Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) requires that Universities teach engineering students to function productively as part of a multidisciplinary team.However, reliable strategies for teaching teamwork are notably absent from the engineering education literature.Existing approaches emphasize cognitive complementarity ensuring representation of appropriate knowledge experts and overcoming affective obstacles such as personality conflicts and problems in interpersonal communication.Comparatively less research has examined conative approaches, in which students explore the relation between knowledge of instinctive behavioral strengths and team productivity.This study reports the experiences of an instructional team at Arizona State University that introduced a new module on conation in a mandatory freshman engineering education course, FSE 100 Introduction to Engineering.All students completed an on-line assessment of their instinctive behavioral strengths called the Kolbe A TM .During a three-hour lab period, the assessment results were interpreted with the class and teams were formed to test different combinations of instinctive strengths: 1) students with similar strengths (inertia), 2) students with different strengths (conflict) and 3) students with a complementary diversity of strengths (synergy).These teams were assigned an interim project requiring them to work together and observed peer behavior.Then, the instructor facilitated discussion of why teams with combinations of certain strengths succeed and others don't.Teams for a final project (design, construction, and race of solar powered cars) were formed based upon an understanding of conative strengths and team synergy gained from the interim project.Results from peer evaluations of teamwork and teammate satisfaction on the solar car project show that students were highly satisfied with the conative approach.
Adams et al. (Thu,) studied this question.