Board 136: Design-Thinking Abilities in Undergraduate Mechanical Engineering Students

Maeve Bakic; Samantha Schauer; Krishna Pakala

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Portland, Oregon
Publication Date: June 23, 2024
Start Date: June 23, 2024
End Date: July 12, 2024
Conference Session: Mechanical Engineering Division (MECH) Poster Session
Tagged Division: Mechanical Engineering Division (MECH)
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/46694

Request a correction

Samantha Schauer is a student at Boise State University, graduating in May 2020 with a Bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering and a minor in Applied Mathematics. Samantha works as an Undergraduate Research Assistant under Dr. Krishna Pakala. She is a

visit author page

biography

Krishna Pakala Boise State University

visit author page

Dr. Krishna Pakala is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Biomedical Engineering at Boise State University (Boise, Idaho). He was the Director for the Industrial Assessment Center at Boise State University. He served as the Faculty in Residence for the Engineering and Innovation Living Learning Community (2014 - 2021). He was the inaugural Faculty Associate for Mobile Learning and the Faculty Associate for Accessibility and Universal Design for Learning. He was the recipient of the Foundation Excellence Award, David S. Taylor Service to Students Award and Golden Apple Award from Boise State University. He was also the recipient of 2023 National Outstanding Teacher Award, ASEE PNW Outstanding Teaching Award, ASEE Mechanical Engineering division’s Outstanding New Educator Award and several course design awards. He serves as the campus representative and was the past-Chair for the ASEE PNW Section. His academic research interests include innovative teaching and learning strategies, use of emerging technologies, and mobile teaching and learning strategies.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Design experiences offer engineering students opportunities to improve their confidence and competency. However, lecture based teaching is often utilized in STEM education, pushing students to “know” the content rather than “understand” the content. When engineering students do not have a comprehensive understanding of core concepts and are not properly prepared in the classroom, they often are unprepared for the workforce and have lower confidence in their abilities. This research study aimed to understand the differences in the design thinking abilities of seniors versus freshmen and sophomore undergraduate mechanical engineering students. The underlying goal of this research study was to bridge the gap between the classroom and workforce by identifying what knowledge gaps students have that prevent them from being prepared for their career in engineering. Students who participated in this study were asked to complete a short online survey and participate in an online group design process. The survey utilized Likert style questions to gauge students’ self-perceived design thinking ability, responses to these questions were analyzed with statistical methods as they were numerical. The group design process lasted no more than 3 hours per group and was conducted as well as recorded on Zoom. During the group design process, students were given a project description requiring them to design a mechanism that would move an object from a kitchen counter up onto a shelf, without damaging said object. The project description included a diagram and was intended to have a wide range of solutions, to allow for differing levels of technical knowledge that seniors, sophomores, and freshmen students often have. Students’ recorded sessions were transcribed and later analyzed utilizing thematic coding. Survey and group design process results indicated that students’ self-perceived design thinking ability aligned with their actual design thinking ability. This was apparent as all students, regardless of student classification, reported confidence in their abilities and completed designs containing some degree of complexity. Results from the group design process indicated that though students do not change their verbal communication ability as they progress through their degree, they do increase their written communication ability and technical knowledge. This was apparent in the higher degrees of design complexity that seniors utilized versus the lower degrees of complexity seen in designs from sophomores and freshmen. Conclusions regarding insight into the student design process provide engineering programs across the country with suggestions for better course and curriculum design, allowing for better student preparedness when entering the workforce.

Citation
Format

Bakic, M., & Schauer, S., & Pakala, K. (2024, June), Board 136: Design-Thinking Abilities in Undergraduate Mechanical Engineering Students Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. https://peer.asee.org/46694

TY - CPAPER
AB - Design experiences offer engineering students opportunities to improve their confidence and competency. However, lecture based teaching is often utilized in STEM education, pushing students to “know” the content rather than “understand” the content. When engineering students do not have a comprehensive understanding of core concepts and are not properly prepared in the classroom, they often are unprepared for the workforce and have lower confidence in their abilities. This research study aimed to understand the differences in the design thinking abilities of seniors versus freshmen and sophomore undergraduate mechanical engineering students. The underlying goal of this research study was to bridge the gap between the classroom and workforce by identifying what knowledge gaps students have that prevent them from being prepared for their career in engineering. Students who participated in this study were asked to complete a short online survey and participate in an online group design process. The survey utilized Likert style questions to gauge students’ self-perceived design thinking ability, responses to these questions were analyzed with statistical methods as they were numerical. The group design process lasted no more than 3 hours per group and was conducted as well as recorded on Zoom. During the group design process, students were given a project description requiring them to design a mechanism that would move an object from a kitchen counter up onto a shelf, without damaging said object. The project description included a diagram and was intended to have a wide range of solutions, to allow for differing levels of technical knowledge that seniors, sophomores, and freshmen students often have. Students’ recorded sessions were transcribed and later analyzed utilizing thematic coding. Survey and group design process results indicated that students’ self-perceived design thinking ability aligned with their actual design thinking ability. This was apparent as all students, regardless of student classification, reported confidence in their abilities and completed designs containing some degree of complexity. Results from the group design process indicated that though students do not change their verbal communication ability as they progress through their degree, they do increase their written communication ability and technical knowledge. This was apparent in the higher degrees of design complexity that seniors utilized versus the lower degrees of complexity seen in designs from sophomores and freshmen. Conclusions regarding insight into the student design process provide engineering programs across the country with suggestions for better course and curriculum design, allowing for better student preparedness when entering the workforce.
AU - Maeve Bakic
AU - Samantha Schauer
AU - Krishna Pakala
CY - Portland, Oregon
DA - 2024/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Board 136: Design-Thinking Abilities in Undergraduate Mechanical Engineering Students
UR - https://peer.asee.org/46694
ER -