First Evolution of the Introduction to Engineering course

V. Taajamaa, X. Guo, T. Westerlund, H. Tenhunen, T. Salakoski (2014). First Evolution of the Introduction to Engineering course. 11.

2014 10th International CDIO Conference, UPC BarcelonaTech, Spain

127_Paper.pdf

Engineering education in the department of Information Technology at the University of Turku, Finland, follows the CDIO framework. In this paper, we examine the first evolution of the Introduction to Engineering course (ITE). The course is based on the CDIO standard no. 4, and it is the very first course for the engineering students when they start their studies.

The background and structure for the course will be presented as well as the course’s intended learning outcomes and their evolution from the previous year. Finally, implications and ideas for the future evolutions for the course will be discussed. The course’s alignment to the whole curriculum will also be addressed. Key research questions are how the students and the teaching team have understood the course’s learning outcomes, and how the teaching team has been able to adopt the learning outcomes into the course structure. In addition, we will discuss the learning enhancement process of the course itself.

The research material has been gathered from the two consecutive courses during December 2012 – December 2013. The research material comprises student feedback in a form of class-room interaction, study journals and feedback survey after the course. In addition to student feedback, the teaching team’s experiences will also be reflected. The questions used in both surveys and study journals were based on intended learning outcomes and partly on CDIO standard no. 4. The changes in the survey questions have been kept minimal in order to increase the uniformity of data. The analysis method follows the grounded theory methodology.

According to the previous results, the ITE course has been a success from its very beginning. The intended learning outcomes have been achieved, and the students regard the course as a good introduction to engineering. The results from this longitudinal research suggest that the evolution of the course is going to the right direction because the students find the new exercises and the evolved course structure beneficial to their learning and engineering studies. The most promising results arise from the group work which was changed from big groups into smaller ones: from 8 to 9 students per group to 4 students per group.

According to the new results, it is important that also in the following ITE courses the substance and knowledge of embedded electronics and software (i.e., programming) is kept and further developed. The key issue for future courses is to further integrate the disciplinary knowledge with other substance learning such as systems thinking, problem–solving, communication skills, group work and societal understanding of the importance of engineering.

Proceedings of the 10th International CDIO Conference, Barcelona, Spain, June 15-19 2014

Authors (New):

Ville Taajamaa

Xing Guo

Tomi Westerlund

Hannu Tenhunen

Tapio Salakoski

Pages:

Affiliations:

University of Turku, Turku, Finland

Fudan University, China

Keywords:

Freshmen course

hands-on learning

Intended Learning Outcomes

Problem solving

Year:

2014

Reference:

Atman, C.J., Sheppard, S.D., Turns, J., Adams, R.S., Fleming, L.N., Stevens, R.,. Streveler, R.A., Smith, K.A., Miller, R.L., Leifer, L.J., Yasuhara, K., and Lund, D., (2010), Enabling Engineering Student Success: The Final Report for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education. San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool Publishers :

Biggs J., (2011) “Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment”, Higher Education 32: 347-364,, Kluwer Academic Publishers :

Bisson, C., Luckner, J., (1996), Fun in Learning: The Pedagogical Role of Fun in Adventure Education. Perspectives. Journal of Experiential Education, v19 n2 p108-12,107 :

Budny, D., W. LeBold, G. Bjedov, (1998) "Assessment of the Impact of Freshman Engineering Courses," Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 87, No. 4, pp. 405-411. :

Cheville, A. R., (2012) Engineering Education Today: Capturing the Afterlife of Sisyphus in Five Snapshots, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 100,May 13th :

Crawley, E., F., (2007) Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D.R., Rethinking Engineering Education, The CDIO Approach, Springer, 286 pages :

Crawley, E.F., (2002), Creating the CDIO syllabus, a universal template for engineering education, 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference :

Felder, R. M., Silverman, L.K., (1988) Learning and Teaching Styles In Engineering Education, Engr. Education, 78(7), 674–681 :

Froyd, J., Wankat, P., G., Smith, K., A., (2012) Five Major Shifts in 100 Years of Engineering Education, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 100,May 13th.:

Giles, E., (2012), 'Fun Injected Learning' [online]. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2 :42-44. Availability:http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=103767998550936;res=IELNZC :

ISSN: 1442-1100

Joyce, T., and Hopkins, C.,(2011) Working together: the positive effects of introducing formal teams in a first year Engineering degree, vol.6, issue 1, engineering education :

Knight, D. W., Carlson, L. E. and Sullivan, J. F., (2007), Improving engineering student retention through hands-on, team based, first-year design projects,[ in Proc. Int. Conf. Res. Eng. Educ., Honolulu, HI.:

Lehmann, M., P.Christensen, X. Du, and M.Thrane, (2008), Problem-oriented and project-based learning (POPBL) as an innovative learning strategy for sustainable development in engineering education, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol.33, No. 3, 283-295 :

Lindsay E, Munt R, Rogers H, Scott D, & Sullivan K., (2000), Making students engineers. Engineering Education: Journal of the Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre, 3(2), UK, 2008. :

Marra R., Palmer, and Litzinger T., B, (2000), The effects of a first-year engineering design course on student intellectual development as measured by the Perry scheme,[ J. Eng. Educ., vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 39–45:

Moller-Wong, C., E. Arvid, (1997) "An Engineering Student RetentionStudy," Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 86, No. 1, pp.7-15. :

Moti, F., Lavy, I., & Elata, D., (2003), Implementing the project-based learning approach in an academic engineering course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 13, no. 3: 273-288 :

Myers, M. D. (1997) "Qualitative Research in Information Systems," MIS Quarterly (21:2), pp. 241-242. MISQ Discovery, archival version, http://www.misq.org/supplements/. Association for Information Systems (AISWorld) Section on Qualitative Research in Information Systems, updated version, last modified: September 3, 2013 www.qual.auckland.ac.nz :

Taajamaa, V., Liljeberg, P., Salakoski, T., (2013) Commencing Studies with a Project, PAEE – International Symposium on Project Approaches in Engineering Education, Eindhoven Netherlands :

Taajamaa, V, Sjöman, H, Kirjavainen, S, Utriainen, T, Repokari, L, Salakoski, T,(2013), Dancing with Ambiguity – Design thinking in interdisciplinary engineering education, Design thinking conference, Shenzhen, China :

Taajamaa, V, Westerlund, T, Salakoski, T, (2013) Interdisciplinary Engineering Education - Practice Based Case, IEDEC Conference, Santa Clara, USA :

on July 4, 2014 - 10:00 MAndersson

First Evolution of the Introduction to Engineering course

Navigation

First Evolution of the Introduction to Engineering course

Share this content.