Engineering Design: Are We Teaching The Right Stuff?
- Conference
- Location
-
Honolulu, Hawaii
- Publication Date
-
June 24, 2007
- Start Date
-
June 24, 2007
- End Date
-
June 27, 2007
- ISSN
-
2153-5965
- Conference Session
- Tagged Division
-
Design in Engineering Education
- Page Count
-
16
- Page Numbers
-
12.624.1 - 12.624.16
- DOI
-
10.18260/1-2--2589
- Permanent URL
-
https://peer.asee.org/2589
- Download Count
-
1030
Paper Authors
Rudolph Eggert Boise State University
RUDY J. EGGERT, Ph.D., P.E. is a Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Boise State University. His research interests include Engineering Design, Optimization, Design Theory and Methodology, Machine Design, and Probabilistic Analysis. In addition to a number of conference papers and journal articles he authored Engineering Design, published by Prentice Hall in 2004. A long time member of ASEE, he is the 2006/7 Design in Engineering Education Division Chair-Elect.
Abstract
NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract
Engineering Design: Are We Teaching the Right Stuff?
Abstract
Developing an undergraduate engineering design curriculum can be a challenge. Using the continuous improvement process adopted by ABET 2000, engineering programs typically consider: which outcomes our program should set out to achieve, which assessment measures to use, and how we should make revisions to develop our program. To achieve the “outcomes” program faculty carefully develop curricula including what should be taught, and also when and how it should be taught.
This study reviewed literature, beginning with 1991, covering capstone design and design education in general. The composition of respondents varies such as group surveys covering capstone design among different disciplines and other, more narrowly focused surveys. In summary the studies indicate that since Dixon’s seminal article in 1991 we have seen: increased emphasis in integrating the Product Realization Process, improvement in the working definitions of design and design processes, an increase in the number of design topics taught in capstone design from 1994 to 2005, but, an apparent and dramatic decrease in the number of design topics from 2003-2006.
1.0 Introduction
Developing an undergraduate engineering design curriculum can be a challenge for any institution. Using the continuous improvement process adopted by ABET 2000, we typically consider: which outcomes our program should set out to achieve, which assessment measures to use, and how we should make revisions to develop our program.
Criterion 3, of ABET’s 2007 Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs1, lists 11 desirable outcomes lettered (a) thru (k). Outcome (c), specifically deals with engineering design, stating that graduating students should have: “an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability”
Criterion 4 goes on to list three subject areas: “(a) one year of a combination of college level mathematics and basic sciences (some with experimental experience) appropriate to the discipline, (b) one and one-half years of engineering topics, consisting of engineering sciences and engineering design appropriate to the student's field of study..., and (c) a general education component that complements the technical content of the curriculum and is consistent with the program and institution objectives.”
Criterion 4 further states that: “Engineering design is the process of devising a system, component, or process to meet desired needs. It is a decision-making process (often iterative), in which the basic sciences, mathematics, and the engineering sciences are applied to convert resources optimally to meet these stated needs.”
Eggert, R. (2007, June), Engineering Design: Are We Teaching The Right Stuff? Paper presented at 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii. 10.18260/1-2--2589
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: © 2007 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