and articulate expected future value from that learning. In employing theLS as an instrument for a formative assessment, we attempt to identify the students’Zones of Proximal Development (ZPD
designed with the help of contemporaryunderstandings of effective instruction methods (e.g. table 1 below), also relying extensivelyon available mechanical design texts such as Dieter & Schmidt.7Table 1: Instructional practices that create effective learning experiences8Affective • Arouse interest to students of contrasting abilities and goals • Provide stimulating, interesting, and varied assignments that are within the range of students abilities but challenge them to reach for the top of that range • Make connections to students interests and intended careersMeta-cognitive • Build self-regulative abilities by explicitly teaching students about them • Promote reflection to enhance attention to meta-cognitive
and varying models have been developed. For example, Crismond and Adams5present a robust matrix illustrating the design learning trajectories of K-16 students. Their matrixderives from existing literature and explores nine design strategies, from “understanding thechallenge” to “reflecting on the process.” Compared to beginners, informed designers aredescribed as continual learners who work creatively and make decisions based on their skills andknowledge. Similarly, Cross10 compares the behaviors of expert and novice engineeringdesigners. For instance, when solving a problem, expert designers focus on “breadth-first Page 26.1131.3approaches
seek to bring about change – helps us understand the different ways in which peoplesolve problems individually and as part of a team. When team members’ cognitive styles arediverse, creating an effect known as cognitive gap, the team may experience the advantages ofapproaching problems in diverse ways, but the likelihood of conflicts and misunderstandingsincreases6.This study investigated the relationship between cognitive style and the perceptions of studentsworking in teams about their own ideation. Through the analysis of reflection surveys from 202pre-engineering, engineering, and design students participating in an ideation study, we exploredthe following questions: (1) how does working in teams impact students' perceptions of theirown
matrices or House of Quality. However, in the process of providing rationalistic toolsto students, engineering education may be implicitly perpetuating the belief that engineers makedecisions through rationalistic reasoning alone. In reality, other types of informal reasoning, suchas empathic and intuitive reasoning, are utilized for decision making in ill-structured contextssuch as engineering design. The beliefs that undergraduate students hold about decision makingin the context of design is not well understood, and this work contributes to this gap in theliterature.To learn more about students’ beliefs about decision making, we collected qualitative pilot datain the form of both one-on-one, semi-structured interviews and written reflections
voluntary.The pedagogical theoriesThe pedagogical theories supporting the Para didactic Laboratory activities are: i) constructivismas proposed by Jean Piaget; ii) experiential learning according to David Kolb and John Dewey;iii) reflective learning according to Donald Schön and John Dewey. And as support tools: i) thefour stages of competence of Noel Burch; ii) the theory of Flow created by MihalyCsikszentmihalyi.ConstructivismAccording to Jean Piaget for the process of learning to be efficient it must take into account thecurrent stage of cognitive development of the students and create situations that allow them todevelop new cognitive structures to absorb the knowledge and develop the skills andcompetences required at each stage of their learning
lower empathetic designtendency scores? This study was conducted in a junior-level design course of 76 BME students.We collected and analyzed three data sources: students’ self-reflection reports about theirreframing processes, empathic design tendency scores, and interviews with selected teams andinstructors. The results demonstrated that more than half of the students perceived the connectionbetween empathy and their reframing decisions and that they usually had one reframing momentin the stages of problem definition and concept identification. Also, the findings suggested thetriggers for their reframing moments, information sources guiding their reframing processes,changes made through reframing, and influences of reframing decisions on team
work.In this paper, we focus on the weekly surveys: participants received two separate surveys eachweek: a short quantitative perceived preparedness survey sent each Tuesday via Qualtrics and ashort qualitative reflection survey sent each Thursday via email. Participants received $6.25 foreach completed survey, paid in 4-week increments (i.e. up to $50 for each 4-week set of surveys- up to $150 total).The quantitative survey was informed by Experience Sampling Methodologies (ESM), in whichthe purpose of the instrument is to capture experiences as they happen in real time forparticipants [28-30]. The survey asked participants to identify activities in which they hadparticipated within the past week. The list of possible activities was constructed
incorporation of groupwork experiences into cornerstone and capstone experiences, where individual work hashistorically been typical. However, as many institutions are experimenting with alternativemodels that incorporate group work throughout a degree program, there is little understanding ofhow—or whether—students are able to develop the skills they need to work on their own. In thisstudy, we address students’ views towards collaboration and their construction of individualcompetence in a novel transdisciplinary learning environment, where group projects are typicaland individual work is highly atypical.Collaboration and Teamwork SkillsEngineering education researchers have long recognized the importance of collaboration andteamwork, reflecting the
impact of a user’s prior knowledge and the reflections of first-year engineeringstudents on differing results were also assessed.The results of this study indicate that designing a product display or interface is still centeredaround a population stereotype, but the population takes many forms depending on the productor interface. When an open-ended prompt is provided, such as, “draw in how you consider the[gear selections] should be positioned for [an auto transmission] Neutral (N), Drive (D), Low(L), and Reverse (R),” the multitude of responses becomes overwhelming to designers. Theinfluence of cultural shifts, since the original study, was evident within our responses as well.Multiple responses highlighted how modernization of technology may
disparate contexts and perspectives.2. improve the ability to apply engineering design concepts to solve problems in the real world.3. improve the ability to make reflective judgment through independent and critical thinking4. improve the ability to make and act on the moral or ethical judgment in the engineering design process5. improve the ability to function effectively on a team.6. improve the ability to communicate effectively with a range of audiencesThis course is designed to achieve the learning outcomes listed above by assigning studentsdesign activities and projects. Table 1 shows the detailed descriptions of the teaching methodsused for each learning outcome. Table 1. Teaching methods for each learning outcome
multiple approaches to inquiry to research this particular wicked problem of ourtime. Our course incorporated documentary film, fiction, arts based inquiry, research, andmultiple modes of reflection to frame the design of creative solutions to complex problems.Engaging students in practices of attending to experience introduced them to artistic/creativereflective practices, design thinking, and aesthetic inquiry. Examining how artists interweaveart, science, technology, and math in imaginative artworks that blur boundaries between art,design, and STEM disciplines developed "thinking dispositions that are valued both within andbeyond the arts," (p. x, Hetland, Winner, Veenema, & Sheridan, 2013). In this paper we discuss how an art
Introduction module, students first learned about the National Academy of EngineeringGrand Challenges for Engineering. As part of discussion groups, they were asked to prioritize thechallenges and identify those that most interested them. Most students were previously unawareof these challenges. In reflecting what was learned in this module, one student stated: I learned the responsibility of engineering. With all the rewarding aspects of engineering comes responsibility. The grand challenges emphasized the responsibility engineers have to society. If engineers have the tools to create, they should use them to create good. This is important to acknowledge so that engineering can remain ethical and just.Students were then
the results from2012 and 2013 in Figures 1 and 2. Page 26.997.4Figure 1: Overall, students perceived engineering as a respected career that involves designing cool things and helping society. Page 26.997.5 Figure 2: A summary of student associations towards male engineers and creativity.Students who participated in the game project also reflected on their experiences and learning.On average, 85% of students agreed or strongly agreed the game project was creative, and 71%said they enjoy creating games, while 80% enjoy playing games. Interestingly, more
which the university will: become an anchorinstitution, demonstrate engaged scholarship, practice changemaking, advance access andinclusion, demonstrate care for our common home, and integrate our liberal arts education.In addition, the University Core curriculum recently underwent an overhaul with a new CoreCurriculum in place in Fall 2017. One significant outcome of the new Core reflects theUniversity’s commitment to Diversity, Inclusion and Social Justice (DISJ). Whereas studentspreviously were required to take a single Diversity course, the new Core requires students to taketwo Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice (DISJ) courses recognizing a developmental modelof achieving these outcomes. In addition, the DISJ designation is now based
given multiple realisticconstraints, much like they would experience after they took their first engineering position 3.Most undergraduate engineering programs have now been through several iterations of theABET 2000 accreditation process, which normally occurs in six-year intervals. After fifteenplus years of functioning under the ABET 2000 criteria it seems appropriate to reflect upon thechanges and consider the results. This paper focuses on a review of the engineering curriculum,an overview of accreditation, the role of capstone in the curriculum and finally a new model forcapstone in relationship to the curriculum. A hierarchical ordering of student outcomes ispresented with examples of possible direct measures.2. Status of the Engineering
, collaborate and build, monitor progress, and reflect on tasks. However, research onPBL engineering discourse has placed a stronger focus on self-regulation than shared regulationprocesses [6], [7]. Understanding how students jointly regulate efforts may help to structurecollaborative tasks and promote efficient regulatory and design processes—two critical learningoutcomes in PBL [1], [7].MethodsStudy setting & participants. The study is part of a series examining the relation betweenperceived social network and collaboration patterns in engineering design. We followed fourfirst-year student teams in a two-term project-based engineering course in California in the 2018-2019 academic year. The goal of this elective course is to introduce students
emphasized creative thinking or doing. Hence, the primary contribution of this paperinvolves the development and testing of the instrumentation for evaluation purposes. In contrast,the pedagogical underpinnings of the Engineering Technology and Arts (ETA) curricula, ofwhich this course is a part, are described in Tovar et al. [8]. To help interpret the validity of thequantitative findings [9], potential causes of changes on survey constructs are considered in lightof observational data, focus groups, and reflections by the instructors on course implementation.1.2 Design of Complex and Origami StructuresThis course was developed as part of the Engineering, Technology, and Arts (ETA) track in themechanical engineering department at an urban research
performance metric for the study wasthe student’s final grade in the fall and spring semesters of the senior capstone design course, aswell as the delta in the student grade. The student’s grades were correlated to a numeric value forcomparison, which is reflective of the GPA calculation at Florida Institute of Technology. Thenumerical values for performance are represented as traditional GPA scoring whereby A=4.0,B=3.0, C=2.0, D=1.0 and F=0.To supplement the quantitative study results, the authors performed an exit interview with each ofthe senior capstone design teams. The students were asked a total of 19 questions, in an open-floor,interview type format. The students were instructed to be as specific as possible in their answers.The authors
immersive interdisciplinary learningenvironment with a tangible scope, featuring direct mentorship of faculty and a local architect,collaboration between two colleges, and active interaction with a non-profit organization. Theproject is evaluated based upon information gathered from student design artifacts, constructionprocess documentation, and perceptual data via surveying and reflection. This paper discussesthe benefits and unique challenges of Design for Homeless (DfH) and provides insights on itsimplementation as a capstone experience.IntroductionCapstone design courses are intended to provide rich opportunities for student learning [1].According to Marin et al., successful capstone experience can be affected by many factors,including student
recent alumnus who has a vision impairment. Reflections: After completing the low vision simulation, students were asked to write a reflection of their experience in the course online discussion forum. Participants were asked to post a response to the prompt below and also post two replies to their classmate’s posts. “Describe your experience today wearing the low vision simulation goggles/ blindfolds. What did you learn about living with a vision impairment? Did this activity help you break any misconceptions that you held in the past?” The qualitative analysis of their primary
visualizations of teams’ design process across several metrics.More specifically, actions were clustered into three categories: construction, optimization, andnumerical analysis. Design teams’ actions were further contextualized in terms their designtimeline and the sites they explored.Results from design team analytics have implications not only for teams’ design process, butmay be re-deployed as reflection tools for students’ or progress indicators for teachers or designmentors.In the next section the paper reviews research in learning analytics and visualization for dataanalysis. Following this, the context of the study and design challenge are outlined. Energy3D isdiscussed briefly before reviewing the data collected and participants for the study
. Companies that she has worked with renew their commitment to innovation. She also helps students an- swer these questions when she teaches some of these methods to engineering, design, business, medicine, and law students. Her courses use active storytelling and self-reflective observation as one form to help student and industry leaders traverse across the iterative stages of a project- from the early, inspirational stages to prototyping and then to delivery.Dr. Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University Sheri D. Sheppard, Ph.D., P.E., is professor of Mechanical Engineering at Stanford University. Besides teaching both undergraduate and graduate design and education related classes at Stanford University, she conducts research