Concept for Purposive and Motivational Teaching and Learning in Engineering Courses

7/28/2019 Concept for Purposive and Motivational Teaching and Learning in Engineering Courses

1/6

Concepts for Purposive and MotivationalTeaching and Learning in Engineering

Design Courses*

BERND BENDER

M.E. Department/Engineering Design and Methodology, Technical University of Berlin, Strasse des 17

Juni 135, D-10623, Berlin, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]

New technologies demand new qualifications and new teaching concepts. Sole reliance on intuitionand previous experience is insufficient. The Technical University of Berlin uses a systematicapproach to learning/teaching which adopts a holistic approach to problem solving embracing thenew technologies. This ensures that the way of teaching changes as much as the way of learning.

INTRODUCTION

DUE TO THE application of new technologies,modifications of tasks and organizational struc-tures, more complex customer requirements oftechnical products and services as well as increas-ing international dependency of economies, designengineers are confronted with new qualificationdemands. The classical technical-scientific quali-fication has to be extended by transdisciplinaryknowledge and skills, which enable creative

problem solutions, cooperative social behaviorwith leadership abilities and communicationcompetencies as well as a holistic view of technicalproblems [7].

To face these new qualificational demands, asystematic approach to learning/teaching conceptscomprising all relevant dimensions of teaching andlearning has to be worked out to ensure aconscious and deliberate process of teaching andlearning that can be both influential and capable ofcommunication.

THE BACKGROUND OF ENGINEERING

DESIGN EDUCATION IN GERMANY

Looking at the tradition and development ofengineering design education in Germany, one firsthas to realize the double-tracked structure ofGermany's higher education sector and in conse-quence the double-tracked tradition of mechanicalengineering programs. Within the 3-year programsat Fachhochschulenwhich can be translatedbest as `colleges of applied sciences'there is astrong focus on a practice-oriented readiness forjob and profession. In contrast the mechanical

engineering education within a 5-year universityprogram is aiming at a scientific and theory-basedqualification, leading to much more generalprofessional abilities. But even at university,where the curriculum has a strong emphasis onfundamental knowledges in mathematics and basicsciences, the main study shows a distinct orien-tation towards practice and applied engineeringsubjects.

Considering the general conviction that design isbased probably much more on problem solving

experiences and a `feeling' for the adequate reduc-tion of complexity than on exact scientific methodsand strategies, engineering design courses repre-sent an exception within the strong deductivestructure of mechanical engineering curricula.Their structure and tradition is inductive, leadingfrom concrete examples to abstract concepts, fromreal products to models, strategies and processes ofgeneral applicability.

This has to be seen in contrast to the traditionand development in the Anglo-Saxon contextwhere, for example in the US as a consequenceof the Grinter report [3], since the 1950s theimportance of applied engineering subjects

declined against the proportion of basic andengineering sciences, although that was only oneof the total of 10 recommendations of the Grintercommittee. Actually the Grinter report propagatedan adequate balance of humanities and socialsciences, mathematics and basic sciences, engi-neering science, engineering specialty subjects andelectives. Germany (and most of continentalEurope) has not gone through this extremescientification of engineering education that theUS experienced by misinterpreting the GrinterReport. As a result, design methodology like thatestablished by Pahl and Beitz [6] or documented

in [8] is considered as being very theoretical inGermany's engineering community. However in* Accepted 15 July 2000.

336

Int. J. Engng Ed. Vol. 17, Nos. 4 and 5, pp. 336341, 2001 0949-149X/91 $3.00+0.00Printed in Great Britain. # 2001 TEMPUS Publications.


2/6

the Anglo-Saxon context it is considered as beingvery applied.

THE INTENTIONAL DIMENSION OFENGINEERING DESIGN COURSES

Purposive teaching and learning means that firstof all one has to define the pursued teachingobjectives. As one example Beitz and Helbig ques-tioned German industry and university expertsabout deficiencies of the past engineering design

education and about future demands in this sector[2].

One outcome is a qualification schemeconsisting of the `five pillars' subject-specific,methods, systems, personal/social and practicecompetencies, which can be regarded as a newholistic set of teaching objectives for engineeringhigher education (Fig. 2).

An inquiry among engineering design teachers at

TU Berlin executed by the author refined thisglobal set to a level manageable for planningengineering design courses and exercises in thebasic study. As one result, each of the fourglobal teaching objectives has been differentiatedto a profile of competencies to be imparted to thestudents [1].

LEARNING/TEACHING CONCEPTS FORENGINEERING DESIGN COURSES

Usually in concepts for courses and exercises themain attention is directed to the choice of teachingtopics to be treated (e.g. shafts, clutches, gear-boxes). This causes a natural emphasis on classicalsubject-specific competencies without explicit andconscious treatment of transdisciplinary knowledgeand skills. A modern learning/teaching concepthas to combine the four dimensions: teachingobjectives, teaching topics, teaching methods and

Fig. 1. Engineering design curriculum within mechanical engineering programs at German universities (by way of example ofTU Berlin).

Fig. 2. The `five pillars' of qualificationglobal teaching objectives for engineering design education [2, p. 55].

Concepts for Purposive and Motivational Teaching and Learning 337


3/6

teaching media, in consideration of didacticalcognitions.

A didactical model suitable for engineering

design courses is represented by `Kolb's cycleof experiential learning', which differentiates thefour phases concrete experience, reflective obser-vation, abstract conceptualization and activeexperimentation [4], cit. after [5] (Fig. 4).

In order to make sure that this cycle will be closedfor each teaching objective, teaching methods andmedia have to meet appropriate student work-forms. One can visualize the correlation of the

four learning/teaching dimensions with the fourdesign phases: planning and clarifying the task,conceptual design, embodiment design and detail

design [6, p. 65] and appropriate student work-forms in a portfolio that gives good advice for theconceptualization of engineering design courses [1](Fig. 5).

Teaching objectives, teaching topics, studentworkforms and coordinated forms of teachingmethods and media can be combined in such away that enables a step-by-step integration oftransdisciplinary teaching objectives.

Fig. 3. Profiles of competencies for engineering design courses (basic study) [1].

Fig. 4. `Kolb's cycle of experiential learning' [4] cit. after [5, p. 32].

B. Bender338


4/6

MOTIVATION AND THE ROLE OF THETEACHER

Motivation is a key to keeping the processof learning like that described in `Kolb's cycleof experiential learning' active. To increase thestudents' self-motivation to deal with teachingtopics on their own and with enthusiasm, teachershave to grow into a new role being not so much aclassical lecturer but more a trainer and partner ofthe students by coaching their approach to theteaching topics and moderating or modulating theprocess of learning, Fig. 6.

There has to be an appropriate application of

teaching methods and media to balance in-struction, feedback, observation and moderationon one hand and a continuing modification of theteaching topics on the other hand to fulfil this newrole successfully.

At TU Berlin, in recent years efforts like thatshown in Fig. 6 were undertaken to achieve thequalification targets mentioned. The result is alearning/teaching concept tested in practice,which develops the students' transdisciplinaryknowledge and skills in the basic study in threeterms. The student workforms separate work,oral presentation (individual or in teams) andmethodically supervised teamwork are applied to

Fig. 5. Correlation of learning/teaching dimensions with design phases and student workforms [1].

Fig. 6. Teachers' role in modern learning/teaching concepts.



5/6

the classical treatment of subject-specific topicsduring common lecture-room exercises. Thatcauses an improvement of new competencies tobe applied and deepened in the final fourth term inthe context of a teamwork and problem-basedstudy project which is described in [5].

For further training in the main study this

learning/teaching concept finds its consequenttermination in an engineering design projectseminar containing a two-days project manage-ment training for the students, which has beensuccessfully tested in the last years.

HOW DO WE LEARN NEW TEACHING?

A rarely considered problem is that introducingthe new role described above causes an enlarge-ment (and enrichment) of the teachers' tasks. Allof this points to the fact that their competenciesalso are to be extended. Traditions and experi-ences are important cornerstones of successfulteaching but permanent reflection on objectives,topics, methods and media, the adaptability tocommunication, innovations and life-long learn-ing are challenges to be faced not only by thestudents.

As we know by experience, it is more difficult tochange the way of teaching than to change the wayof learning because personal convictions andlong-term teaching traditions show a tendency tobe carried on without being questioned. The bestway to achieve sustainable changes in this field isto establish a new culture of teaching which is at

the same time a culture of life-long learning of theteachers and the faculty.

Today in Germany there is not yet a convincingsolution for this problem but at the Institute ofEngineering Design at TU Berlin we have success-fully tested a mix of approaches to achieve a

change of culture like that mentioned abovewithin the last few years.

To prepare all teachers for their job in coachingstudent teams, instead of holding one-way-lectures`at' them, we established two days training work-shops containing the topics project management,presentation, communication and moderation.

There is also a weekly teachers' conference withall teachers being involved in a one-term coursetaking part to discuss actual problems and tosynchronize strategies and concepts for teamcoaching in running study projects. For thefuture we also plan to regularly take part inexternal trainings and workshops related to thesetopics.

After a few years of practice in this field we nowcan realize a step-by-step change of the teachingculture really can be achieved. But, however, thebiggest problem remaining is the question ofsustainability of these cultural changes due to thelack of continuity in human resources caused bythe regular 5-year rotation of the academic staff inGermany.

CONCLUSION

Experienced teachers may well master thefour dimensions of teaching, learning, choiceof topics and teaching methods/media all byintuition. Nevertheless for facing new qualifica-tional demands, university education shouldbeware of sole reliance on intuition and prior

experience. The fact remains that new qualifica-tions do not only require new concepts. With-out a new teaching culture and a new type ofteacher we will not get new students with newcompetencies coping with the challenges of the21st century.

REFERENCES

1. Bernd Bender and Wolfgang Beitz, New learning/teaching concepts in engineering design educa-tionexperiences made at TU Berlin, Proc. Int. Conf. Engineering Design ICED '99, Vol 2,p. 88188, Munich (1999).

2. Wolfgang Beitz and Dirk Helbig, Neue Wege zur ProduktentwicklungBerufsfahigkeit und

Weiterbildung, Schriftenreihe Konstruktionstechnik, Bd. 37, TU Berlin 1997 (in German).3. L. E. Grinter (chairman) Report on Evaluation of Engineering Education, J. Eng. Educ., Sept 1955,

p. 2560. (URL: http://www.asee.org/pubs/assets/multimedia/grinter.pdf)4. D. A. Kolb, Experiential LearningExperience as the Source of Learning and Development,

Prentice-Hall, New Jersey (1984).5. Jo rg Longmu, Projektarbeit in der KonstruktionsausbildungOrganisation und Be-wertung,

VDI-Fortschrittsberichte, Reihe 1, no. 302, Du sseldorf 1998 (in German).6. Gerhard Pahl and Wolfgang Beitz, Engineering DesignA Systematic Approach, 2nd rev. ed, Berlin

Heidelberg New York (1996).7. Zum Wandel des Ingenieurberufsbildes, Memorandum des VDI, Verein Deutscher Ingenieure,

Du sseldorf 1997 (in German).8. VDI Design Handbook 2221: Systematic Approach to the Design of Technical Systems and Products

(translation of 1986 German edition), Verein Deutscher Ingenieure, Du sseldorf 1987

B. Bender340


6/6

Bernd Bender acquired his degree of Dipl.-Ing./M.Sc. in Transport/Aerospace Engineeringfrom the Technical University of Berlin in 1993. He was head of the administration ofstudies office at the Process Technology, Environmental Technology and MaterialsSciences department at the Technical University of Berlin, responsible for coordination,reorganization and innovations within four Dipl.-Ing./M.Sc. programs. Since 1997 he hasbeen academic staff member/lecturer at the Institute for Machine Design/EngineeringDesign at the Technical University of Berlin, teaching undergraduate Engineering Designclasses. His special research interests are in qualificational and educational purposes of

engineering design as well as in psychological aspects of the application of designmethodology in early phases of the design process.


Concept for Purposive and Motivational Teaching and Learning in Engineering Courses

Documents

Transcript of Concept for Purposive and Motivational Teaching and Learning in Engineering Courses