June 20, 2010
June 20, 2010
June 23, 2010
15.1160.1 - 15.1160.14
Systematic Ideation Curriculum Effectiveness Investigation & Deployment to Enhance Design Learning
This paper presents our current research on the effectiveness of TRIZ, emphasis on sketching and technology enabled sketching in improving the ideation performance of undergraduate engineering students in classroom settings. This research also investigates the impact of TRIZ and two other conditions, emphasis on sketching and the Pulse Smartpen, for their impact on the ideation performance and provide understanding into the mechanisms by which they operate to this end. Our objective is to test our hypotheses that TRIZ, sketching, or the pulse Smartpen improve design ideation alone or in some combination. To this end, we defined experimental design and protocols to study design and ideation tools, and thereby, provide a standard way to benchmark tool effectiveness. This research work involves rigorous experimental designs to collect quantitative and qualitative data to answer the following three research questions. 1. Can TRIZ improve the ideation performance of engineering students? 2. Can sketching improve the ideation performance of engineering students? 3. Can technology enabled journaling (via Pulse Smartpen) improve the ideation performance of engineering students? The treatment conditions are applied to classes of engineering students from different backgrounds and different institutions. Partial results are presented for this work in progress supported by NSF (0920446 and 0920707).
Design learning and the related design ability have a three-pronged foundation: 1) design process knowledge, 2) design analysis knowledge, and 3) creative processing ability (ideation). Design process knowledge, in general, is taught in first year design courses, and then practiced throughout the engineering curriculum culminating in the capstone design course. During second and third year courses, the engineering curriculum focuses on analytical concepts and techniques ultimately intended to support design analysis ability. Given the overcrowded traditional engineering curriculum, it is not surprising that students do not improve their creative processing skills. The proliferation of assistive software for design has an impact on student training as well. For example, sketching was a critical skill in traditional engineering design but the practice has become less important to students as computer-aided drawing tools have become available to them.
Industrial and academic leaders long expressed concerns about the impact of traditional engineering education on the creative potential of future engineers. A lack of creativity is viewed as problematic in a rapidly changing technology-oriented world where generating new ideas is essential to survival1,2. Industry has also perceived new BS engineering graduates as lacking design capability or creativity, as well as an appreciation for considering alternatives. In the past several years, universities have responded to these challenges by adding more design content and introducing more open-ended design problems into their engineering curricula. Improving
Vargas Hernandez, N., & Kremer, G., & Linsey, J., & Schmidt, L. (2010, June), Systematic Ideation Curriculum Effectiveness Investigation & Deployment To Enhance Design Learning Paper presented at 2010 Annual Conference & Exposition, Louisville, Kentucky. https://peer.asee.org/16740
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: © 2010 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