Design Ability Assessment Technique

Libby Osgood; Clifton R Johnston

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Publication Date: June 15, 2014
Start Date: June 15, 2014
End Date: June 18, 2014
ISSN: 2153-5965
Conference Session: DEED Melange
Tagged Division: Design in Engineering Education
Page Count: 13
Page Numbers: 24.360.1 - 24.360.13
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--20251
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/20251
Download Count: 423

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Libby Osgood P. Eng Dalhousie University and University of Prince Edward Island

visit author page

Libby Osgood is an Assistant Professor at the University of Prince Edward Island in Canada, where she teaches dynamics and design courses. Concurrently, she is pursuing her PhD in Mechanical Engineering at Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Her background is in aerospace engineering, specifically related to satellite design. She was a systems engineer for the integration, test, and launch of NASA Goddard’s FERMI satellite. Her interests have shifted to studying active learning techniques in engineering education, specifically service learning and social justice.

visit author page

author page

Clifton R Johnston P.Eng. Dalhousie University

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Design Ability Assessment Technique There is an ongoing debate to determine which engineering design projects provide the greatest learning opportunity for students. Variations include: whether the client is hypothetical, from industry, or a member of a community organization, whether the product is a paper design, prototype, or fully functioning product, and whether the length of the project is a few weeks long, multi-‐semester, or multi-‐year. In order to compare the merit of each of the factors and measure the impact on student learning, an assessment technique must be developed. While students develop many versatile skills through design projects, such as communication, teamwork, leadership, and engineering science content, the largest impact is shown in students’ ability to design. Design projects can be the sole location that students are exposed to lessons in how to design, so this is the ideal skill to measure, as it is less likely to be affected by external factors. Using a combination of four-‐point Likert scale items, multiple-‐choice questions relating to a design scenario, and quantitative self-‐assessment, a design ability assessment technique was piloted in the Winter of 2013. The design ability construct was defined as an ability to define the problem, evaluate alternatives, and communicate the design. This was derived from a literature review and accreditation materials. Four-‐point Likert-‐scale items were also included concerning ethical awareness, which was defined as knowledge of equal treatment of all persons, ethical conduct in all situations, appreciating cultural diversity for all ethnicities, and possessing a keen awareness of engineers’ responsibility to society. The quantitative instrument was piloted to 200 students with a 10% response rate. While some items displayed a statistically significant result, other items were highly skewed, indicating a poorly written item. Using this information, the instrument was updated and is in the process of validation. This paper will discuss the original instrument, results of the pilot study, and the changes that were inspired by the study.

Citation
Format

Osgood, L., & Johnston, C. R. (2014, June), Design Ability Assessment Technique Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--20251

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -                                               Design Ability Assessment Technique  There  is  an  ongoing  debate  to  determine  which  engineering  design  projects  provide  the  greatest  learning  opportunity  for  students.  Variations  include:  whether  the  client  is  hypothetical,  from  industry,  or  a  member  of  a  community  organization,  whether  the  product  is  a  paper  design,  prototype,  or  fully  functioning  product,  and  whether  the  length  of  the  project  is  a  few  weeks  long,  multi-‐semester,  or  multi-‐year.  In  order  to  compare  the  merit  of  each  of  the  factors  and  measure  the  impact  on  student  learning,  an  assessment  technique  must  be  developed.      While  students  develop  many  versatile  skills  through  design  projects,  such  as  communication,  teamwork,  leadership,  and  engineering  science  content,  the  largest  impact  is  shown  in  students’  ability  to  design.  Design  projects  can  be  the  sole  location  that  students  are  exposed  to  lessons  in  how  to  design,  so  this  is  the  ideal  skill  to  measure,  as  it  is  less  likely  to  be  affected  by  external  factors.      Using  a  combination  of  four-‐point  Likert  scale  items,  multiple-‐choice  questions  relating  to  a  design  scenario,  and  quantitative  self-‐assessment,  a  design  ability  assessment  technique  was  piloted  in  the  Winter  of  2013.  The  design  ability  construct  was  defined  as  an  ability  to  define  the  problem,  evaluate  alternatives,  and  communicate  the  design.  This  was  derived  from  a  literature  review  and  accreditation  materials.  Four-‐point  Likert-‐scale  items  were  also  included  concerning  ethical  awareness,  which  was  defined  as  knowledge  of  equal  treatment  of  all  persons,  ethical  conduct  in  all  situations,  appreciating  cultural  diversity  for  all  ethnicities,  and  possessing  a  keen  awareness  of  engineers’  responsibility  to  society.      The  quantitative  instrument  was  piloted  to  200  students  with  a  10%  response  rate.  While  some  items  displayed  a  statistically  significant  result,  other  items  were  highly  skewed,  indicating  a  poorly  written  item.  Using  this  information,  the  instrument  was  updated  and  is  in  the  process  of  validation.  This  paper  will  discuss  the  original  instrument,  results  of  the  pilot  study,  and  the  changes  that  were  inspired  by  the  study.      
AU  - Libby Osgood P. Eng
AU  - Clifton R Johnston P.Eng.
CY  - Indianapolis, Indiana
DA  - 2014/06/15
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Design Ability Assessment Technique
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/20251
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--20251
ER  -