Integrating CDIO Philosophy into Manufacturing Engineering Capstone Projects

Integrating CDIO Philosophy into Manufacturing Engineering Capstone Projects

A. Ryan, S. Gordon, D. Tanner, P. Williams (2017).  Integrating CDIO Philosophy into Manufacturing Engineering Capstone Projects. 10.

Groover defines automation as the technology by which a process or procedure is accomplished without human assistance (Groover 2008). Automation continues to filter through all levels of modern manufacturing and with the advent of Industry 4.0 will continue to push the boundaries of manufacturing forward. Items such as robotic control, integration of vision systems, RFID and tractability are paramount to successful manufacturing facilities worldwide. Because of this level of automation in modern manufacturing it is paramount that the manufacturing engineering graduate has the skills required by industry to design, develop and evaluate solutions to industrial automation issues. Strobel & Barneveld indicate that “PBL is significantly more effective than traditional instruction to train competent and skilled practitioners and to promote long-term retention of knowledge and skills” (Strobel & Barneveld 2009). With this in mind how automation has been integrated into the capstone projects of a Manufacturing Engineering programme will be presented in this paper. The integration and assessment/feedback mechanisms have been designed and constructed to reflect a CDIO learning approach, where students are assigned a typical industrial problem and asked to conceive solutions, evaluate the best alternative, optimise the design, implement and operate the solution. Students are given feedback on Design phase, Implementation and Operation of the project, with all stages contributing to the final grade in the module. Skills such as collaboration, proactive solving and subject specific knowledge are also assessed. This paper will outline both qualitative and quantitative feedback from the students involved, outlined the project being undertaken and detail the assessment and feedback mechanisms used. It is hoped that this paper will outline and illustrate how a CDIO approach with a specific focus on industrial problems encourages student engagement but more importantly prepares students for issues they will experience in their role as engineers in an industrial environment.

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference in Calgary, Canada, June 18-22 2017

Authors (New): 
Alan Ryan
Seamus Gordon
David Tanner
Peter Williams
Pages: 
10
Affiliations: 
University of Limerick, Ireland
Keywords: 
Capstone Project
Assessment
Feedback
CDIO Standard 5
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 8
Year: 
2017
Reference: 
Clynes, M. and Faftery, S. (2008), Feedback: An essential element of student learning in clinical practice. Nurse Education in Practice, Vol 8, pp. 405-411. : 
Seery, N., D. Canty, and P. Phelan, (2011). The validity and value of peer assessment using adaptive comparative judgement in design driven practical education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2011.: 
Dunlap, J. (2005), Problem-Based Learning and Self-Efficacy: How a Capstone Course Prepares Students for a Profession. Educational Technology Research and Development Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 65–85 : 
Gorham, J. and D.M. Millette (1997) A comparative analysis of teacher and student perceptions of sources of motivation and demotivation in college classes, Communication Education, 46:4, 245-261, : 
Groover, M. “Automation, Production Systems, and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing” Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2008.: 
Gulikers, J, Bastiaens, T. and Kirschner, P. (2004) A Five-Dimensional Framework for Authentic Assessment. Educational Technology Research and Development Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 67–86 : 
Hattie, J. and H. Tymperly, (1997), The Power of Feedback, Review of Educational Research March 2007, Vol. 77, No. 1, pp. 81–112 : 
MacLellan, E. (2001) Assessment for learning: the differing perceptions of tutors and students : 
Ovando, M. (1994),"Constructive Feedback A Key to Successful Teaching and Learning", International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 8 Iss 6 pp. 19 - 22Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(4), 307–318. : 
Strobel, J. and A. van Barneveld, “When is PBL More Effective? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses Comparing PBL to Conventional Classrooms.” The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 2009. 3(1): p. 44-58. : 
Weaver, M. (2006) Do students value feedback? Student perceptions of tutors’ written responses, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31:3, 379-394 : 
Go to top