READY TO ENGINEER C onceive- D esign- I mplement - O perate:

1. READY TO ENGINEER Conceive- Design- Implement - Operate: An Innovative Framework for Engineering Education Edward Crawley Michael Kelly The Cambridge-MIT Institute March 2005

2. “What is chiefly needed is skill rather than machinery” Wilbur Wright, 1902

3. CENTRAL QUESTIONS FOR ENGINEERING EDUCATION What knowledge, skills and attitudes should students possess as they graduate from university? How can we do better at ensuring that students learn these skills?

4. 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 THE NEED We have adopted CDIO as the engineering context of our education

5. 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 • To educate future researchers to understand the importance and strategic value of their work

6. 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 CDIO activities highly interwoven Rich with student design-build projects Featuring active and experiential learning Set in both classrooms and modern learning laboratories and workspaces Constantly improved through robust assessment and evaluation processes

7. PEDAGOGIC LOGIC • Most engineers are “concrete operational learners” Manipulate objects to understand abstractions • Students arrive at university lacking personal experience Lack foundation for “formal operational thought” • Must provide authentic activitiesto allow mapping of new knowledge - alternative is rote or “pattern matching” • Using CDIO as authentic activity achieves two goals -- Provides activities to learn fundamentals Provides education in the creation and operation of systems

8. CDIO • Is a set of common goals • Is a holistic integrated approach that draws on best practice • Is a set of resources that can be adapted and implemented for national, university and disciplinary programs • Is a co-development approach, based on engineering design • Is not prescriptive • Is a way to address the two major questions: • What are the knowledge skills and attitudes? • How can we do a better job?

9. 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 NEED TO GOALS 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

10. THE CDIO SYLLABUS 1.0 Technical Knowledge & Reasoning: Knowledge of underlying sciences Core engineering fundamental knowledge Advanced engineering fundamental knowledge 2.0 Personal and Professional Skills & Attributes Engineering reasoning and problem solving Experimentation and knowledge discovery System thinking Personal skills and attributes Professional skills and attributes 3.0 Interpersonal Skills: Teamwork & Communication Multi-disciplinary teamwork Communications Communication in a foreign language 4.0 Conceiving, Designing, Implementing & Operating Systems in the Enterprise & Societal Context External and societal context Enterprise and business context Conceiving and engineering systems Designing Implementing Operating

11. CDIO SYLLABUS • Syllabus at 3rd level • One or two more levels are detailed • Rational • Comprehensive • Peer reviewed • Basis for design and assessment

12. CDIO-ABET

13. CDIO-UK SPEC

14. CDIO-UK SPEC Could also map against “Output Standards” from EC “Accreditation of HE Programmes”

15. 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

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

17. HOW CAN WE DO BETTER? Re-task current assets and resources in: • Curriculum • Laboratories and workspaces • Teaching, learning, and assessment • Faculty competence Evolve to a model in which these resources are better employed to promote student learning

18. RE-TASK CURRICULUM • Create mutually-supportive disciplinary subjects integrating personal, professional and product/system building skills • Begin with an introductory course that provides a framework for engineering education

19. INTRODUCTORY COURSE • To motivate students to study engineering • To provide a set of personal experiences which will allow early fundamentals to be more deeply understood • To provide early exposure to system building • To teach some early and essential skills (e.g., teamwork) Capstone Disciplines Intro Sciences

20. RE-TASK LABS AND WORKSPACES • Use existing resources to re-task workspaces so that they support hands-on learning of product/system building, disciplinary knowledge, knowledge discovery, and social learning • Ensure that students participate in repeated design-build experiences

21. WORKSPACE USAGE MODES Reinforcing Disciplinary Knowledge Knowledge Discovery Learning Lab Community Building System Building Hangaren

22. DESIGN-BUILD RESOURCES • Multidisciplinary Design Projects (EE/MechE)development of standard design kits; new course materials on CD-ROM • Hardware-Software Co-Designmodern control and software; development of design kits and standard lab stations (spin-dude pictured)

23. RE-TASK TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT • Provide integrated experiences that support deep and conceptual learning of technical knowledge, as well as personal, interpersonal and product/system building skills • Encourage students to take a more active role in their own learning • Provide experiences for students that simulate their future roles as engineers • Assess student knowledge and skills in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building, as well as disciplinary knowledge

24. 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 ACTIVE AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

25. FORM OR ACQUIRE A “THEORY” KOLB’S LEARNING CYCLE APPLY THE THEORY SKILLS DEVELOPMENT CONCRETE EXPERIENCE Tutorials, Exercises, Lab classes, etc. ACTIVE EXPERIMENTATION REFLECTIVE OBSERVATION CDIO ABSTRACT GENERALIZATION TRADITIONAL APPROACH Lectures: Concepts, Models, Laws, etc.

26. SKILLS DEVELOPMENT PROVIDE CONCRETE EXPERIENCES FACILITATE REFLECTION INTRODUCE “THEORY” OF TOPIC PROVIDE APPLICATION OPPORTUNITIES “TRADITIONAL” APPROACH KOLBIAN STRING KOLBIAN STRING AS A TEACHING MODEL ADVANTAGES • DEEPER LEARNING OF FUNDAMENTALS. • MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR DEVELOPING SKILLS. • COVERS ALL LEARNING STYLES. • EMPHASIS ON ARTICULATING AND SOLVING PROBLEMS (APPROPRIATE FOR • ENGINEERS), RATHER THAN ANALYSIS (MORE APPROPRIATE FOR SCIENTISTS).

27. RE-TASK FACULTY COMPETENCE • Enhance faculty competence in personal, interpersonal and product/system building skills • Encourage faculty to enhance their competence in active and experiential teaching and learning, and in assessment

28. FACULTY COMPETENCE IN SKILLS Web-based Instructor Resource Modules

29. AN INVITATION • The CDIO Initiative is creating a model, a change process and library of education resources that facilitate easy adaptation and implementation of CDIO • Many of you are developing important resources and approaches that we could all learn from • Please consider working with us

30. U. Pretoria U. Auckland US Naval Academy Queen’s U., Belfast Denmark Tech. U. École Poly., Montréal U. Liverpool Singapore Poly. Hogeschool Gent Queen’s U. Ontario CDIO COLLABORATORS ORIGINAL COLLABORATORS MIT Linköping Chalmers KTH EUROPE REST OF WORLD N. AMERICA INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATORS

31. CDIO RESOURCES • www.cdio.org • Published papers and conference presentations • Implementation Kits (I-Kits) • Start-Up Guidance and Early Successes • Instructor Resources Modules (IRM’s) • CDIO Book (forthcoming) • UK/Ireland regional workshop in Liverpool - 5 April • Information on CDIO.org, or contact Perry Armstrong