Proceedings of the International CDIO Conference

Proceedings of the International CDIO Conference

2016 - Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Confernce, Turku, Finland, June 12-16 2016
2015 - Proceedings of the 11th International CDIO Conference, Chengdu, China, June 8-11 2015
2014 - Proceedings of the 10th International CDIO Conference, Barcelona, Spain, June 15-19 2014
2013 - 9th International CDIO Conference, MIT, USA 
2012 - 8th International CDIO Conference, Queensland University of Technology, Canada
2011 - 7th International CDIO Conference, DTU, Denmark
2010 - 6th International CDIO Conference, École Polytechnique de Montréal, Canada
2009 - 5th International CDIO Conference, Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore 
2008 - 4th International CDIO Conference, Hogeschool Gent, Belgium
2007 - 3rd International CDIO Conference, MIT, USA
2006 - 2nd International CDIO Conference & Collaborators Meeting
2005 - 1st International CDIO Conference & Collaborators Meeting 

CDIO proceedings – Aims and scope

Aims

The Proceedings of the International CDIO Conference (”CDIO Proceedings”) is an archive for high-quality papers on the theory and practice of engineering education, mainly based on the CDIO (Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate) approach. It is based on selected papers from the International CDIO Conference, and published annually, in electronic format only.

The CDIO Proceedings is the official proceeding of the CDIO Initiative. The CDIO Initiative is a non-governmental organization whose aims are;
•    to sustain an active global community, which develops, shares and implements best practice in engineering education;
•    to advance a coherent and common framework for engineering education which emphasizes a deep understanding of the engineering sciences applied in the context of conceiving, designing, implementing and operating real-world products, processes and systems; and
•    to promote engineering education in national and international communities.

The ultimate aim of the CDIO Proceedings is to contribute to the development and improvement of engineering education, with global application in mind. The CDIO Proceedings analyzes the design and effectiveness of novel curricular and pedagogical approaches, applied to engineering education, as well as strategies and processes for securing and enhancing educational quality. It aims to identify and formulate the knowledge, skills and attributes expected from current and future engineering graduates. It further explores the global trends that influence engineering practice and its consequences for engineering education, including sustainable development, digitalization, innovation, entrepreneurship and accreditation.

Scope

The CDIO proceedings welcomes research papers that advance the state of the art in CDIO‐based education as well as case study papers that describe and critically evaluate particular implementations of CDIO principles in practical settings.

All published papers in the CDIO proceedings have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening and anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees.

The criteria used in the reviewing process are:
•    Relevance of the paper and the ideas developed in relation to CDIO
•    Originality and innovative potential
•    Practical value of the results for engineering education
•    Quality of the research approach, scientific evidence and presentation

The possible topics include (but are not limited to):

•    Knowledge, skills and attributes of engineering graduates
•    Curriculum Design
•    Introduction to Engineering Courses
•    Design-based and Project-based learning
•    Innovation Competencies and Innovation Pedagogy
•    Integrating professional engineering skills
•    Engineering Leadership and Entrepreneurship
•    Internationalization and Globalization
•    Innovations in Teaching and Learning
•    Active, Integrated and Evidence-based Teaching and Learning
•    Learning Assessment
•    Learning environments for engineering education
•    Digital resources for engineering education
•    Faculty Development
•    CDIO Implementation Cases
•    Implementing change
•    Program Evaluation and Accreditation
•    Quality assurance and development
•    Educational leadership

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Authors: Contributions that require a full paper and that are expected to meet those standards by the referees. The contributions should meet the expectations for original scholarly publication, including adequate review of relevant literature, a hypothesis, results of simulations or measurements, analysis, and conclusions. They may address any area of CDIO, including scholarly examinations of CDIO implementation. The final submission must follow the formatting requirements detailed in the template on the conference website and must include a Creative Commons License to allow it to be included in the proceedings and/or archived on the CDIO web site.

Editors: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the review committee is reviewed for its intellectual content, without regard to  gender, race, religion, etc. of the authors. The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. The editors have a duty to act if any misconduct is suspected and to ensure the integrity of the academic record. The editors must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the consent of the author. They should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a published paper.

Reviewers: For each International CDIO Conference, a review committee is appointed. The reviewers are responsible for deciding which of the contributions that should be submitted due to the critera rules above. The reviewing process is single blind peer reviewed (reviewers are aware of the identity of the authors, but authors are unaware of the identity of reviewers. There are at least three or more reviewers for the total number of articles in each issue) and should be conducted objectively and all contributions must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Citation Rules

When citing a reference in the text, use Author/Date in parentheses (van Wezel et al., 2001) or directly refer to Angell & Straub (1999) in text for each reference.

Angell, I. O., & Straub, B. (1999). Rain-dancing with pseudo-science. Cognition, Technology & Work, 1(3), 179-196.

Crisfield, M. A. (1991-1997). Non-linear finite element analysis of solids and structures. Chichester ; New York: Wiley.

Eppinger S. D., & Salminen V. K. (2001). Patterns of product development interactions. Proceedings of ICED ’01, Glasgow, 283-290.

van Wezel, W., & Jorna, R. J. (2001). Paradoxes in planning. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 14(3), 269-286.

Electronic ISSN number: 2002-1593

Go to top
randomness