Problem solving and creativity for undergraduate engineers: findings of an action research project involving robots

Many researchers have written about the importance and complexities of developing problem solving skills and encouraging creative thinking in engineering students. Research continues to suggest deficiencies in developing or assessing process skills; with the attention of engineering educators being on outcomes or products of problem solving scenarios. This paper considers highlights of this previous work, and how this might inform action research to develop a module to improve and encourage process skills in engineering undergraduates. Findings from the first cycle of action research are presented. Lego Mindstorm robots have been used to provide suitable practical activities, and to stimulate student motivation

[1]  Dietrich Brandt,et al.  The Development of Problem Solving Skills in Engineering Students in Context. , 1986 .

[2]  Donald R. Woods.  On Teaching Problem Solving. Part II: The Challenges. , 1977 .

[3]  F. Coffield.  Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review , 2004 .

[4]  D. G. Boyle,et al.  A Students' Guide to Piaget , 1969 .

[5]  R. Mayer.  Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition , 1983 .

[6]  B. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , 1966 .

[7]  Richard M. Felder,et al.  Creativity in Engineering Education. , 1988 .

[8]  B. Bloom.  Taxonomy of educational objectives , 1956 .

[9]  Donald M. Johnson,et al.  Systematic introduction to the psychology of thinking , 1972 .

[10]  S. Nair,et al.  THINKING SKILLS AND PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS AMONG PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS IN NORTHERN ZONE OF MALAYSIA , 2010 .

[11]  Lois W. Sayrs.  Interviews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing , 1996 .

[12]  R. Soden.  Teaching Problem Solving in Vocational Education , 1994 .

[13]  Rob Koper,et al.  Current Research in Learning Design , 2006 .

[14]  G. Pólya,et al.  How to Solve It. A New Aspect of Mathematical Method. , 1945 .

[15]  Allen Newell,et al.  Human Problem Solving. , 1973 .

[16]  F. Marton.  Phenomenography — Describing conceptions of the world around us , 1981 .

[17]  Mary H. McCaulley.  Psychological Types in Engineering: Implications for Teaching. , 1976 .

[18]  Phillip C. Wankat,et al.  Teaching Engineering , 1992 .

[19]  Donald R. Woods,et al.  Characteristics of Engineering Students in Their First Two Years. , 1984 .

[20]  Scott J Turner,et al.  The inclusion of robots within the teaching of problem solving - preliminary results , 2006 .

[21]  J. Bruner.  Beyond the Information Given: Studies in the Psychology of Knowing , 1973 .

[22]  Sue Palmer.  Enquiry-Based Learning Can Maximise a Student's Potential , 2002 .

[23]  Richard M. Felder.  HOW BRIGHT IS THAT , 2006 .

[24]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Complex Problem Solving : Principles and Mechanisms , 1992 .

[25]  Richard M. Felder,et al.  ON CREATING CREATIVE ENGINEERS , 1987 .

[26]  Simon Warren,et al.  "This won't take long…": Interviewing, ethics and diversity , 2001 .

[27]  C. Reigeluth,et al.  Instructional-Design Theories and Models , 1999 .

[28]  Gary Hill,et al.  Robots in problem solving in programming , 2007 .

[29]  David Middlewood,et al.  Creating a Learning School , 2005 .

[30]  Stefan Kaczmarczyk,et al.  Improving Problem Solving and Encouraging Creativity in Engineering Undergraduates , 2007 .

[31]  M. Savin-Baden.  Problem-Based Learning in Higher Education: Untold Stories. , 2000 .

[32]  Leslie J. Briggs,et al.  Principles of Instructional Design , 1974 .

[33]  J. D. Williams,et al.  TEACHING PROBLEM‐SOLVING , 1961 .

[34]  D. Kolb.  Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development , 1983 .

[35]  Jorgen Sandburg.  Are Phenomenographic Results Reliable , 1997 .

[36]  David Wiley,et al.  Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy , 2000 .

[37]  G. Wallas.  The art of thought , 1926 .