Engineering education, research and design: breaking in and out of liminal space

1 Liminality is presented as a concept familiar to engineering educators, researchers and 2 designers, as a state of challenge and discomfort that we must flux in and out of in order 3 to advance our respective aims. Common areas for discussion in familiarising engineering 4 learners with liminality are sought. Threshold concepts, divergent-convergent thinking, and 5 the concept of design, research and education as iterative processes associated with breaking 6 in and out of liminal space are explored. The duality of learning is discussed through the 7 acquisition and participation metaphors. The use of design courses in leading learners in 8 to and out of liminal space, and in particular the Group Design Projects on the Imperial 9 Civil Engineering MEng degree are discussed. In closing the informed creative, as opposed 10 to routine design process, viewed from an engineering and a psychology perspective is briefly 11 characterised, along with the skills and experiences that the engineering community would 12 wish engineering graduates to have. 13

[1]  Clive L. Dym,et al.  Teaching Design to Freshmen: Style and Content , 1994 .

[2]  Spencer P. Magleby,et al.  A Review of Literature on Teaching Engineering Design Through Project‐Oriented Capstone Courses , 1997 .

[3]  Ilana Seidel Horn,et al.  Teaching as Problem Solving , 2013 .

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

[5]  Thomas J. Howard,et al.  Describing the creative design process by the integration of engineering design and cognitive psychology literature , 2008 .

[6]  R. Land.  Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge (1): linkages to ways of thinking and practising within the disciplines , 2003 .

[7]  Tim Stratford.  Experiments in learning design: Creating space for creativity and continuity in design education , 2016 .

[8]  Martin Gillie,et al.  Engineering Art: Experiences of an Innovative Learning Week Activity , 2015 .

[9]  R. Felder,et al.  Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education. , 1988 .

[10]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Statistics as a Catalyst to Learning by Scientific Method Part I—An Example , 1999 .

[11]  Judy Goldfinch,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A PEER ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUE FOR OBTAINING INDIVIDUAL MARKS ON A GROUP PROJECT , 1990 .

[12]  D. Sluijsmans,et al.  The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review , 1999 .

[13]  H. King.  Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge , 2006 .

[14]  C. R. Cosgrove,et al.  Assigning Students to Groups for Engineering Design Projects: A Comparison of Five Methods , 1994 .

[15]  A. Sfard.  On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One , 1998 .

[16]  Clive L. Dym,et al.  Learning Engineering: Design, Languages, and Experiences * , 1999 .

[17]  B. Zimmerman,et al.  Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn. , 2000, Contemporary educational psychology.

[18]  Noah Levine,et al.  Virtual by design , 2012 .

[19]  Glynis Cousin,et al.  Neither teacher-centred nor student-centred: threshold concepts and research partnerships , 2010 .

[20]  John S. Gero,et al.  The Situated Function - Behaviour - Structure Framework , 2002, AID.

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

[22]  Angel C. Aparicio,et al.  Tradition and Innovation in Teaching Structural Design in Civil Engineering , 2007 .

[23]  Martin Crapper,et al.  Innovative learning at The University of Edinburgh , 2014 .

[24]  L.J. Leifer,et al.  Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning , 2005, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[25]  M. Reardon.  A Review of Literature on Teaching Evaluation , 2013 .

[26]  D. Perkins.  The Many Faces of Constructivism. , 1999 .

[27]  Timothy Ibell.  Learning structural engineering , 2010 .

[28]  Timothy Ibell,et al.  Engaging students with e-activities , 2013 .

[29]  Jan H. F. Meyer,et al.  Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning , 2005 .

[30]  Douglas A. Johnson,et al.  A Comparison of Simplified-Visually Rich and Traditional Presentation Styles , 2011 .

[31]  David Kember,et al.  Peer Assessment of an Individual ‘s Contribution to a Group Project , 1993 .

[32]  Michael G. Oliva,et al.  Making The Strange Familiar: Creativity and the Future of Engineering Education , 2004 .

[33]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[34]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Statistics as a catalyst to learning by scientific method , 1999 .