AC 2012-4471: UTILIZING THE ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCESS TO CREATE A FRAMEWORK FOR CURRICULA DESIGN

Project-based...inquiry-driven...student-centered...all keywords found when reading literature about techniques used in the engineering classroom. It is clear there is a large community of engineering educators that feels these techniques need to be integrated in the classroom. Research has shown that these pedagogies create an environment that is more engaging to the students. However, a possible downfall of these techniques is that they can become time consuming and if not integrated properly can become the focus of a course taking away from learning the fundamentals. Engineering educators can “fit a project in” on a micro level by the addition of new techniques periodically in class. On the macro level, the question is how one can create a complete overhaul of a particular curriculum while maintaining the integrity of the content. To answer this question we look to the engineering design process. The same principles of engineering design can be applied to curriculum design. The engineering educator has a product – the course – and is told to make it better for the consumer – the students. This paper will present a framework that describes in detail the engineering design process and how it relates to each step of our curriculum design process. Because of the active research methodology, examples from curriculum redesigns that were used to help develop this model of curriculum design will be highlighted. This innovative approach on the curriculum design process for engineering education will be discussed in detail. Introduction Engineering Educators, for years, have been trying to improve the education process for engineering students. The goal of the educator is to create a classroom environment that is more engaging and promotes transfer in the students' learning. Success in teaching for transfer is shown by students not only learning a concept in an isolated instance but rather being able to take what they learn and transfer it to other applications. The National Research Council for psychology has identified some essential concepts for both the teacher and learner in order to encourage deep understanding and the ability to transfer. The concepts identified by the council are (a) learning the fundamentals is key, (b) too much context could be harmful and instead some abstraction could promote better transfer, (c) maintaining a level of excitement and engagement leads to deeper understanding, and (d) instructors should keep in mind that learning new concepts builds on previously learned concepts when developing a course 1 . Engineering Educators strive to create environments that promote learning on a deep level in engineering classrooms. Many papers have been written by engineering educators with the concepts identified by the National Research Council as their underlying themes 2, 3, 4 . Engineering Educators understand the need for students to transfer their knowledge of a concept from one class to another. Many of the courses in an engineering curriculum build on one another. If a student does not have a deep understanding at the beginning, it will be hard for them to succeed in the future. It is one thing to understand the attributes needed for deep learning, but engineering educators must take action to put these concepts into practice in the engineering learning environment. In many cases, action has been taken where curriculum that promotes engagement and deep learning is available to a certain extent. Instructors have taken current content in a curriculum and added projects that illustrate the content. Some classes are completely redesigned to have these engaging techniques, but in other cases projects are added as an afterthought. Simply putting in a project to aid in discussion of a concept is fine and has its merits; however, poor implementation of the project will detract from the fundamental concept being taught. Additionally, some of the projects or engaging techniques are implemented, but only reach a surface level of understanding for the students and in turn deep learning is not achieved. As discussed above, simply plugging in a project here and there whenever it fits appropriately can provide benefits to the students, but, if a course is examined as a whole and redesigned, a more seamless integration of fundamental concepts with projects can be achieved. The question is, however, how can one perform a complete overhaul of a particular curriculum while maintaining the integrity of the content. For engineering educators, it seems only fitting to look towards the engineering design process. The same principles of engineering design can be applied to curriculum design. The engineering educator has a product – the course – and is told to make it better for the consumer – the students. Engineering Design Process Throughout the years there have been many models created that illustrate the engineering design process; a few of which are shown in Figures 1, 2, and 3. Figure 1. A graphic depicting the Figure 2. A Graphic Depicting the Engineering Design Process 5 Engineering Design Process 6 Figure 3. A graphic depicting the Engineering Design Process 7 The steps in each figure vary slightly, but can all be condensed into four steps of design, each containing various sub-steps: Problem Formulation, Solution Generation, Solution Analysis, and Solution Evaluation. A closer look at each step is necessary in understanding the process as a whole. The Problem Formulation phase is arguably the most critical stage in the engineering design process. To begin a design process full understanding the scope of a problem is needed to develop the most optimum solution. This is achieved by clearly defining all parameters and aspects of the problem through discussion with experts and previously conducted research; thus, time should be allotted to the definition of the problem statement. A clearly composed statement is needed in order to develop a solution. All aspects must be considered in the Problem Formulation stage. Understanding what is desired as the end goal as well as looking at the various parameters that might influence the end result such as: time, space, funding, materials available, etc. Keeping these parameters in mind will help in narrowing down the core of the problem statement. In the Solution Generation phase of the design process the design team must develop potential solutions to the problem statement. The generation process can be done in a number of ways. One of the most popular methods used in today’s engineering design is brainstorming. An individual or team generates a list of all possible solutions that could yield success in solving the problem statement. The list should be all inclusive having no restriction on what is proposed. The generation phase should allow for the most ridiculous to the most practical of solutions. Allowing for creativity in solution generation can potentially spark solutions that may not have necessarily been thought of due to restrictions on creativity. Many times the more outrageous solutions do not get implemented, but the outrageous may lead to creatively discovering a solution that solves the problem. The Solution Analysis stage begins to take a closer look at the solutions developed in the generation phase. The design team must should look at each solution and analyze its feasibility for implementation and how well this will solve the problem. All parameters as they relate to the problem statement should be examined. For instance, the product being designed might have time constraints. This constraint should be taken into account when narrowing down the list of potential design solutions. Additionally, a comparison of the solutions generated is necessary. Comparing and contrasting solution A with solution B with solution C (and so on), can lead to determining which is the most appropriate solution. In the Solution Analysis phase, the design team might find that a combination of solutions is optimum. Analyzing each portion of the solutions and finding the most useful parts could combine into the best possible solution. Once the solution is narrowed down a prototype should be made of the best solution. The prototype can be analyzed further to determine how favorably the solution solves the problem. Much time should be spent in the testing of the prototype to ensure the design is optimum. The fourth step in the engineering design process is the Solution Evaluation phase. Within this phase of the design process the prototype is developed into its final design. The final design is given to the customer for use. Feedback should be obtained from the customer such that future iterations of the design can be made with the necessary improvements. Throughout these four phases of the design process the design team must keep in mind that design is not a linear process, it is rather an iterative process. While in the solution generation phase, the design team might determine that a closer look at the problem formation is necessary; thus, requiring the team to go back to stage one of the design process. For instance, another parameter might develop that changes the problem. During the Solution Evaluation phase the results might not lead to the desired solution and a look back at the Solution Analysis phase might be needed. Additionally, as mentioned with the final design feedback can be received that suggests changes should be made to the design, which leads the team back to the prototyping phase in the design process. There are many techniques that are used in order to approach the design process. One in particular that is popular is the IDEO design philosophy 8, 9 . IDEO is a successful design firm that does consulting for various design projects. The company takes a humanistic approach to innovation by using diverse design teams to develop products. To begin the design process, the design team collects information on the product by reading research and talking to exper