Multidisciplinary projects as learning tool for sustainable approaches

1. Multidisciplinary projects as learning tool for sustainable approaches Experience and some critical assessment L.M.F. Dejong

2. Multidisciplinary projects • Students in any (technical) discipline have to learn: • To understand each other’s language • To start thinking in systems • To dedicate their specialism to a system approach

3. Sustainable development • The “CIRRUS” approach: • an integrated focus on sustainability in all the study programmes, by integrating • Knowledge • Insight • Competences In different subjects, courses and projects. Main aspects, creating • an awareness of sustainability • A vision on sustainability • Learning a systems approach

4. Multidisciplinary projects • Objectives multidisciplinay projects program: • To gain experience • To develop an integrated course • To develop a protocol for MD-projects • Important problem definition • Students from various disciplines  truly cooperate ? • MD-collaboration  sustainable solutions?

5. Practical approach • Directly at the start of CIRRUS project, the “ENO” MD-project was carried out • The results of that “ENO” MD-project formed input for a protocol • The protocol was used in three further projects.

6. Protocol • Intake phase • Assessment project subject • Allocation people & resources + acceptance • Execution phase • Orientation / problem definition • Analysis / design • Implementation • Evaluation / finalising

7. Projects / learning experience • “Eno” project • To assess the need of information on sustainable energy options • Major experiences MD-project • Duration • Level participants equal • Amount of time available • Cohesion of the group (Belbin / Tuckman) • Interactivity project <=> project group • Relation external party

8. Projects / learning experience • “De Pettena” project • To improve the energy economy of a home for the elderly • Project result: very successful • Major experiences MD-project: • Protocol worked well. • Coaching of teambuilding, in particular cooperation of students, is too hard for supervisors in the field.

11. Projects / learning experience • “De Pettena” project • To improve the energy economy of a home for the elderly • Project result: very successful • Major experiences MD-project: • Protocol worked well. • Coaching of teambuilding, in particular cooperation of students, is too hard for supervisors in the field.

12. Projects / learning experience • “Xerox” project • Design a process to reuse parts of a new generation copiers • Partly successful • Major experiences MD-project • The willingness and ability to collaborate. • The level of the students • Large projects, hard to demarcate in time

13. Observations, conclusions and recommendations (1) • Student • Recruitment of students is hard • “Equivalence” requires special attention • Groupforming process needs attention • Organisation • Bringing in line of department programmes remains a problem

14. Observations, conclusions and recommendations (2) • External parties • Too high hopes • Impact of supervision MD projects too much • Inexpierence of external supervisors with tackling problems in teamwork • Protocol • Tuning with regard to the planning of the study programmes • Teambuilding in house • Proposals • MD-projects planned in earlier stage of the studies

15. Summary • Pro • MD-projects enriches the student’s learning process • Companies were quite taken with such projects • Students must become better in their own field • Neutral • Teambuilding within the Faculty • Contra • Students are tired of being leveled down • The programming of the different studies differs too much • Acquisition of external MD assignments is hard.