Salt Lake City, Utah
June 23, 2018
June 23, 2018
July 27, 2018
While several variations of the design processes are used throughout K-8 engineering classrooms, the overall process encourages students to identify the problem, brainstorm possible solutions, design and build at least one of the solutions, test the solution, and continue throughout an iterative cycle of redesigning and retesting until the solution is successful. An inevitable component of this design process is the experience of design failure, which occurs “when a designed solution, or aspect of a designed solution, does not meet criteria under constraints as specified by the problem” (Lottero-Perdue, 2015, p. 2). One’s ability to persist and learn from failure has been recognized throughout policy documents (NGSS Lead States, 2013) and research studies (Cunningham & Kelly, 2017) as an essential skill, or habit of mind, that successful engineers possess. However, when looking at societal views and the generalized school view of the word “failure,” there tends to be negative connotations and teachers typically associate failure with academic expectations or abilities (Lottero-Perdue, & Parry, 2017). Individual’s associations with the word “failure” are highly contextualized and can range from productive and positive to non-productive and negative. Arguing that failure is central to the engineering design process and one’s ability to persist in the face of failure is a necessary prerequisite for future engineers (Petroski, 2012), it is essential for young engineering students to view design failure in a productive and positive way. A central part engineering problem-solving is experiencing struggle, or uncomfortable moments where a designed solution is not working as it was intended. This study examines what these experiences look like for young engineering students, including how they react, and the strategies they use to persist (or not) through failure. This qualitative dissertation study, which has been approved for data collection, employs a comparative case study design in order to gain insight into how elementary engineering students experience design failure. More specifically, this dissertation looks to answer the following research questions: 1. What are design failure experiences in elementary engineering contexts? 2. In what ways do elementary engineering students react to design failure? 3. What are the coping strategies students use during and after design failure experiences that lead them to persist or not persist through failure? Since this dissertation study has passed the proposal stage, the poster will focus on background literature, the theoretical framework, the research design, data collection plans, as well as future research plans.
Cellitti, J. (2018, June), Exploring Design Failure in the Design Process: A Comparative Case Study of Young Engineering Students Paper presented at 2018 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition , Salt Lake City, Utah. https://peer.asee.org/30485
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: © 2018 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