June 15, 2014
June 15, 2014
June 18, 2014
Design in Engineering Education
24.1196.1 - 24.1196.22
The Development of a Rubric to Evaluate and Promote Students’ Integration of Stakeholder Considerations into the Engineering Design ProcessWith the current and future infrastructure, energy, environmental, and medical-related challengesfacing society, there is a movement by members of the engineering design education communityto introduce design approaches and experiences that place a higher value on the needs andlimitations of stakeholders. At the undergraduate level, the purpose of these approaches andexperiences is to allow students to interact with stakeholders throughout the design process anddevelop a design solution which, in many cases, can be delivered to the client for future use.Through these experiences, students can gain valuable insight into how designers can incorporatestakeholder considerations. However, in the design of complex systems, such as aircraft, theextent to which students can experience the entire design process and interact regular withstakeholders is limited. For example, many aerospace design instructors have to choose whetherto pursue a project which focuses on the conceptual design process, but does not include designactivities like prototyping and building, or a project that includes detailed design andconstruction, but can be expensive. As a result, many of the conceptual design experiencesprovided in the classroom tend to focus on the design of technology using quantitative methods,which may not be capable of integrating stakeholder considerations into the design.To aid in the integration of stakeholder considerations into these and similar courses, this paperwill describe the development of a rubric to examine students’ design understanding and howstudents perceive and integrate stakeholders into the design of a complex system. The rubric isgrounded within the design, human factors, and human-centered design literature and is based onspecific objectives that can be assessed by looking at student design projects and presentations.The paper will include a discussion of related frameworks and rubrics along with the specificstudies which informed the development of this rubric. These studies include an examination ofthe behavior of beginning and informed designers, an exploration of how students experiencehuman-centered design, and a case study of engineers and human factors specialists at anaerospace engineering firm.To assess the validity, reliability, and overall usability of the rubric, the paper will present theresults of a two phase process. The first phase captures the perceptions of subject-matter expertsin aircraft design and engineering education, as well as course instructors. The second phaseillustrates the initial application of the rubric by a panel of faculty, graduate students, andresearch scientists, who use the rubric to evaluate the design projects from a fixed-wing designcourse. The paper then concludes with discussion of how the rubric can be utilized by designinstructors as both a teaching and evaluation tool. Overall, this work aims to assist designinstructors in preparing their students to respond to the complex engineering challenges facingour society today and in the future.
Coso, A. E., & Pritchett, A. (2014, June), The Development of a Rubric to Evaluate and Promote Students’ Integration of Stakeholder Considerations into the Engineering Design Process Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10.18260/1-2--23129
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: © 2014 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