Learning Nanotechnology, Business and Communication by Envisioning Future Products

Learning Nanotechnology, Business and Communication by Envisioning Future Products

M. Jokinen, S. Loppela-Rauha, M. Tamminen (2016).  Learning Nanotechnology, Business and Communication by Envisioning Future Products. 11.

Eight optional interdisciplinary study modules were offered for all second-year students of the Faculty of Business, ICT and Chemical Engineering at Turku University of Applied Sciences. The students enrolled for one, selecting it as their normative study module for 9 weeks. The study module “Nanotechnology - Future Prospects and Business Opportunities” (15 ECTS) was co-taught by 3 teachers with different areas of expertise (nanotechnology, business, and English language and communication). The aim was to broaden the views of students of different disciplines, to develop their interpersonal and communication skills, to emphasize the need of versatile skills when developing new products, and to orientate the students towards the entrepreneurial mindset. The study module was conducted in interdisciplinary student groups (10 groups with 5-7 members) in English. Students of both chemical engineering, information technology (regular and international), and business participated in the study module. The first week was used to produce wild ideas for products, applications, or services which are based on nanomaterials and could be reality in 2050. Food for thought was provided concerning nanotechnology, product development, brainstorming and group communication, and the students produced about 30 different ideas. They then selected the 10 most interesting topics, forming 10 groups, in which the rest of the study module was conducted. After this initial brainstorming, the activities concentrated on conceiving the future and potential new products. The groups continued the design of envisaged products and business ideas by collecting information while using business and innovation tools and practicing effective and convincing communication. The last 2-3 weeks were reserved for implementation, i.e., describing the envisaged product and business idea, and if possible, creating a descriptive prototype. Between the weekly take-off session on Monday and reporting on Friday, the groups worked independently, having been provided different tools and publications (e.g., articles and videos), complemented by their own information retrieval. Reading circles were held weekly prior to writing the week reports. In addition to regular written and oral reports (presentations, pitches, and group meetings online), the students also reported their progress weekly in individual diaries and group reports with reflection on learning. Additional information was gathered by collecting student feedback and by self-evaluation and group evaluation to support both assessment and analysis of learning outcome. The group work resulted in visions for 10 future nanomaterial-based products with analyzed customer profiles and business models, presented in a poster exhibition at the end of the study module. Many product visions combined electronics, software and biotechnology or chemistry, and one of the common topics was clean energy. Many groups first had difficulties with collaboration, but most overcame it fast. The feedback confirmed that most of the aims were achieved. The students emphasized that their communication and collaboration skills improved, but they also reported learning about business, nanotechnology, and social media and innovation tools. The word “interesting” (and corresponding) was a common indicator of a change in mindset towards interdisciplinary team work.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland, June 12-16 2016

Authors (New): 
Mika Jokinen
Sari Loppela-Rauha
Monica Tamminen
Pages: 
11
Affiliations: 
Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland
Keywords: 
Innovation process
design-implement
self-steering
group work
Integrated Learning
entrepreneurial mindset
Year: 
2016
Reference: 
Ament, J. R., & Pérez Vidal, C. (2015). Linguistic outcomes of English medium instruction programmes in higher education: A study on economics undergraduates at a Catalan university. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(1), 47-67.: 
Beránek, L. (2015). The Attitude of the College Students to Entrepreneurial Skills Development in the Subject E-commerce. Informatics in Education, 14(1), 1–12.: 
Carlson, C. J & Wilmot, W. W. (2006). Innovation. The five Disciplines for Creating What Customers Want. New York. Random House Inc.: 
CDIO. (2014a). CDIO Standards 2.0 Retrieved 26.1.2015, from http://cdio.org/implementingcdio/standards/12-cdio-standards.: 
van Dijk, G., Raijmakers, B. & Kelly, L. (2010), What are the tools of service design?. In M. Stickdorn & J. Schneider (eds.), This is Service Design Thinking (pp. 139-217). Amsterdam. BIS Publishers.: 
Gray, D., Brown, S. & Macanufo, J. (2010). Gamestorming. Sebastopol CA. O'Reilly Media Inc.: 
Haynie, J.M., Shepherd, D., Mosakowski, E. & Earley, P.C. (2010) A situated metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 217-229.: 
Jansen, S., van de Zande, T., Brinkkemper, S., Stam, E. & Varma, V. (2015) How education, stimulation, and incubation encourage student entrepreneurship: Observations from MIT, IIIT, and Utrecht University, The International Journal of Management Education, 13, 170-181.: 
Klasén, Ida (2011). Communication in engineering education – A new way of looking at integrated learning activities and forms of communication. Proceedings of the 7th International CDIO Conference, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, June 20 - 23, 2011.: 
Lehto, A., Kairisto-Mertanen, L. & Penttilä T. (eds.) (2011). Towards innovation pedagogy – A new approach to teaching and learning for universities of applied sciences. Tampere: Tampereen yliopistopaino-Juvenes Print Oy.: 
Li, X., Zhou, M., Li, F. & Ma, C. (2014) Construction the talent cultivation mode and optimizing the knowledge structure for environmental protection equipment specialty. The proceedings of ICCSE 2014, 907-910.: 
Mendelow, A. (1991) Stekeholder Mapping. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Information Systems. Cambridge, MA.: 
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press.: 
Osterwalder, A. & Pigneur, Y. (2010) Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. New Jersey. Wiley.: 
Penttilä T., Kontio, J. (2014). Integrating innovation pedagogy and CDIO (Conceive – Design — Implement — Operate) approach - towards shared expressions in engineering education. Proceedings of ICEE/ICIT 2014 Conference, 434-440.: 
Savage, N., Birch, R. & Noussi, E. (2011) Motivation of engineering students in higher education. Engineering Education, 6, 39-46.: 
Wheadon, J.D. & Duval-Couetil, N. (2014) Business Plan Development Activities as a Pedagogical Tool in Entrepreneurship Education. The Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 31-48.: 
Wheelwright, S.C. & Clark, K.B. (1992). Revolutionizing Product Development – Quantum Leaps in Speed, Efficiency, and Quality. New York. The Free Press.: 
Yau, Jessy J.C. & Cheah, Sin-Moh (2011). Curriculum integration: Twinning of a core chemical engineering module with a teamwork & communication module. Proceedings of the 7th International CDIO Conference, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, June 20 - 23, 2011.: 
Go to top