LESSONS LEARNED FROM TEACHING AND TUTORING DESIGN THINKING TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS

LESSONS LEARNED FROM TEACHING AND TUTORING DESIGN THINKING TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS

K. Refsvik, O. Alsos, T. Bolstad (2023).  LESSONS LEARNED FROM TEACHING AND TUTORING DESIGN THINKING TO ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS. 879-890.

To deal with societal challenges, future engineers need new skills and competences. Design thinking is one such skill. The project Future Technology Studies (Dahle Øien, 2021) aimed to develop the study programs in technology at Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) according to future technological development, societal challenges, and industry needs. One of the findings from FTS was that technology students should learn Design Thinking. In this work, we study an implementation of design thinking in an electronic engineering study program. Specifically, we use three perspectives, students, learning assistants, and teachers, to study how they experience the introduction of a cross-disciplinary topic in a domain-specific project course. The target group were electrical engineering students (N=117) who did a user-centered electronic system in a project-based introductory course in electronic systems design. Drawing on findings from a web-based questionnaire from students (N=67) and interviews with course staff members and tutors (N=13) our findings show (1) that more work is needed to improve the course description, activities, syllabus, and student evaluation and (2) the importance of making the purpose and goal of including design thinking in the course clear for the students.

Authors (New): 
Kjell Are Refsvik
Ole Andreas Alsos
Torstein Bolstad
Pages: 
879-890
Affiliations: 
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
Keywords: 
Cross-disciplinary teaching
future technology studies
design thinking
Electrical Engineering
Design
CDIO Standard 1
CDIO Standard 3
CDIO Standard 5
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 9
CDIO Standard 11
Year: 
2023
Reference: 
Alsos, O. A. (2015). Teaching product design students how to make everyday things interactive with Arduino. Make2Learn@ICEC.: 
Atman, C., Adams, R., Cardella, M., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering Design Processes: A Comparison of Students and Expert Practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96, 359–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2007.tb00945.x: 
Atman, C., Cardella, M., Turns, J., & Adams, R. (2005). Comparing freshman and senior engineering design processes: An in-depth follow-up study. Design Studies, 26, 325–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.09.005: 
Atman, C. J., Chimka, J. R., Bursic, K. M., & Nachtmann, H. L. (1999). A comparison of freshman and senior engineering design processes. Design Studies, 20(2), 131–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(98)00031-3: 
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138871: 
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa: 
Cardella, M., Atman, C., Turns, J., & Adams, R. (2008). Students with Differing Design Processes as Freshmen: Case Studies on Change. International Journal of Engineering Education, 24, 246–259.: 
Crosthwaite, C. (2021). Engineering Futures 2035 Engineering Education Programs, Priorities & Pedagogies.: 
Dahle Øien, G. E. (2021, January). Fremtidens teknologistudier. Fremtidens teknologistudier. https://www.ntnu.no/fremtidensteknologistudier: 
Dahle Øien, G. E. (2022). Teknologiutdanning 4.0: Anbefalinger for utvikling av NTNUs teknologistudier 2022-2030. NTNU.: 
Department of Electronic Systems, NTNU. (2023a). Course Description, TTT4255 Electronic System Design, Bacis Course. https://www.ntnu.edu/studies/courses/TTT4255#tab=omEmnet: 
Department of Electronic Systems, NTNU. (2023b). The Innovation Project—Elektronic systems design and Innovation. Innovation Project. https://www.ntnu.no/studier/mtelsys/innovasjonsprosjektet: 
Fai, S. K. (2011). AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY OF INFUSING DESIGN THINKING INTO THE CDIO FRAMEWORK.: 
Figueiredo, A. D. de. (2008). Toward an Epistemology of Engineering (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 1314224). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1314224: 
Glen, R., Suciu, C., Baughn, C. C., & Anson, R. (2015). Teaching design thinking in business schools. The International Journal of Management Education, 13(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2015.05.001: 
Kamp, A. (2020). Navigating the Landscape of Higher Engineering Education. https://repository.tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid%3Adf7883b5-919d-4479-a105-15f3c0605e25: 
Lee, C. H., Lee, L., & Kuptasthien, N. (2014). DESIGN THINKING FOR CDIO CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT.: 
Lee, P. L. (2021). Engineering Change—The future of engineering education in Australia. Australian Council of Engineering Deans. aced.edu.au/index.php/blog-3/reports: 
Lilliesköld, J., & Östlund, S. (2008). Designing, implementing and maintaining a first year project course in electrical engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education, 33. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043790801980326: 
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are Cognitive Skills Context-Bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001016: 
Ping, M. C. S. (2011). THE USE OF DESIGN THINKING IN C-D-I-O PROJECTS.: 
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.: 
Vattam, S., & Kolodner, J. (2008). On foundations of technological support for addressing challenges facing design-based science learning. Pragmatics & Cognition, 162, 405–436. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.16.2.08vat: 
Go to top
randomness