New Orleans, Louisiana
June 26, 2016
June 26, 2016
June 29, 2016
978-0-692-68565-5
2153-5965
Design in Engineering Education
17
10.18260/p.27156
https://peer.asee.org/27156
883
Eli Silk is an Assistant Professor of Professional Practice in the Graduate School of Education at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
Shanna Daly is an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Michigan. She has a B.E. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Dayton (2003) and a Ph.D. in Engineering Education from Purdue University (2008). Her research focuses on strategies for design innovations through divergent and convergent thinking as well as through deep needs and community assessments using design ethnography, and translating those strategies to design tools and education. She teaches design and entrepreneurship courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels, focusing on front-end design processes.
Dr. Kathryn Jablokow is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering and Engineering Design at Penn State University. A graduate of Ohio State University (Ph.D., Electrical Engineering), Dr. Jablokow’s teaching and research interests include problem solving, invention, and creativity in science and engineering, as well as robotics and computational dynamics. In addition to her membership in ASEE, she is a Senior Member of IEEE and a Fellow of ASME. Dr. Jablokow is the architect of a unique 4-course module focused on creativity and problem solving leadership and is currently developing a new methodology for cognition-based design. She is one of three instructors for Penn State’s Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on Creativity, Innovation, and Change, and she is the founding director of the Problem Solving Research Group, whose 50+ collaborating members include faculty and students from several universities, as well as industrial representatives, military leaders, and corporate consultants.
Dr. Yilmaz is an Associate Professor of Industrial Design. She teaches design studios and lecture courses on developing creativity and research skills. Her current research focuses on identifying impacts of different factors on ideation of designers and engineers, developing instructional materials for design ideation, and foundations of innovation. She often conducts workshops on design thinking to a diverse range of groups including student and professional engineers and faculty member from different universities. She received her PhD degree in Design Science in 2010 from University of Michigan. She is also a faculty in Human Computer Interaction Graduate Program and the ISU Site Director for Center for e-Design.
The goal of this study was to explore multiple quantitative measures of design ideation shifts. We specifically investigated shifts in ideation focused on generating incremental design solutions versus radical design solutions. Utilizing Kirton’s Adaption-Innovation (A-I) theory, incremental solutions were labeled as being more adaptive and radical solutions were labeled as being more innovative. We conducted a study with 23 prospective and current undergraduate engineering students. Participants first generated conceptual solutions for a design problem with minimal constraints to create a situation in which they felt free to generate ideas they naturally felt were most appropriate for the problem. Second, participants generated ideas for a different design problem that was framed either to encourage more adaptive or more innovative ideas. We coded each idea using two different versions of a paradigm-relatedness metric. The metrics assessed the extent to which an idea works within or extends beyond currently prevailing paradigms for the problem. Version 1 had two levels: (1) paradigm-preserving or (2) paradigm-modifying. Version 2 added a third intermediate level: (1) paradigm-preserving, (2) somewhat paradigm-modifying, or (3) strongly paradigm-modifying. We assessed ideation shifts quantitatively from the first to the second ideation sessions by comparing counts and proportions of both metrics. Comparing the different quantitative measures provided a test of the advantages and disadvantages of the different ways to characterize ideation shifts.
Silk, E. M., & Daly, S. R., & Jablokow, K. W., & Yilmaz, S., & Rechkemmer, A., & Wenger, J. M. (2016, June), Using Paradigm-Relatedness to Measure Design Ideation Shifts Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.27156
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: © 2016 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