Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
My doctoral research explores how student mechanical engineers are taught, learn, and apply a design thinking process to routinely create and innovate in the context of training for industry practice. I am interested in the maturation of master's students with backgrounds in mechanical engineering adjusting to a project-based learning experience centered on design thinking methodology and processes. I use a combination of theoretical approaches from design research, engineering education and the learning sciences. My methodology draws on field observations in the classroom of a capstone-plus core mechanical engineer course on design innovation at Stanford University [1] as well as interviews, document analysis and other qualitative methods. I am gathering empirical evidence of what design learning looks like and how it changes over time and how students conceptualize design and engineering. In order to characterize the transition that students make along the novice to expert design continuum, students' concept maps for their design processes and drawings of their notions of engineers and designers at work were collected. Students were asked to generate a concept map of their "typical design process" and to draw a designer at work and an engineer at work along the lines of the Draw-a-Scientist Test [2]. Initial findings from qualitative content analysis indicate that the concept maps of design process mature over time along a consistent learning trajectory. Students also have distinct but complimentary mental models of the roles of a designer and engineer mainly along two emerging themes: idea generation/implementation and human/tech-centerness. A preliminary framework of "Ways of Thinking" [3] relating design thinking activities to engineering thinking activities and production and future thinking has been developed and is being used to analyze student project team design activity. Students in the design innovation course capture their work regularly on a wiki and in quarterly design documentation reports. By coding and analyzing the reports of each team, their design steps and order they take in their design processes can be noted. Preliminary analysis of project matched pairs shows that the more leaps around in their design process steps and prototyping activities a team makes a more novel project deliverable outcome as well as bettering the students' learning experience. Additional observations of students have been done to capture the barriers and catalysts to them learning along the way. With field observations of regular team meetings, it's apparent students are hindered by a predisposition to plan and calculate repeatedly before taking action and making. The students' learnings are helped by a close proximity to other groups in a shared design space ("situative zeitgeist"), a series of front-loaded prototype milestone assignments ("scaffolded prototyping"), a practice of encouraging reflection on what is gained from prototyping ("cognitive iteration") and repeatedly stepping through the steps of the design process ("cognitive apprenticeship"). Data collection is complete and the analysis is ongoing. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2009 | 10.1145/1640233.1640287 | Creativity & Cognition |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
design learning,expert design continuum,design step,design innovation,design process step,design innovation course,design process,student engineer,quarterly design documentation report,design research,concept map,idea generation,mechanical engineering,qualitative method,empirical evidence,engineering education,design thinking,data collection,conceptual design,content analysis | Design brief,Learning sciences,Design education,Active learning,Computer science,Design thinking,Knowledge management,Human–computer interaction,Project team,Design research,Strategic design,Mathematics education | Conference |
Citations | PageRank | References |
0 | 0.34 | 1 |
Authors | ||
1 | ||
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Micah Lande | 1 | 6 | 4.21 |