June 18, 2006
June 18, 2006
June 21, 2006
11.412.1 - 11.412.10
The ABET Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs specifically requires design in criterion three and criterion four. These requirements stem from a fundamental need for engineers to understand and carry out the design process and the requirements are unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. ABET criteria do not allow substitution of research for design in an engineering program. What is the difference between research projects and design projects and why doesn’t ABET allow the substitution? The objective of this paper is to review the rationale for the design requirement in the ABET criteria; review the differences between design and research; and to propose questions that can be used to differentiate between a research project and a design project in an engineering curriculum.
Can the difference between design and research be quantifiably defined? At what point does research become design or design become research? Addressing these questions is much like examining a fine work of art. Examine a painting by a master artist. Look at the white of a lily such as those found in the painting “Carnation, Lily, Lily, Rose,” by John Singer Sargent 1. Can you truly find anything that is just black or white? The fact is there are many colors in the blacks and whites and the beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder. As with art, design is often in the eye of the evaluator. If the difference were black or white, the job an engineering faculty member would be easy. A student understands design or doesn’t. There would be no measuring the degrees of understanding. However, as professionals we have learned judging a student’s ability to design is far more like judging shades of gray. This paper explores many of the shades of gray with respect to the differences between design and research and proposes questions that can aid judging between a “major design experience” and an academic research project.
The ability to design is one of the measures that helps define if a graduate is truly prepared to practice engineering. It is an ability defined by the engineering profession as a “black or white” skill needed by every graduate of an engineering program. A graduate must show that he or she has had “a major design experience based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work and incorporating appropriate engineering standards and multiple realistic constraints.” 2 However, it is at this point that engineering educators begin to illustrate the many colors of the engineering education art.
All engineering curricula, including biomedical engineering, are required to include design as part of a student’s education. This requirement is supported by the definition of an engineer as one who is versed in the practice of engineering and the definition of engineering as the art of designing.3,4 It is required by ABET, Inc. in its engineering accreditation criteria three and four. Criterion three requires that each program “demonstrate that their students attain an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic,
Gassert, J. D., & Enderle, J. D., & Lerner, A., & Jacques, S., & Katona, P. (2006, June), Design Versus Research; Abet Requirements For Design And Why Research Cannot Substitute For Design Paper presented at 2006 Annual Conference & Exposition, Chicago, Illinois. https://peer.asee.org/663
ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2006 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015