Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-n6p7q Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-02-23T04:10:37.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A framework for design engineering education in a global context

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2010

Andrew J. Wodehouse
Affiliation:
Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Hilary J. Grierson
Affiliation:
Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Caroline Breslin
Affiliation:
Department of Learning Services, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Ozgur Eris
Affiliation:
Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering, Needham, Massachusetts, USA
William J. Ion
Affiliation:
Department of Design, Manufacture and Engineering Management, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Larry J. Leifer
Affiliation:
Center for Design Research, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA
Ade Mabogunje
Affiliation:
Center for Design Research, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA

Abstract

This paper presents a framework for teaching design engineering in a global context using innovative technologies to enable distributed teams to work together effectively across international and cultural boundaries. The Digital Libraries for Global Distributed Innovative Design, Education, and Teamwork (DIDET) Framework represents the findings of a 5-year project conducted by the University of Strathclyde, Stanford University, and Olin College that enhanced student learning opportunities by enabling them to partake in global, team-based design engineering projects, directly experiencing different cultural contexts and accessing a variety of digital information sources via a range of innovative technology. The use of innovative technology enabled the formalization of design knowledge within international student teams as did the methods that were developed for students to store, share, and reuse information. Coaching methods were used by teaching staff to support distributed teams and evaluation work on relevant classes was carried out regularly to allow ongoing improvement of learning and teaching and show improvements in student learning. Major findings of the 5-year project include the requirement to overcome technological, pedagogical, and cultural issues for successful eLearning implementations. The DIDET Framework encapsulates all the conclusions relating to design engineering in a global context. Each of the principles for effective distributed design learning is shown along with relevant findings and suggested metrics. The findings detailed in the paper were reached through a series of interventions in design engineering education at the collaborating institutions. Evaluation was carried out on an ongoing basis and fed back into project development, both on the pedagogical and the technological approaches.

Type
Special Issue Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Atherton, J.S. (2004). Teaching and learning: constructivism in learning. Accessed at http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/constructivism.htm on July 13, 2005.Google Scholar
Bates, T. (2000). Managing Technological Change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.Google Scholar
Breslin, C., Nicol, D., Grierson, H., Wodehouse, A., Juster, N., & Ion, W.J. (2007). Embedding an integrated learning environment and digital repository in design engineering education: lessons learned for sustainability. British Journal of Educational Technology 38(5), 805816.Google Scholar
Curtis, D. (2001). Start With the Pyramid. Accessed at http://www.edutopia.org/php/article.php?id=Art_884&key=037 on July 14, 2005.Google Scholar
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. (2009). Dublin Core Metadata Standards. Accessed at http://dublincore.org/ on June 12, 2009.Google Scholar
Dym, C.L., Agogino, A.M., Eris, O., Frey, D.D., & Leifer, L.J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education 94, 103120.Google Scholar
Eris, O., & Leifer, L. (2003). Facilitating product development knowledge acquisition: interaction between the expert and the team. International Journal of Engineering Education 19(1), 142152.Google Scholar
Foltz, C., Schmidt, L., & Luczak, H. (2002). Not seeing the woods for the trees—empirical studies in design engineering. Proc. Workshop on the Role of Empirical Studies in Understanding and Supporting Design Engineering, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.Google Scholar
Frank, M., Lavy, I., & Elata, D. (2003). Implementing the project-based learning approach in an academic engineering course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 13, 273288.Google Scholar
Grierson, H., Ion, W., & Juster, N. (2006). Project memories: documentation and much more for global team design. Proc. Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE06), Salzburg, Austria.Google Scholar
Grierson, H., Nicol, D., Littlejohn, A., & Wodehouse, A. (2004). Structuring and sharing information resources to support concept development and design learning. Proc. Networked Learning Conf., pp. 572579.Google Scholar
Grierson, H., Wodehouse, A., Breslin, C., Ion, W., & Juster, N. (2006). Building a design engineering digital library: the workflow issues. Proc. Engineering and Product Design Education Conf. (E&PDE06), Salzburg, Austria.Google Scholar
Grierson, H., Wodehouse, A., Breslin, C., Ion, W., Nicol, D., & Juster, N. (2008). An evaluation study of a digital library of ideas: workflow model and classroom use. International Journal on Digital Libraries 9(1), 2939.Google Scholar
Grierson, H., Wodehouse, A., Ion, W.J., & Juster, N. (2005). Supporting reflection and problem-based learning through the use of LauLima. Proc. Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE05), Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Inspec. (2009). The INSPEC Thesaurus. Accessed at http://www.theiet.org/publishing/inspec/ on June 12, 2009.Google Scholar
Love, T. (1999). Design engineering education: some implications of a post-positivist theory of design cognition. In In the Continuum of Design Education (Juster, N., Ed.), pp. 3342. Bury St. Edmunds: Professional Engineering Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Mair, G., Cunningham, D., Grierson, H., & Ion, W. (2007). An integrated digital design and manufacture studio for educating future product designers. Proc. Engineering and Product Design Education (E&PDE07), Newcastle, UK.Google Scholar
McGill, L., Nicol, D., Littlejohn, A., Grierson, H., Juster, N., & Ion, W.J. (2005). Creating an information rich learning environment to enhance design student learning: challenges and approaches. British Journal of Educational Technology 36(4), 629642.Google Scholar
Mills, J.E., & Treagust, D.F. (2003). Engineering education—is problem-based or project-based learning the answer? Australian Journal of Engineering Education. Accessed at http://www.aaee.com.au/journal/2003/mills_treagust2003.pdfGoogle Scholar
Nicol, D.J., Littlejohn, A., & Grierson, H. (2005). The importance of structuring information and resources within shared workspaces during collaborative design learning. Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning 20(1), 3139.Google Scholar
Palincsar, A.S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology 49(31), 345364.Google Scholar
Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding Learning and Teaching: The Experience in Higher Education. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Sonalkar, N., Mabogunje, A., Jung, M., Eris, O., Wodehouse, A., Grierson, H., Leifer, L., Lynn, A., Juster, N., & Ion, W. (2006). A conceptual framework for understanding the impact of digital libraries on design engineering learning performance. Proc. IDETC/CIE 2006, ASME Int. Design Engineering Technical Conf. Computers and Information in Engineering, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
Sonalkar, N., Mabogunje, A., Leifer, L., Eris, O., & Jung, M. (2007). Powerbrowsing—a method to accelerate designers' familiarity with video information in digital libraries. Proc. Int. Conf. Design Engineering, Paris.Google Scholar
The Tiki Community. (2009). The TikiWiki Project Community Site. Accessed at http://tikiwiki.org/tiki-index.php on April 29, 2009.Google Scholar
Thomas, J.W. (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning. Accessed at http://www.k12reform.org/foundation/pbl/research on September 10, 2009.Google Scholar
Twigg, C. (2003). Improving learning and reducing costs: new models for online learning. EDUCAUSE Review 35(5), 2838.Google Scholar
University of Strathclyde. (2008). The DIDET Project. Accessed at http://www.didet.ac.uk/ on April 17, 2008.Google Scholar
University of Strathclyde. (2009). DIDET Case Studies. Accessed at http://www.didet.ac.uk/system/case_studies/ on May 1, 2009.Google Scholar
Wodehouse, A., Breslin, C., Eris, O., Grierson, H., Ion, W., Jung, M., Leifer, L., Mabogunje, A., & Sonalkar, N. (2007). A reflective approach to learning in a global design project. Proc. Engineering and Product Design Education Conf. (E&PDE07), Newcastle, UK.Google Scholar
Wodehouse, A., Breslin, C., Farrugia, P., Grierson, H., Ion, W., Sonalkar, N., & Vere, I.D. (2008). A task-based approach to global design education. Proc. Int. Conf. Engineering and Product Design Education, Barcelona.Google Scholar