Board 136: Design-Thinking Abilities in Undergraduate Mechanical Engineering Students

Abstract Design experiences offer engineering students opportunities to improve their confidence and competency. However, lecture based teaching is often utilized in STEM education, pushing students to "know" the content rather than "understand" the content. When engineering students do not have a comprehensive understanding of core concepts and are not properly prepared in the classroom, they often are unprepared for the workforce and have lower confidence in their abilities. This research study aimed to understand the differences in the design thinking abilities of seniors versus freshmen and sophomore undergraduate mechanical engineering students. The underlying goal of this research study was to bridge the gap between the classroom and workforce by identifying what knowledge gaps students have that prevent them from being prepared for their career in engineering. Students who participated in this study were asked to complete a short online survey and participate in an online group design process. The survey utilized Likert style questions to gauge students' self-perceived design thinking ability, responses to these questions were analyzed with statistical methods as they were numerical. The group design process lasted no more than 3 hours per group and was conducted as well as recorded on Zoom. During the group design process, students were given a project description requiring them to design a mechanism that would move an object from a kitchen counter up onto a shelf, without damaging said object. The project description included a diagram and was intended to have a wide range of solutions, to allow for differing levels of technical knowledge that seniors, sophomores, and freshmen students often have. Students' recorded sessions were transcribed and later analyzed utilizing thematic coding. Survey and group design process results indicated that students' self-perceived design thinking ability aligned with their actual design thinking ability. This was apparent as all students, regardless of student classification, reported confidence in their abilities and completed designs containing some degree of complexity. Results from the group design process indicated that though students do not change their verbal communication ability as they progress through their degree, they do increase their written communication ability and technical knowledge. This was apparent in the higher degrees of design complexity that seniors utilized versus the lower degrees of complexity seen in designs from sophomores and freshmen. Conclusions regarding insight into the student design process provide engineering programs across the country with suggestions for better course and curriculum design, allowing for better student preparedness when entering the workforce.