Ready to Engineer Conceiving- Designing- Implementing – Operating Edward Crawley

We have adopted CDIO as the engineering context of our education THE NEED Desired Attributes of an Engineering Graduate Understanding of fundamentals Understanding of design and manufacturing process Possess a multi-disciplinary system perspective Good communication skills High ethical standards, etc. Underlying Need Educate students who: Understand how to conceive- design-implement-operate Complex value-added engineering systems In a modern team-based engineering environment We have adopted CDIO as the engineering context of our education

DEVELOPMENT OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION Personal, Interpersonal and Design -System Building Pre-1950s: Practice 2010s: CDIO 1960s: Science & practice 1980s: Science Disciplinary Knowledge Engineers need both dimensions, and we need to develop education that delivers both

GOALS OF CDIO To educate students to master a deeper working knowledge of the technical fundamentals To educate engineers to lead in the creation and operation of new products and systems

VISION We envision an education that stresses the fundamentals, set in the context of Conceiving – Designing – Implementing – Operating systems and products: A curriculum organised around mutually supporting disciplines, but with authentic activities highly interwoven Rich with student design-build projects Featuring active and experiential learning Set in both classrooms and modern engineering learning workspaces Constantly improved through robust assessment and evaluation processes

PEDAGOGIC LOGIC Most engineers learn from the concrete to the abstract Manipulate objects to understand abstractions Students arrive at university lacking personal experience We must provide dual impact authentic activities to allow mapping of new knowledge Using CDIO as authentic activity achieves two goals -- Provides education in the creation and operation of systems Builds the cognitive structure to understand the fundamentals more deeply

CDIO APPROACH, STRUCTURE AND RESOURCES GOOD PRACTICE SCHOLARSHIP CO- DEVELOPMENT SHARING CONTEXT (1) LEARNING OUTCOMES (2) LEARNING PLANS & ACTIVITIES (3-8) SKILLS AND EVALUATION (9-12) CHANGE PROCESS

ENGINEERING EDUCATION CONTEXT What should be the context of engineering education? - the product/process/system lifecycle A focus on the needs of the customer Delivery of products, services and systems Incorporation of new inventions and technologies A focus on the solution, not disciplines Working with others, and within resources Water Bike Project Courtesy of Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm

BENEFITS OF LEARNING IN THIS CONTEXT Setting the education of engineers in the context of engineering practice gains the benefits of Contextual Learning Increases retention of new knowledge and skills Interconnects concepts and knowledge that build on each other Communicates the rationale for, meaning of, and relevance of, what students are learning

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: CONTEXT STANDARD ONE Adoption of the principle that product, process, and system lifecycle development and deployment -- Conceiving, Designing, Implementing and Operating -- are the context for engineering education It is authentic - what engineers do! It is the underlying need and basis for the skills lists that industry proposes to university educators It is the natural context in which to teach these skills to engineering students It better supports the learning of the technical fundamentals

NEED TO GOALS: WHAT WE TEACH Educate students who: Understand how to conceive- design-implement-operate Complex value-added engineering systems In a modern team-based engineering environment And are mature and thoughtful individuals Process Product 4. CDIO 1. Technical 2. Personal 3. Inter- personal Team Self The CDIO Syllabus - a comprehensive statement of detailed Goals for an Engineering Education

THE CDIO REVISED SYLLABUS v2.0 AND UNESCO FOUR PILLARS 1.0 Disciplinary Knowledge & Reasoning: LEARNING TO KNOW Knowledge of underlying mathematics and sciences Core engineering fundamental knowledge Advanced engineering fundamental knowledge, methods and tools 2.0 Personal and Professional Skills & Attributes LEARNING TO BE Analytical reasoning and problem solving Experimentation, investigation and knowledge discovery System thinking Attitudes, thought and learning Ethics, equity and other responsibility 3.0 Interpersonal Skills: Teamwork & Communication LEARNING TO WORK Teamwork TOGETHER Communications Communication in a foreign language 4.0 Conceiving, Designing, Implementing & Operating Systems in the Enterprise, Societal and Environmental Context LEARNING TO DO External, societal and environmental context Enterprise and business context Conceiving, systems engineering and management Designing Implementing Operating

VALIDATION WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS Stakeholders are individuals or groups who share an interest, and have an investment, in graduates of a particular program. They benefit from the program’s success, and hold programs accountable for results. Who are the stakeholders of your programs? Methods to get stakeholder input and support: Interviews Focus-group discussions Surveys Peer review Workshops Examples of stakeholders include students, faculty, alumni, industry, taxpayers, professional associations. Methods to get stakeholder input and support: Interviews may be conducted face-to-face or by telephone. Focus-group discussions, or focus-group interviews, bring groups of 5 to 8 people together to get their input to a series of topics. They are usually conducted in one location to take advantage of the group’s synergy and body language. Surveys, or written questionnaires, may be conducted by postal mail, electronic mail, or on designated websites. Peer review solicits input from experts on topics related to the CDIO Syllabus. For example, communication experts may be asked to review Section 3.2 on Communication. Workshops are sessions in which stakeholders implement the ideas that have been generated by other methods of data collection, that is, they revise the CDIO Syllabus, based on the input of earlier interviews an surveys.

SYLLABUS LEVEL OF PROFICIENCY 6 groups surveyed: 1st and 4th year students, alumni 25 years old, alumni 35 years old, faculty, leaders of industry Question: For each attribute, please indicate which of the five levels of proficiency you desire in a graduating engineering student: 1 To have experienced or been exposed to 2 To be able to participate in and contribute to 3 To be able to understand and explain 4 To be skilled in the practice or implementation of 5 To be able to lead or innovate in

PROFICIENCY EXPECTATIONS Innovate Proficiency Expectations at MIT Aero/Astro Skilled Practice Understand Participate Exposure REMARKABLE AGREEMENT!

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: OUTCOMES STANDARD 2 Specific, detailed learning outcomes for personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills, as well as disciplinary knowledge, consistent with program goals and validated by program stakeholders “Resolves” tensions among stakeholders Allows for the design of curriculum Basis of student evaluation Tells us what to teach

HOW CAN WE DO BETTER? Make better use of current assets and resources in: Curriculum Laboratories and workspaces Teaching and learning Assessment and evaluation Faculty competence Evolve to a model in which these resources are: Better employed to promote student learning, More efficiently developed by sharing resources

THE CDIO STANDARDS: EFFECTIVE PRACTICE FRAMWORK 1. CDIO as Context* Adoption of the principle that product and system lifecycle development and deployment are the context for engineering education 2. CDIO Syllabus Outcomes* Specific, detailed learning outcomes for personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills, consistent with program goals and validated by program stakeholders 3. Integrated Curriculum* A curriculum designed with mutually supporting disciplinary subjects, with an explicit plan to integrate personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills 4. Introduction to Engineering An introductory course that provides the framework for engineering practice in product and system building, and introduces essential personal and interpersonal skills 5. Design-Build Experiences* A curriculum that includes two or more design-build experiences, including one at a basic level and one at an advanced level 6. CDIO Workspaces Workspaces and laboratories that support and encourage hands-on learning of product and system building, disciplinary knowledge, and social learning 7. Integrated Learning Experiences* Integrated learning experiences that lead to the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge, as well as personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills 8. Active Learning Teaching and learning based on active experiential learning methods 9. Enhancement of Faculty CDIO Skills* Actions that enhance faculty competence in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills 10. Enhancement of Faculty Teaching Skills Actions that enhance faculty competence in providing integrated learning experiences, in using active experiential learning methods, and in assessing student learning 11. CDIO Skills Assessment* Assessment of student learning in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills, as well as in disciplinary knowledge 12. CDIO Program Evaluation A system that evaluates programs against these 12 standards, and provides feedback to students, faculty, and other stakeholders for the purposes of continuous improvement *essential

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: RE-TASK CURRICULUM Standard 3: Create mutually-supportive disciplinary courses integrating personal, interpersonal and product, process and system building skills

CURRICULAR ORGANIZATIONS Disciplines run vertically, Skills and projects run horizontally A strict disciplinary curriculum Organized around disciplines, with no explicit introductions or skills An apprenticeship model Based on projects, with no organized introductions of disciplines A Problem Based curriculum Organized around problems, but with disciplines interwoven An Integrated curriculum Organized around disciplines, but with skills and projects interwoven

SEQUENCING THE CURRICULUM THE BLACK-BOX EXERCISE OUTPUT: ”Final” learning outcomes, competence for the engineer INPUT: Previous knowledge and skills Course (black box) Input to following courses All courses or modules in the program are presented through their input and output only Enables efficient discussions Makes connections visible (as well as lack thereof) Serves as a basis for improving coordination between courses Courtesy of KTH - The Royal Institute of Technology. Refer to “Rethinking Engineering Education”, Box 4.2 on p. 97. If time permits, ask participants to sketch this exercise on an index card.

OVERLAY DESIGN For each Syllabus topic, need to develop an appropriate cognitive progression For example, for design: Design process Design by redesign Disciplinary design Design for implementation Multidisciplinary design Then identify where content will be taught

INTEGRATING SKILLS Call them engineering skills Problem solving, critical thinking, communicating and working in teams, and design are ways to express and apply technical knowledge. Therefore, these are engineering skills Provide opportunities to develop skills - not to “add more content” Learning is best achieved through practicing, reflecting, and giving and receiving feedback, rather than lecturing on the underlying psychological and social principles of these skills. Integrate learning - do not “append” skills modules Practicing personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills is the way to apply and express technical knowledge. Engineering skills are learned in the technical context. Terminology here is both important and difficult. Throughout the CDIO Standards, we use the phrase “personal, interpersonal, and product, process, and system building skills”, This is a more exact description of the learning outcomes we expect of students, but it is difficult to use this phrase in discussions. We, then, refer to these as “engineering skills”. Avoid using the terms “soft skills” or “generic skills”. The group of skills we integrated into the curriculum are intrinsic to engineering, and therefore, “engineering skills”.

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: RE-TASK LABS AND WORKSPACES Standard 5: Ensure that students participate in two or more design-implement experiences, including one at a basic level and one at and advanced level

CAPSTONE DESIGN-BUILD EXPERIENCES Provide authentic activities onto which more abstract learning can be mapped Provide the natural context in which to teach many CDIO syllabus skills (teamwork, etc.) Reinforce by application previously learned abstract knowledge, to deepen comprehension

SUSAN AMBROSE’S 7 PRINCIPLES OF LEARNING AND IMPACT ON TEACHING Students prior knowledge can help or hinder teaching Have to provide knowledge Have to build upon it and activate it Early projects create knowledge, later project activate How students organize knowledge influences how they learn and apply what they know Absent structure, knowledge decays quickly Experts’ structure is different from early learner Projects provide knowledge and structure Student’s motivation determines, directs and sustains what they do to learn Values and self efficacy create motivation Leads to behavior and eventually performance Projects motivate students

INTRODUCTORY COURSE To motivate students to study engineering To provide “prior knowledge” - system building and some early and essential skills (e.g., teamwork) To provide a set of personal experiences which will students to understand structure, and therefore better learn fundamentals Capstone Disciplines Intro Sciences

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: RE-TASK TEACHING AND LEARNING Standard 8: Teaching and learning based on active and experiential learning

ACTIVE AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING ACTIVE LEARNING Engages students directly in manipulating, applying, analyzing, and evaluating ideas Examples: Pair-and-Share Group discussions Debates Concept questions EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING Active learning in which students take on roles that simulate professional engineering practice Examples: Design-build projects Problem-based learning Simulations Case studies Dissections

CONCEPT QUESTIONS A black box is sitting over a hole in a table. It is isolated in every way from its surroundings with the exception of a very thin thread which is connected to a weight. You observe the weight slowly moving upwards towards the box. 1) This situation violates the First Law of Thermodynamics 2) Heat must be transferred down the thread 3) The First Law is satisfied, the energy in the box is increasing 4) The First Law is satisfied, the energy in the box is decreasing 5) The First Law is satisfied, the energy in the box is constant (Original problem due to Levenspiel, 1996)

Responses from sophomores PEER INSTRUCTION Responses from sophomores

EDUCATION AS AN INPUT-OUTPUT PROCESS noise noise X0 X2 X1 Reflecting, Integrating,Forgetting Dynamics Learning Dynamics curricular pedagogy Cy Cz noise z y goals assessment knowledge skills attitudes X = X1 - X0 = learning

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: RE-TASK ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION Standard 11: Assess student knowledge and skills in personal, interpersonal, and product, process and system building, as well as disciplinary knowledge

SELF-EFFICACY BASED ASSESSMENT Intention & Action Self-efficacy is the specific confidence that you have that you can execute a task With successful performance of tasks, self-efficacy increases and encourages the individual to take on tasks of greater difficulty, which increases self-efficacy further Performance and self are closely correlated Self-efficacy, which can be easily measured, is a good basis of pre/post test assessment We are developing a battery of self-efficacy based leaning assessment instruments across that spectrum of CDIO Syllabus skills Self-efficacy Performance Self-efficacy Performance Self-efficacy 34

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE: RE-TASK ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION Standard 12: Evaluate programs against these twelve standards, and provide continuous feedback to students, faculty, and other stakeholders for continuous improvement

CONTENT OF THE STANDARDS For each of the 12 Standards, there is: The Standard itself A Description, Rationale A set of six ranking rubrics, both in a generic template, and specialized set for each of the 12 Standards The Rubrics suggest the evidence that would backup the ranking A questionnaire that guides you though self evaluation and helps to identify how you would improve

GENERIC RUBRICS, AND SPECIALIZED RUBRICS FOR STANDARD 3 Specialized for Standard 3 – Integrated Curriculum 5 Evidence related to the standard is regularly reviewed and used to make improvements Stakeholders regularly review the integrated curriculum and make recommendations and adjustments as needed. 4 There is documented evidence of the full implementation and impact of the standard across program components and constituents There is evidence that personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills are addressed in all courses responsible for their implementation. 3 Implementation of the plan to address the standard is underway across the program components and constituents Personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills are integrated into one or more years in the curriculum. 2 There is a plan in place to address the standard A curriculum plan that integrates disciplinary learning, personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills is approved by appropriate groups. 1 There is an awareness of need to adopt the standard and a process is in place to address it The need to analyze the curriculum is recognized and initial mapping of disciplinary and skills learning outcomes is underway. There is no documented plan or activity related to the standard There is no integration of skills or mutually supporting disciplines in the program.

CONTENT OF THE STANDARDS For each of the 12 Standards, there is: The Standard itself A Description, Rationale A set of six ranking rubrics, both in a generic template, and specialized set for each of the 12 Standards The Rubrics suggest the evidence that would backup the ranking A questionnaire that guides you though self evaluation and helps to identify how you would improve Are you a CDIO Program?? Try rating yourself on this standard?

EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT Typical: Professor identifies need Gets idea Not familiar with literature or other practice Tries something It works Is replaced or gets tired Back to status quo Improved: University/Industry team identifies need Idea developed Informed by literature and other practice Parallel experimentation Good evaluation Recognition and reward Institutionalized reform Transformation requires: resources, coordination, expertise, mechanism for sharing, incentives

CDIO RESOURCES Visit www.cdio.org! Published papers and conference presentations Implementation support Support for change process Book: Rethinking Engineering Education - The CDIO Approach Local and regional workshops CDIO International Conference – MIT/Harvard June 2013, Barcelona 2014 Visit www.cdio.org!