Search

Design thinking is a robust framework for creatively and effectively identifying and solving important human problems. While design thinking is commonly associated with fields like industrial design, it can be applied to many problem types. For example, several recent examples demonstrate the applicability of design thinking to the design and development of educational materials, courses, and systems. These results suggest that design thinking could be used as a framework to (re)design and develop effective engineering courses. The goal of this project is to understand how nine educators from different backgrounds did or did not use design thinking to redesign a sophomore-level electrical and computer engineering course. The primary source of data was 21 transcribed audio recordings of design meetings and is supplemented with interviews, reflections, and course artifacts. Thematic analysis revealed 10 themes that represent connections and disconnections between the process used and a common five-stage design thinking process (empathize, define, ideate, prototype, and test). These themes demonstrate some of the opportunities and challenges related to design thinking within an engineering course design setting. In particular, they suggest that engineering course design is a relevant context for design thinking, but one to which design thinking methods do not always naturally translated. Future work should focus on better understanding unique applications of design thinking within engineering course design and methods that might to support more designerly behaviors among engineering educators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considering a wide range of ideas is crucial for engineers as they seek to solve complex problems. Paradigm-relatedness is one dimension on which ideas can range from more incremental--ideas that refine and improve existing solutions--to more radical--ideas that approach a problem from a new perspective or seemingly unrelated angle. We developed a tool that consists of a set of framing strategies an engineer can apply to a design task to assist in generating ideas that differ from their initial ideas. We created two versions of the tool--one with an incremental set of framing strategies and another with a radical set. We explored whether the framing tool impacted the paradigm-relatedness of ideas generated in conceptual design sessions. Forty-five students attending a summer engineering outreach program participated in the study. Participants were given a problem statement and generated ideas initially without the tool and then with the version of the tool of their choosing. Post hoc, we coded each idea as more incremental or more radical on a four-point scale and examined the change in ideas between the first ideation session and the second. It was found that 73% of the participants chose the framing tool version we would have assigned to them based on our coding of their initial ideas. All of these participants exhibited a shift in the predicted paradigm-relatedness direction, providing support for the overall effectiveness of the tool. However, some participants selected a version of the tool that was not consistent with our intended use of the tool, and this happened more often with the incremental version of the tool. Those participants were inconsistent in shifting their ideas. Case examples were explored to gain insight into the ways in which the tool was effective as well as how it could be improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Looking beyond the presented problem can allow new perspectives to emerge, opening up the possibility of more varied solutions. Little research exists about how engineering designers engage in this process, which we call problem exploration. In a study with engineering students, each student talked aloud as they worked to create design solutions; next, we asked them to explain their problem focus and to define the problem they addressed in each solution. The protocols revealed multiple cognitive strategies used to structure and frame the presented problem in alternative ways. Further research is aimed at empirically-based design tools to support problem exploration in engineering design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]