1. Scenario-Based Learning: Helping Students See Relevance
Keywords: engineering design & analysis, professional preparation of engineers, active learning, case studies, context
Scenario-Based Learning: Helping Students See Relevance
Samantha R. Brunhaver, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Polytechnic School
Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering
Arizona State University

2. Why?
Problem:
Core engineering courses are traditionally slow to adopt project-based learning and other innovative pedagogies
These courses typically provide a poor approximation of engineering practice, which can affect students’ persistence and engagement
Educational Objectives:
By analyzing real-life engineering scenarios, students can understand how the knowledge and skills gained in their courses apply to actual engineering decisions
This approach can also reinforce other learning objectives key to the preparation of engineers and expose students to different engineering pathways

3. of a Camera Shutter Mechanism
When?
Personal History with the Innovation:
Course
Scenario
Short Description
ENGR 14: Intro to Solid Mechanics
(Fall 2012, Stanford, with Drs. Sheri Sheppard & Mark Schar)
Design and Analysis
of a Skateboard
Use the concepts of forces and stresses to design a skateboard. Choose materials and a supplier that will meet the listed requirements.
EGR 201: Use-Inspired Design I
(Fall 2014, Arizona State, with Drs. Adam Carberry, Nadia Kellam, & Thomas Sugar)
of a Camera Shutter Mechanism
Using numerical methods, determine the optimal spring stiffness for the shutter mechanism on a disposable camera. Justify your choice using the listed requirements.
EGR 217: Engineering Mechanics Fundamentals
(Spring 2015, Arizona State)
of a Truss Bridge
Use FEA to design a truss bridge that meets the listed requirements (including cost and weight).
EGR 572: Quantitative Methods for Engineering Education Research
(Fall 2016, Arizona State, with
Dr. Jennifer Bekki)
Analysis of
Concept Inventory
(SCI) Data
(among many others)
Conduct a statistical analysis to determine whether an intervention to improve students’ performance on the CI was successful. Would you recommend repeating it?
What is the developmental history of your innovation?

4. Where? Institutional Partners:
Adopted from solid mechanics course taught as a Teaching Assistant in graduate school at Stanford
Current partners include Stanford, ASU, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and University of California-Merced
Curricular Unit:
Began as a hybrid case study-lab assignment
Currently forms the basis of an entire graduate course
Used with both undergraduate and graduate students
Could be implemented as a single class or a full course

5. What? Learning Activities/Materials:
Students provided with 2-4 page narrative describing the problem, supplemented by class lectures and discussion
Each problem requires students to balance constraints, analyze real data, and compare multiple solution paths
Undergrads work in teams on worksheets designed to scaffold their progress
Graduate students design their own analyses and draw their own conclusions to answer an open-ended question
Successes:
Overall feedback from students has been positive
Students report enjoying the experience of role-playing the engineer and hands-on simulation (i.e., Kolb’s learning by doing, 1981)
Assignments also helpful in assessing learning
Instructor can determine whether students can actually solve a problem, rather than just apply equations (i.e., Bloom’s Taxonomy, 1956)

6. Prognosis? Documenting Impact: Student course evaluations
Journal articles (IJEE) & conference papers (ASEE, REES)
Scaling Up (partners wanted):
Interested in scaling to other core engineering courses
Interested in scaling to other universities
Current Challenges (advice appreciated):
Student resistance to the “non-technical” aspects (e.g., balancing constraints, making decisions)
Faculty resistance to the time necessary to develop each scenario (teaching materials, notes, etc.)