COGNITION AND TRANSDISCIPLINARY DESIGN: AN EDUCATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERGRADUATE ENGINEERING DESIGN CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Contemporary engineering product design and development no longer adheres to the boundaries of a single discipline and has become tightly integrated, often relying on interaction of multiple disciplines for completion of integrated product design projects. In order to design these products, design and development practice has transcended the discipline boundaries to become a transdisciplinary engineering design process. A collaboration of specialists from different engineering disciplines is required to develop efficient solutions to interdisciplinary problems of product design. Despite this shift from mono-disciplinary to transdisciplinary, the engineering design curriculum remains focused on teaching discipline specific design practice through skill based subject specific pedagogy with a limited emphasis on the importance of design process and transdisciplinarity in the design process. As a result, new graduates starting in design and development organizations face a difficulty finding a common basis of understanding of disciplines’ interactions and must go through a process of often implicit ‘onboarding’ to understand the transdisciplinary engineering design process. This can be avoided by developing and adapting undergraduate design process education in line with industrial demands. This paper proposes a theoretical framework based on empirical engineering design research in industry, educational psychology and teaching approaches such as Bloom’s Taxonomy and Kolb’s Model of Experiential Learning for developing the core elements of a transdisciplinary engineering design process curriculum.

[1]  Riichiro Mizoguchi,et al.  Deployment of an ontological framework of functional design knowledge , 2004, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[2]  Gregory R. Olsen,et al.  An Ontology for Engineering Mathematics , 1994, KR.

[3]  Nicolai P. Kirillov,et al.  Creativity in Engineering Education , 2015 .

[4]  D. Krathwohl A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview , 2002 .

[5]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Design process commonalities in trans-disciplinary design , 2013 .

[6]  John S. Gero,et al.  Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design , 1990, AI Mag..

[7]  Darcy Haag Granello Encouraging the Cognitive Development of Supervisees: Using Bloom's Taxonomy in Supervision , 2000 .

[8]  Patricia L. Hardré,et al.  Structuring Engineering Design Courses to Motivate Students , 2013 .

[9]  John S. Gero,et al.  Drawings and the design process , 1998 .

[10]  D. Kolb,et al.  Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education , 2005 .

[11]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  AN ANALYSIS OF DESIGN PROCESS MODELS ACROSS DISCIPLINES , 2012 .

[12]  N. Dixon,et al.  The Kolb Model Modified for Classroom Activities , 1987 .

[13]  Boris Eisenbart,et al.  A FRAMEWORK FOR COMPARING DESIGN MODELLING APPROACHES ACROSS DISCIPLINES , 2011 .

[14]  Toni Noble,et al.  Integrating the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy with Multiple Intelligences: A Planning Tool for Curriculum Differentiation , 2004, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[15]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[16]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993 .

[17]  V. R. Benjamins,et al.  Overview of Knowledge Sharing and Reuse Components: Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods , 1999, IJCAI 1999.

[18]  Donald R. Woods,et al.  An Evidence‐Based Strategy for Problem Solving , 2000 .

[19]  B. Olds,et al.  The Effect of a First‐Year Integrated Engineering Curriculum on Graduation Rates and Student Satisfaction: A Longitudinal Study , 2004 .

[20]  Saeema Ahmed-Kristensen,et al.  Merged ontology for engineering design: Contrasting empirical and theoretical approaches to develop engineering ontologies , 2009, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[21]  Sekta Lonir Oscarini,et al.  BLOOM'S TAXONOMY: ORIGINAL AND REVISED , 2010 .

[22]  M. Z. Kamsah Developing Generic Skills in Classroom Environment: Engineering Students’ Perspective , 2004 .

[23]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Analyzing Transdisciplinary Design Processes in Industry: An Overview , 2013 .

[24]  D. Laurillard,et al.  Styles and Approaches in Problem-solving , 2005 .

[25]  S. Betts Teaching and Assessing Basic Concepts to Advanced Applications: Using Bloom's Taxonomy to Inform Graduate Course Design , 2008 .

[26]  Ken M. Wallace,et al.  A Methodology for Creating Ontologies for Engineering Design , 2007, J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng..

[27]  Mogens Myrup Andreasen,et al.  The design ontology: foundation for the design knowledge exchange and management , 2010 .

[28]  John S. Gero,et al.  A function–behavior–structure ontology of processes , 2007, Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing.

[29]  Mogens Myrup Andreasen,et al.  Towards a formal design model based on a genetic design model system , 2005 .

[30]  Willemien Visser,et al.  The Cognitive Artifacts of Designing , 2006 .

[31]  Lucienne Blessing,et al.  Stages in product lifecycle: Trans-disciplinary design context , 2014 .

[32]  Jean-Yves Dantan,et al.  Set based robust design of mechanical systems using the quantifier constraint satisfaction algorithm , 2010, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell..