Exploring the Effects of the Design Prompt on Students’ Design Cognition

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher B. Williams ◽  
Yoon Lee ◽  
John Gero ◽  
Marie C. Paretti
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Structure Design ◽  
Problem Solution ◽  
Design Cognition ◽  
Underlying Assumption ◽  
Design Task ◽  
Education Practice ◽  
Common Basis ◽  
Student Teams

Engineering design educators often provide their students a task (or “prompt”) to guide their design projects. Similarly, engineering design educational researchers also provide research participants with a design task to guide their activity during experimental sessions. In both contexts, there is a fundamental underlying assumption that the design task has no significant effect on the students’/participants’ design cognition. Specifically, the authors test the hypothesis that a design task does affect a student’s design experience. Failing to disprove this hypothesis could significantly impact both design education practice and design education experimental research. To determine the effect of a design task on students’ design cognition, experimental sessions were conducted wherein student design teams worked together to solve a speculative design task. The student teams were presented with two nearly identical design tasks; however, one featured an additional design requirement. A task-independent protocol analysis method grounded in the Function-Behavior-Structure design ontology is performed on audio and video recordings of the design sessions to provide a common basis for comparing the two groups. Differences in design cognition are identified by analyzing and comparing the percent occurrences of the design issues and design processes and the Problem-Solution indices.

Comparing the Design Cognition of Two Engineering Majors: A Measurement-Based Approach

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon Suk Lee ◽  
John Gero ◽  
Christopher B. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Design Education ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Protocol Analysis ◽  
Structure Design ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Problem Solution ◽  
Design Cognition ◽  
Engineering Majors ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Experimental Group

This paper presents the results of two years of a three-year longitudinal study on the impact of design education on students’ design thinking and practice. Two engineering majors in a large research-intensive state university are being studied. The control group is a major focused on engineering mechanics. The experimental group is a mechanical engineering major that uses design as a context for its curriculum. A task-independent protocol analysis method grounded in the Function-Behavior-Structure design ontology is utilized to provide a common basis for comparing students across discipline and year. This study reports data collected at the beginning and at the end of students’ sophomore year, and at the end of their junior year. Students in the experimental group completed an introductory mechanical design course, while students in the control group had no formal design component in their curriculum. The results of analyzing and comparing the percent occurrences of design processes and problem-solution index from the protocol analysis of both cohorts are presented. These results provide an opportunity to investigate and understand how students’ design cognition is affected by a design course.

Exploring the effect of a visual constraint on students’ design cognition

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-17
Author(s):  
Mohammadali Ashrafganjouei ◽  
John S. Gero
Keyword(s):  
Correspondence Analysis ◽  
Structure Design ◽  
Cognitive Effort ◽  
Statistical Testing ◽  
Problem Solution ◽  
Design Cognition ◽  
Problem Framing ◽  
Group A ◽  
Structure Index ◽  
Retrospective Reporting

Abstract This paper presents the results of a study that explores the effect of a visual constraint on design behaviors of architecture students. To examine this effect, 24 second-year architecture students volunteered to participate. Each of them undertook similar conceptual design briefs in two different conditions, one with and another without a visual constraint. Retrospective reporting was used to collect the verbalization of participants. The FBS ontology was used to model the design cognition of the participants by coding their design protocols. A dynamic analysis was used to study the differences between the two conditions based on the problem–solution index. A further index, the pre-structure–post-structure index, was proposed to measure design behavior differences between the two conditions. The correspondence analysis was used to explore the effect of gender. There were statistically significant differences in the distributions of cognitive effort between the two groups. These differences include in the visual constraint group a decrease in the focus on behavior before structure and in the processes related to it, compared to the non-visual constraint group. The non-visual constraint group changed their focus on problem framing and solving while adding a visual constraint led participants to focus simultaneously on both framing and solving. The visual constraint group had a different attention temporally to pre- and post-structure design processes during designing than the non-visual constraint group. The order of experiencing the two design sessions had only a small effect. The results of correspondence analysis demonstrate that there are categorical gender differences not found using statistical testing.

scholarly journals How Concept Selection Tools Impact the Development of Creative Ideas in Engineering Design Education

2018 ◽  
Vol 140 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuan Zheng ◽  
Sarah C. Ritter ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Engineering Design ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Design Stage ◽  
Concept Selection ◽  
Engineering Design Education ◽  
Student Teams ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Selection Tools

Concept selection tools have been heavily integrated into engineering design education in an effort to reduce the risks and uncertainties of early-phase design ideas and aid students in the decision-making process. However, little research has examined the utility of these tools in promoting creative ideas or their impact on student team decision making throughout the conceptual design process. To fill this research gap, the current study was designed to compare the impact of two concept selection tools, the concept selection matrix (CSM) and the tool for assessing semantic creativity (TASC) on the average quality (AQL) and average novelty (ANV) of ideas selected by student teams at several decision points throughout an 8-week project. The results of the study showed that the AQL increased significantly in the detailed design stage, while the ANV did not change. However, this change in idea quality was not significantly impacted by the concept selection tool used, suggesting other factors may impact student decision making and the development of creative ideas. Finally, student teams were found to select ideas ranked highly in concept selection tools only when these ideas met their expectations, indicating that cognitive biases may be significantly impeding decision making.

The Trajectory of Psychological Safety in Engineering Teams: A Longitudinal Exploration in Engineering Design Education

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scarlett Miller ◽  
Jacqueline Marhefka ◽  
Katie Heininger ◽  
Kathryn Jablokow ◽  
Susan Mohammed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Education ◽  
Engineering Design ◽  
Team Performance ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Psychological Safety ◽  
Engineering Student ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Engineering Research ◽  
Student Teams ◽  
Potential Factors

Abstract Although teamwork is being integrated throughout engineering education because of the perceived benefits of teams, the construct of psychological safety has been largely ignored in engineering research. This omission is unfortunate, because psychological safety reflects collective perceptions about how comfortable team members feel in sharing their perspectives and it has been found to positively impact team performance in samples outside of engineering [20]. Engineering team research has also been crippled by “snap-shot” methodologies and the resulting lack of investigation into the dynamic changes that happen within a team over course projects. This is problematic, because we do not know when, how, or what type of interventions are needed to effectively improve “t-shaped” engineering skills like teamwork, communication, and engaging successfully in a diverse team. In light of these issues, the goal of the current study was to understand how psychological safety might be measured practically and reliably in engineering student teams over time. In addition, we sought to identify the trajectory of psychological safety for engineering design student teams and identify the potential factors that impact the building and waning of psychological safety in these teams. This was accomplished through a 4-week study with 12 engineering design teams where data was captured at six time points. The results of this study present some of the first evidence on the reliability of psychological safety in engineering student populations. The results also help begin to answer some difficult fundamental questions on supporting team performance in engineering education.

Evaluating Methodical Engineering Design Education

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Rückert ◽  
Gritt Ahrens ◽  
Frauke Schroda ◽  
Oliver Gaedeke
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Structure Design ◽  
Additional Stress ◽  
Design Work ◽  
Engineering Design Education ◽  
University Of Berlin ◽  
Design Projects ◽  
Work Structure

Abstract At the Institute for Machine Design of the Technical University of Berlin, design methodology has been taught in industry-related engineering design projects for more than 20 years. In an interdisciplinary research study, different kinds of engineering design projects were evaluated. The aim was to identify factors which influence the acceptance and application of design methods, and thus optimize engineering design education and design methodology. The results suggest that the design work structure prescribed by design methodologies is a natural way to structure design work, at least for students. The separation of the basic machine elements education and the design methodology education seems to result in additional stress for the students.

Training the Participatory Renaissance Man: Past Creative Experiences and Collaborative Design

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Sauder ◽  
Yan Jin
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Collaborative Design ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Protocol Analysis ◽  
Creative Cognition ◽  
Collaborative Environment ◽  
Engineering Design Education ◽  
Renaissance Man ◽  
Current Engineering ◽  
And Training

Students are frequently trained in a variety of methodologies to promote their creativity in the collaborative environment. Some of the training and methods work well, while others present challenges. A collaborative stimulation approach is taken to extend creative cognition to collaborative creativity, providing new insights into design methodologies and training. An experiment using retrospective protocol analysis, originally conducted to identify the various types of collaborative stimulation, revealed how diversity of past creative experiences correlates with collaborative stimulation. This finding aligns with previous research. Unfortunately, many current engineering design education programs do not adequately provide opportunities for diverse creative experiences. As this study and other research has found, there is a need to create courses in engineering design programs which encourage participation in diverse creative activities.

A Pillar of Mechanical Engineering Design Education in Australia: 25 Years of the Warman Design and Build Competition

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Warren F. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Mechanical Engineering ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Student Assessment ◽  
National Committee ◽  
Engineering Design Education ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Institutional Learning ◽  
History Of

The “Warman Design and Build Competition”, running across Australasian Universities, is now in its 26th year in 2013. Presented in this paper is a brief history of the competition, documenting the objectives, yearly scenarios, key contributors and champion Universities since its beginning in 1988. Assuming the competition has reached the majority of mechanical and related discipline engineering students in that time, it is fair to say that this competition, as a vehicle of the National Committee on Engineering Design, has served to shape Australasian engineering education in an enduring way. The philosophy of the Warman Design and Build Competition and some of the challenges of running it are described in this perspective by its coordinator since 2003. In particular, the need is for the competition to work effectively across a wide range of student group ability. Not every group engaging with the competition will be competitive nationally, yet all should learn positively from the experience. Reported also in this paper is the collective feedback from the campus organizers in respect to their use of the competition as an educational experience in their classrooms. Each University participating uses the competition differently with respect to student assessment and the support students receive. However, all academic campus organizer responses suggest that the competition supports their own and their institutional learning objectives very well. While the project scenarios have varied widely over the years, the intent to challenge 2nd year university (predominantly mechanical) engineering students with an open-ended statement of requirements in a practical and experiential exercise has been a constant. Students are faced with understanding their opportunity and their client’s value system as expressed in a scoring algorithm. They are required to conceive, construct and demonstrate their device with limited prior knowledge and experience, and the learning outcomes clearly impact their appreciation for teamwork, leadership and product realization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document