June 24, 2017
June 24, 2017
June 28, 2017
Design in Engineering Education
Self-regulated learning (SRL), which is often called self-regulation, is defined broadly as a complex repository of knowledge and skills for planning, implementing, monitoring, evaluating, and continually improving the learning process. The effective use of self-regulation helps a student oversee his or her learning process by interpreting requirements, planning and monitoring ongoing cognitive activities, and comparing outcomes with internal and external standards. Research suggests that the recursive, dynamic, multi-directional, and complex nature of self-regulated learning (SRL) always occurred in a context. The term context refers to all circumstances or facts that surround a particular SRL action. In a typical higher education settings, the contexts may include various levels of policies (e.g., university, department, and classroom policies), curriculum, subject domain, instructional approaches, and any specific given tasks. The intent of this research is to learn how senior students from two engineering disciplines self-regulate themselves in the Capstone design course. We recruited four groups of students working on four different design projects at a public university in the mountain west of the United States of America; two groups were recruited from the biological engineering (BE) department and the other two groups were recruited from the mechanical and aerospace engineering (MAE) department. In addition to the participants’ demographics, qualitative data were collected from course Canvas™, e-Journal, and design journey map. The analysis were framed using Butler & Cartier’s model of self-regulation in context and Dym & Little’s design process frameworks. Four engineering experts, two from each respective engineering discipline, were recruited to help code the design process and students’ self-regulation. Through the chronological narrative analysis, we found that project management, which included the management of time, resources, and team, was a prevailing topic in both disciplines. Due to the nature of their design projects, BE students had more engagement in time management compare to the MAE students. In terms of design process, students from all groups were heavily engaged in preliminary design activities, but somewhat rather disengaged in the detailed design phases. MAE had more dynamics design process compared to the BE, especially students’ self-regulations between problem definition, conceptual, and preliminary design phases. Furthermore, biological engineering students seemed to be heavily engaged with various standards and protocols, compare to their MAE fellow students. On the project management aspect of self-regulation, students from both engineering disciplines seemed to take quite different strategies to respond to their unique design tasks’ requirements.
Febrian, A., & Lawanto, O. (2017, June), Students' Self-regulation in a Senior Capstone Design Context: A Comparison Between Mechanical and Biological Engineering Design Projects Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--28872
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: © 2017 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