Teaching engineering design: Can reading a textbook make a difference?

Teaching design is an integral part of most engineering curricula. Often, students are introduced to the engineering design process through a chapter in a textbook. Does this passive approach to teaching an active process aid the students' learning? An experiment was conducted to assess what students learn about the design process when they read a text. Here, 10 students enrolled in a freshman course were asked to read aloud from a freshmen engineering textbook. Half of the subjects read the text prior to solving three open-ended engineering design problems and the other half solved the same problems before they read the text. Both the subjects' process in solving the problems, as well as the quality of their solutions (the product), are assessed. Results show that subjects that read the text before they solved the three problems spent significantly more time solving the problems and were more sophisticated in their problem solving strategies. These subjects also scored better when judged on the quality of their approach to the problem (including the number of design criteria considered, communications, assumptions, and technical accuracy). However, these subjects did not score better on a quality measure of the final solution.     

Experiences of First‐Year Engineering Students Working on Ill‐Structured Problems in Teams

Background

As engineers solve problems that are ill‐structured and require collaboration, a common goal of engineering programs is to develop students' competencies for solving such problems in teams, often using cornerstone design experiences.

Purpose

With the goal of designing effective learning environments, this study identifies qualitatively different ways that engineering students experienced ill‐structured problems while working in teams.

Design/Method

This phenomenographic study employs interview data from 27 first‐year engineering students. Iterative data analysis resulted in categories of student experiences and their logical relationships.

Results

Seven categories describing collaborative, ill‐structured problem‐solving experiences emerged: completion, transition, iteration, organization, collaboration, reasoning, and growth. These categories are organized in an outcome space along dimensions we call reaction to ambiguity and use of multiple perspectives that can be used to frame students' perspectives from less comprehensive to more comprehensive.

Conclusions

First‐year engineering students experience team‐based, ill‐structured problem solving in a variety of ways. The resulting outcome space is of practical use to educators who teach courses involving collaborative, ill‐structured problem solving.     

Enabling Effective Engineering Teams: A Program for Teaching Interaction Skills*

A program for teaching interaction skills to engineers and engineering students has been developed. Based on cognitive style theory, this customized program uses the typical engineer's problem solving strengths to teach skills of interviewing, questioning, exchanging ideas, and managing conflict. The goal of this program is to enable these problem solvers to apply their technical skills more effectively by improving interpersonal interactions. The modular nature of the training program makes it easily transportable, and all or part of it can be used in courses that require students to work in teams. This paper discusses what makes this training “a good fit” with engineering students, the background for its content, and the program's six modules. Personal experiences with teaching this material and recommendations for implementation are discussed. Similarities and differences between teaching the engineering professional and student, themes of student perceptions about the training, and future directions are also addressed.     

Improving Problem Solving Performance by Inducing Talk about Salient Problem Features

Background Across many domains, research has shown that students often fail to select and apply appropriate conceptual knowledge when solving problems. Programs designed to support monitoring skills have been successful in several domains. Purpose (Hypothesis ) Critical conceptual knowledge in statics appears to be cued by paying attention to the bodies that are present in a problem, as well as to which ones are interacting and how. The research question addresses whether students can be induced to think about the bodies present, and whether focusing on bodies improves problem solving performance. Design /Method Using a pre‐post test design, written and verbal protocols were obtained for students solving problems before and after instruction. During instruction all students saw the same set of examples and corrected answers, but only the experimental group was asked questions designed to promote body centered talk. Solutions and protocols were coded and analyzed for frequency of body centered talk and solution quality. Results The experimental group showed statistically significant increases in relevant body centered talk after instruction. Both groups improved their ability to represent unknown forces in free body diagrams after instruction, with the experimental group showing a greater, but not statistically significant, improvement. However, for both groups, the error rate in representing unknown forces at an interaction was significantly lower when a student referred to the bodies in the particular interaction. Conclusions Problem solving in conceptually rich domains can improve if, in addition to acquiring conceptual knowledge, students develop strategies for recognizing when and how to apply it.     

An Evidence‐Based Strategy for Problem Solving

Over 150 published basic strategies for problem solving are documented and compared. “Nested” strategies are described. Research is summarized of the cognitive and attitudinal processing used when we solve problems. The connection between past problems that have been solved successfully, the subject knowledge, the current problem to be solved, and the problem solving process is described. “Problems” are distinguished from “exercises.” Based on the research evidence, eleven criteria are posed for the creation of an evidence‐based strategy. A resulting strategy is described. Suggestions are given about how to overcome the propensity to use the strategy as a series of linear, sequential steps. Evidence is summarized of the use and effectiveness of the proposed evidence‐based strategy. Most successful problem solvers use a “strategy.” In this paper, we survey published strategies, consider the research evidence about the appropriateness of using and teaching via strategies, summarize pertinent research evidence about the problem solving process and apply criteria to devise an evidence‐based strategy for problem solving.     

Cognitive Assessment of Students' Problem Solving and Program Development Skills

A cognitive assessment method for measuring students' problem solving and program development abilities, their skills, knowledge, perception, attitudes and motivation toward problem solving and programming is presented. This method takes into consideration the thinking skills required by students learning how to program, as well as specific knowledge related to program development. The goal is to teach students the skills necessary for formulating the problem; planning and designing the solution; implementing and testing the solution; and monitoring and evaluating the solution's progress. This paper discusses this alternative assessment method and the instruments created to evaluate students' work in an introductory course on problem solving and programming.     

A Paradigm for Assessing Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Engineering Students

Conceptual and procedural knowledge are two mutually‐supportive factors associated with the development of engineering skill. The present study extends previous work on undergraduate learning in engineering to provide further validation for an assessment paradigm capable of quantifying engineering students' conceptual and problem‐solving knowledge. Eight students who were enrolled in an introductory thermodynamics course and four who were enrolled in the course sequel provided verbal protocol data as they used instructional software. They were compared to existing data from a cohort of eleven science and engineering majors who had not taken thermodynamics. The results replicated earlier findings showing more cognitive activity on computer screens requiring overt user interaction compared to text‐based screens. The data also indicated that higher‐ versus lower‐performing students, based on course grades, engaged in more higher‐order cognitive processing. There was no evidence that students gained deeper cognitive processing as they advanced through the engineering curriculum.     

An Engineering Major Does Not (Necessarily) an Engineer Make: Career Decision Making Among Undergraduate Engineering Majors

This study uses a mixed‐methods design to investigate students' career decision making at two U.S. undergraduate institutions. The research question was, “To what extent do students who complete undergraduate programs in engineering intend to pursue engineering careers?” We surveyed senior engineering majors about their post‐graduate intentions, and later interviewed a subset of the seniors about their career intentions. Only 42 percent of students surveyed reported that they definitely intended to pursue a career in engineering, 44 percent were unsure, and 14 percent were definitely not pursuing engineering. We observed significant institutional differences. Interview data reveal the quixotic nature of many students' decisions about their careers; strikingly, students were vacillating between multiple post‐graduate options late into the senior year, even into summer. Implications are discussed for further research and ways engineering departments can influence students' career decisions.     

Preparing Students for Careers in Material Handling

This report summarizes the proceedings of a roundtable discussion of materials handling educational issues by a panel consisting of practitioners in the materials handling industry. The objective of the discussion was to: (i) understand how practitioners apply their engineering expertise to industrial problems, (ii) identify critical skills and attributes required of practicing materials handling engineers, and (iii) determine how ties between universities and the practicing community could be strengthened to prepare material handling students for successful careers in the material handling industry. The discussion was centered around five issues related to the above objectives. The panel felt that a vast majority of the materials handling problems faced by practitioners fall in the operational analysis category. Simulation modeling, group problem solving, project management and simple operational analysis based on fundamental mechanical and electrical engineering principles appear to be the primary analytic methods used for problem solving. Graduating engineers entering the materials handling field must possess strong communication, interpersonal and analytical skills, be able to organize and lead a project successfully, and exhibit a high degree of creativity. Because the role of a materials handling engineer will often be that of an internal consultant, they must be able to lead and work effectively in multi‐disciplinary teams. Increased automation on the shop‐floor and globalization of the business world demand that the engineer have a strong multi‐disciplinary background. Materials handling students in the nation's universities must be familiar with various equipment types including their functionality, applications, strengths and weaknesses, have a firm grasp of the analytical and simulation based problem solving tools, and be able to take the “big picture,” systems approach in problem solving. Classroom instruction must include project and case based learning and coverage of theoretical topics. While the former is important for students to be able to solve practical problems, the latter is valuable for imparting analytical skills and creativity. Increased collaboration between the industry and universities will help prepare successful materials handling engineers.     

Developing Problem Solving Skills: The McMaster Problem Solving Program

This paper describes a 25-year project in which we defined problem solving, identified effective methods for developing students' skill in problem solving, implemented a series of four required courses to develop the skill, and evaluated the effectiveness of the program. Four research projects are summarized in which we identified which teaching methods failed to develop problem solving skill and which methods were successful in developing the skills. We found that students need both comprehension of Chemical Engineering and what we call general problem solving skill to solve problems successfully. We identified 37 general problem solving skills. We use 120 hours of workshops spread over four required courses to develop the skills. Each skill is built (using content-independent activities), bridged (to apply the skill in the content-specific domain of Chemical Engineering) and extended (to use the skill in other contexts and contents and in everyday life). The tests and examinations of process skills, TEPS, that assess the degree to which the students can apply the skills are described. We illustrate how self-assessment was used.     

Developing On‐Line Homework for Introductory Thermodynamics

Homework in engineering courses is used to develop problem‐solving skills and to provide students with the practice they need in order to achieve mastery of essential concepts and procedures in their disciplines. We describe homework exercises that were developed for introductory thermodynamics and delivered to students via the Internet. Records of student use were created automatically by the computer server. The data revealed students' patterns of software usage in the context of the course; additional data from course instructors revealed the extent to which completing the on‐line homework improved students' in‐class test performance.     

Lessons Learned: Implementing the Case Teaching Method in a Mechanical Engineering Course

Background Case studies have been found to increase students' critical thinking and problem‐solving skills, higher‐order thinking skills, conceptual change, and their motivation to learn. Despite the popularity of the case study approach within engineering, the empirical research on the effectiveness of case studies is limited and the research that does exist has primarily focused on student perceptions of their learning rather than actual learning outcomes. Purpose (Hypothesis ) This paper describes an investigation of the impact of case‐based instruction on undergraduate mechanical engineering students' conceptual understanding and their attitudes towards the use of case studies. Design /Method Seventy‐three students from two sections of the same mechanical engineering course participated in this study. The two sections were both taught using traditional lecture and case teaching methods. Participants completed pre‐tests, post‐tests, and a survey to assess their conceptual understanding and engagement. Results Results suggested that the majority of participants felt the use of case studies was engaging and added a lot of realism to the class. There were no significant differences between traditional lecture and case teaching method on students' conceptual understanding. However, the use of case studies did no harm to students' understanding while making the content more relevant to students. Conclusions Case‐based instruction can be beneficial for students in terms of actively engaging them and allowing them to see the application and/or relevance of engineering to the real world.     

Pre‐college Electrical Engineering Instruction: The Impact of Abstract vs. Contextualized Representation and Practice on Learning

Background While engineering instructional materials and practice problems for pre‐college students are often presented in the context of real‐life situations, college‐level texts are typically written in abstract form. Purpose (Hypothesis ) The goal of this study was to jointly examine the impact of contextualizing engineering instruction and varying the number of practice opportunities on pre‐college students' learning and learning perceptions. Design/ Method Using a 3 × 2 factorial design, students were randomly assigned to learn about electrical circuit analysis with an instructional program that represented problems in abstract, contextualized, or both forms, either with two practice problems or four practice problems. The abstract problems were devoid of any real‐life context and represented with standard abstract electrical circuit diagrams. The contextualized problems were anchored around real‐life scenarios and represented with life‐like images. The combined contextualized‐abstract condition added abstract circuit diagrams to the contextualized representation. To measure learning, students were given a problem‐solving near‐transfer post‐test. Learning perceptions were measured using a program‐rating survey where students had to rate the instructional program's diagrams, helpfulness, and difficulty. Results Students in the combined contextualized‐abstract condition scored higher on the post‐test, produced better problem representations, and rated the program's diagrams and helpfulness higher than their counterparts. Students who were given two practice problems gave higher program diagram and helpfulness ratings than those given four practice problems. Conclusions These findings suggest that pre‐college engineering instruction should consider anchoring learning in real‐life contexts and providing students with abstract problem representations that can be transferred to a variety of problems.     

Effects of Faculty Interaction and Feedback on Gains in Student Skills*

Previous research has identified several variables that affect students' course satisfaction and gains in learning outcomes. The purpose of this article is to provide the reader with insights about the relationships between faculty‐student interaction and students' perceptions of selected skills and attitudes. This study specifically examined the relationships between engineering faculty teaching practices, classroom climate, and students' perceptions of their gains in communication skills, problem‐solving skills, occupational awareness, and engineering competence in a curriculum emphasizing engineering design activities. Data were gathered from more than 1,500 students taking the first‐year design course offered at 19 campuses of the Penn State system over a period of two years. The results suggest that faculty interacting with and providing constructive feedback to students were significantly and positively related to students' self‐reported gains in several design and professional skills. These relationships remained after controlling for student demographic characteristics and campus location. Recommendations regarding specific teaching practices are provided.     

Development of a Work Sampling Methodology for Behavioral Observations: Application to Teamwork

Engineering programs must assess students' abilities to master “criteria 3 a‐k.” Skills such as teamwork, problem solving, design, and ethical understanding entail learning various processes; hence, assessing these outcomes is better accomplished by focusing on the process rather than the result. Methods for observing students' performance, such as 100 percent behavioral observation, are ideal but expensive. We extend work sampling, an economic industry‐based alternative, to observe cognitive and behavioral processes. Specifically, we describe a work sampling methodology to assess students engaged in teamwork. We then determine attributes of teamwork, establish target time proportions using 100 percent observation, and statistically compare the targets to proportions obtained from work sampling intervals to determine the effective interval. The robustness of work sampling is tested in four learning environments. Results indicate that sampling provides a statistically valid alternative for assessing teamwork. However, when observing design and ethical understanding processes, additional research is needed to make work sampling viable.     

A Statics Concept Inventory: Development and Psychometric Analysis

A quantification of conceptual understanding of students in statics was undertaken. Drawing on a prior study identifying the fundamental concepts and typical student errors in statics, multiple choice questions were devised to probe students' ability to use concepts in isolation. This paper describes a testing instrument comprising such questions, as well as psychometric analyses of test results of 245 students at five universities.     

Information processing and problem solving: the migration of problems through formal positions and networks of ties.

A study of the flow of information about organizational problems was conducted. We found that managers often avoided passing problems to formally designated problem solvers and used personal ties to forward information to problem solvers. The strength of ties between individuals had a weak effect on passing problems across professional boundaries.     

Collaborative Learning vs. Lecture/Discussion: Students' Reported Learning Gains*

This study examined the extent to which undergraduate engineering courses taught using active and collaborative learning methods differ from traditional lecture and discussion courses in their ability to promote the development of students' engineering design, problem‐solving, communication, and group participation skills. Evidence for the study comes from 480 students enrolled in 17 active or collaborative learning courses/sections and six traditional courses/sections at six engineering schools. Results indicate that active or collaborative methods produce both statistically significant and substantially greater gains in student learning than those associated with more traditional instructional methods. These learning advantages remained even when differences in a variety of student pre‐course characteristics were controlled.     

Optimizing Worked‐Example Instruction in Electrical Engineering: The Role of Fading and Feedback during Problem‐Solving Practice

How can we help college students develop problem‐solving skills in engineering? To answer this question, we asked a group of engineering freshmen to learn about electrical circuit analysis with an instructional program that presented different problem‐solving practice and feedback methods. Three findings are of interest. First, students who practiced by solving all problem steps and those who practiced by solving a gradually increasing number of steps starting with the first step first (forward‐fading practice) produced higher near‐transfer scores than those who were asked to solve a gradually increasing number of steps but starting with the last step first (backward‐fading practice). Second, students who received feedback immediately after attempting each problem‐solving step outperformed those who received total feedback on near transfer. Finally, students who learned with backward‐fading practice produced higher near‐ and far‐transfer scores when feedback included the solution of a similar worked‐out problem. The theoretical and practical implications for engineering education are discussed.