Understanding Design Iteration: Representations from an Empirical Study

Design is a cornerstone of the engineering profession and a prominent feature in how we educate engineers and accredit engineering programs. Design problems are often ambiguous, ill-structured, and may have multiple solutions. As a result, a designer’s understanding of the problem or possible solutions evolves through a process of iteration. Iteration is a symbolic feature in design models that represents a process of revisiting and resolving design conflicts. Although iteration is considered an integral part of design activity and a natural attribute of design competency, there is little research that explicitly operationalizes or represents iterative activity. The purpose of this paper is to provide and discuss theoretically meaningful representations of iteration in engineering design. Representations were generated from empirical data from a comprehensive study of cognitive processes in iterative design activity. The utility of these representations is evidenced in their ability to emphasize empirical findings, highlight qualitative trends and patterns of behavior, and distinguish differences in design success and levels of engineering experience. In addition, these representations may be useful pedagogical tools for engaging design students and design educators in discussions about effective iterative behaviors.

[1]  Jay B. Brockman Evaluation of student design processes , 1996, Technology-Based Re-Engineering Engineering Education Proceedings of Frontiers in Education FIE'96 26th Annual Conference.

[2]  Elliot W. Eisner,et al.  The Promise and Perils of Alternative Forms of Data Representation , 1997 .

[3]  Masaki Suwa,et al.  Unexpected discoveries and S-invention of design requirements , 2000 .

[4]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem–solution , 2001 .

[5]  Oded Maimon,et al.  The design process: properties, paradigms, and structure , 1997, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[6]  Cynthia J. Atman,et al.  Characterizing Engineering Student Design Processes An Illustration Of Iteration , 2000 .

[7]  S. I. Madanshetty,et al.  Cognitive basis for conceptual design , 1995 .

[8]  Cynthia J. Atman,et al.  A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes , 1999 .

[9]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[10]  Petra Badke-Schaub,et al.  Analysis of design projects , 1999 .

[11]  Cynthia J. Atman,et al.  Information Gathering: A Critical Step for Quality in the Design Process , 1997 .

[12]  Robert P. Smith,et al.  Experimental observation of iteration in engineering design , 1998 .

[13]  C.J. Atman,et al.  Graphical representations of engineering design behavior , 1998, FIE '98. 28th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Moving from 'Teacher-Centered' to 'Learner-Centered' Education. Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36214).

[14]  Karen M. Bursic,et al.  Verbal Protocol Analysis as a Method to Document Engineering Student Design Processes , 1998 .

[15]  Cynthia J. Atman,et al.  Educating effective engineering designers: the role of reflective practice , 2003 .

[16]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[17]  C.J. Atman,et al.  Cognitive processes in iterative design behavior , 1999, FIE'99 Frontiers in Education. 29th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Designing the Future of Science and Engineering Education. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.99CH37011.

[18]  John S. Gero,et al.  An evolutionary process model of design , 1992 .