scholarly journals An Analysis of First-Year Students’ Changing Perceptions of Engineering Design and Practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Fries ◽  
Ryan Krauss
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Design And Practice

scholarly journals Design Practica as Authentic Assessments in First-year Engineering Design Courses

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher McComb ◽  
Catherine Berdanier ◽  
Jessica Menold
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Skill Level ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Entry Level ◽  
Learning Attitudes ◽  
Perceived Change ◽  
Common Learning

This paper describes the design and evaluation of a novel assessment for first-year engineering design courses that is rooted in an authentic design challenge. This approach modifies the traditional written-exam approach typically found in engineering courses, which is inherently inauthentic and cannot easily capture the exploratory nature of engineering design. Our assessment improves alignment with common learning objectives found in first-year engineering design courses and additionally prepares students for the type of case study interviews that are increasingly common for entry-level engineering jobs. To evaluate our assessment, 50 first-year students completed the engineering design self-efficacy instrument once before beginning the assessment and a second time approximately 48 hours later upon completion of a reflection assignment. In addition, students retrospectively reported their perceived change in self-efficacy during the assessment. Analysis shows that students perceived a large retrospective increase in skill level, despite only a small increase in directly measured self-efficacy. These results are analyzed in light of the Dunning-Kruger effect and we posit that the assessment helps to align students’ self-efficacy with their actual skill level. Increased alignment of self-efficacy with skill level may minimize student frustration when encountering challenging tasks in the future, potentially increasing retention of engineering students as well as facilitating the development of lifelong learning attitudes.

Modification of Robotics Curriculum for Project-Based First Year Engineering Design Course

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Nolte ◽  
Xiaomei Tan ◽  
Alexander Weaver ◽  
Elizabeth Starkey
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
First Year ◽  
Usability Study ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Analysis Techniques ◽  
Prototype Development ◽  
Curriculum Making ◽  
Comprehensive Curriculum

Abstract Texas Instruments (TI) currently offers a comprehensive curriculum to supplement their Robotics System Learning Kit MAX (TI-RSLK MAX). While designed for all college students, TI would like to provide a modification of the curriculum specifically for first-year engineering design courses. The goal of this project was to modify the current TI-RSLX MAX curriculum, making it easier to digest for first-year engineering students and more applicable to shorter duration projects (∼8 weeks), while still being information dense. To better understand the user experience of the current TI-RSLK MAX curriculum and determine what users would want from a modified curriculum, user interviews were conducted and analyzed using inductive qualitative analysis techniques. Results showed that while the current TI robotics project has many positives, first-year students primarily struggled with the coding aspect of the project. These results directed and informed the prototype development of a modified curriculum module focused on teaching students code. Low- and medium-fidelity prototypes were developed and tested with users. Data from the usability study were analyzed using descriptive analysis techniques and results indicate that the medium-fidelity prototype helped students learn robotics coding. This research has implications for a high-fidelity modified TI-RSLX MAX curriculum and robotics education for first-year engineering design students.

scholarly journals The Professional Spine: Creation of a Four-year Engineering Design and Practice Sequence

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Frank ◽  
David Strong ◽  
Rick Sellens
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Student Feedback ◽  
First Year ◽  
Problem Analysis ◽  
Assessment And Evaluation ◽  
Practice Sequence ◽  
Design And Practice ◽  
First Time ◽  
Academic Year

This paper discusses the development of a four-year Engineering Design and Practice Sequence (EDPS) of project-based courses at Queen’s University. The four-year sequence is a core requirement for all engineering students, and will develop competence in design process methods and tools, problem analysis, creativity, economics and entrepreneurship, engineering communications, professionalism, and ethics. The EDPS was designed to meet requirements of the Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board graduate attributes , which addresses requirements of the Washington Accord. They also target applicable elements of the CDIO syllabus. The EDPS is being delivered to first year engineering students for the first time in the 2010-2011 academic year and will continue rolling out over the next three years. The paper discusses the process involved in creating the sequence, the course objectives and delivery for each year of the program, and proposed assessment and evaluation methods. The sequence will also be compared to previously published engineering design and practice sequences. The outcomes of the first year, including student feedback and attribute assessment, will also be discussed. Upper year students who will not experience the engineering design and practice sequence are being assessed on their understanding of design methods to provide baseline data for comparison with students who progress through the sequence in future years.This paper was also published in the ASEE 2011 Annual General Conference with joint permission of ASEE and CEEA.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTING COMPETENCY-BASED ASSESSMENT IN A FIRST YEAR ENGINEERING DESIGN COURSE

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Frank ◽  
Simon Bailey ◽  
Aphra Rogers
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
First Year ◽  
Traditional Grading ◽  
Assessment Approach ◽  
Competency Based ◽  
Design And Practice ◽  
Multiple Assessment ◽  
Competency Based Assessment

Competency-based assessment (CBA) is increasingly of interest in higher education, particularly in the professions. This assessment approach requires that students demonstrate satisfactory performance in specified measurable outcomes for progression, rather than meeting a particular overall average in a range of assessments. The paper describes the implementation of CBA in a first year engineering design and practice course. Each competency was linked to multiple assessment points to allow multiple opportunities to meet the competency without requiring the teaching staff to regrade assignments that did not meet expectations. The structure was designed to use no new additional course personnel. Based on this work the team recommends using past grades and learning outcome data the likely consequences of applying CBA to course assessment schemes, running CBA in parallel witha traditional grading scheme, and planning for flexibility in the grading scheme. Applying CBA to authentic activities was much more complex than for individual tests.

Effects of Industrial Experience and Coursework During Sophomore and Junior Years on Student Learning of Engineering Design

2006 ◽  
Vol 129 (7) ◽  
pp. 662-667 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reid Bailey
Keyword(s):  
Engineering Design ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Idea Generation ◽  
First Year ◽  
Process Knowledge ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Industrial Experience ◽  
Design Concepts ◽  
Design Activities ◽  
Allot Time

While prior work indicates that seniors near the end of their capstone design course know more about design than first-year students, it is unclear where this knowledge is gained. We study two possible sources of seniors’ greater design knowledge: coursework during sophomore and junior years and industrial experience. The design process knowledge of seniors at the beginning of their capstone class was assessed and information about their industrial experience obtained. These data were compared to assessment data of first-year students at the end of an introduction to engineering design course. The results indicate that industrial experience greatly increases students’ recognition that documentation needs to occur throughout the design process. Seniors with industrial experience, however, are less aware that idea generation is an important part of design and are less able to allot time to different design activities than first-year students at the end of a hands-on introduction to engineering design course. For the remaining four aspects of design process knowledge assessed—namely, identifying the requirements for a project at the project’s outset, making decisions with a systematic process based on analysis, building and testing prototypes and final designs, and the overall layout of design including iteration—no differences are found between seniors with industrial experience and first-year students at the end of an introduction to engineering design course. One explanation for why industrial experience does not impact student’s design process knowledge positively in more areas than documentation is that students on internships only experience a small portion of a design process. Due to this “snapshot” experience, either (1) students are not able to learn a significant amount about the bigger picture design concepts or (2) students each learn about different aspects of design but, as a population, do not show any significant increase in design process knowledge. The one activity that all interns will experience is the necessity to document their work. Furthermore, seniors without industrial experience scored no differently than first-year students on any single aspect of design process knowledge measured. This indicates that analysis-heavy sophomore and junior classes do not impact design process knowledge.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document