Complex Solutions for Complex Problems?: Exploring the Effects of Task Complexity on Student Use of Design for Additive Manufacturing and Creativity

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Task Complexity ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Problem Statement ◽  
Design Task ◽  
Complex Design ◽  
Complex Solutions ◽  
Future Work

Abstract The integration of additive manufacturing (AM) processes in many industries has led to the need for AM education and training, particularly on design for AM (DfAM). To meet this growing need, several academic institutions have implemented educational interventions, especially project- and problem-based, for AM education; however, limited research has explored how the choice of the problem statement influences the design outcomes of a task-based AM/DfAM intervention. This research explores this gap in the literature through an experimental study with 222 undergraduate engineering students. Specifically, the study compared the effects of restrictive and dual (restrictive and opportunistic) DfAM education, when introduced through either a simple or complex design task. The effects of the intervention were measured through (1) changes in student DfAM self-efficacy, (2) student self-reported emphasis on DfAM, and (3) the creativity of student AM designs. The results show that the complexity of the design task has a significant effect on the participants’ self-efficacy with, and self-reported emphasis on, certain DfAM concepts. The results also show that the complex design task results in participants generating ideas with greater median uniqueness compared to the simple design task. These findings highlight the importance of the chosen problem statement on the outcomes of a DfAM educational intervention, and future work is also discussed.

Complex Solutions for Complex Problems? Exploring the Role of Design Task Choice on Learning, Design for Additive Manufacturing Use, and Creativity

2019 ◽  
Vol 142 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Problem Statement ◽  
Design Task ◽  
Complex Solutions ◽  
Future Work ◽  
Am Processes

Abstract The integration of additive manufacturing (AM) processes in many industries has led to the need for AM education and training, particularly on design for AM (DfAM). To meet this growing need, several academic institutions have implemented educational interventions, especially project- and problem-based, for AM education; however, limited research has explored how the choice of the problem statement influences the design outcomes of a task-based AM/DfAM intervention. This research explores this gap in the literature through an experimental study with 175 undergraduate engineering students. Specifically, the study compared the effects of restrictive and dual (restrictive and opportunistic) DfAM education, when introduced through design tasks that differed in the explicit use of design objectives and functional and manufacturing constraints in defining them. The effects of the intervention were measured through (1) changes in participant DfAM self-efficacy, (2) participants' self-reported emphasis on DfAM, and (3) the creativity of participants' design outcomes. The results show that the choice of the design task has a significant effect on the participants' self-efficacy with, and their self-reported emphasis on, certain DfAM concepts. The results also show that the design task containing explicit constraints and objectives results in participants generating ideas with greater uniqueness compared with the design task with fewer explicit constraints and objectives. These findings highlight the importance of the chosen problem statement on the outcomes of a DfAM educational intervention, and future work is also discussed.

But Will It Build? Assessing Student Engineering Designers’ Use of Design for Additive Manufacturing Considerations in Design Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (9) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Contact Area ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Support Material ◽  
Design Task ◽  
Process Characteristics ◽  
Build Time ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Part Complexity

Abstract Additive manufacturing (AM) enables engineers to improve the functionality and performance of their designs by adding complexity at little to no additional cost. However, AM processes also exhibit certain unique limitations, such as the presence of support material. These limitations must be accounted for to ensure that designs can be manufactured feasibly and cost-effectively. Given these unique process characteristics, it is important for an AM-trained workforce to be able to incorporate both opportunistic and restrictive design for AM (DfAM) considerations into the design process. While AM/DfAM educational interventions have been discussed in the literature, few studies have objectively assessed the integration of DfAM in student engineering designers’ design outcomes. Furthermore, limited research has explored how the use of DfAM affects the students’ AM designs’ achievement of design task objectives. This research explores this gap in literature through an experimental study with 301 undergraduate students. Specifically, participants were exposed to either restrictive DfAM or dual DfAM (both opportunistic and restrictive) and then asked to participate in a design challenge. The participants’ final designs were evaluated for (1) build time and build material (2) the use of the various DfAM concepts, and (3) the features used to manifest these DfAM concepts. The results show that the use of certain DfAM considerations, such as part complexity, number of parts, support material mass, and build plate contact area (corresponding to warping tendency), correlated with the build material and build time of the AM designs—minimizing both of which were objectives of the design task. The results also show that introducing participants to opportunistic DfAM leads to the generation of designs with higher part complexity and lower build plate contact area but a greater presence of inaccessible support material.

The Earlier the Better? Investigating the Importance of Timing on Effectiveness of Design for Additive Manufacturing Education

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Layer By Layer ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Layer Deposition ◽  
Subtractive Manufacturing ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Design Ideas ◽  
Am Processes

Additive Manufacturing (AM) is a novel process that enables the manufacturing of complex geometries through layer-by-layer deposition of material. AM processes provide a stark contrast to traditional, subtractive manufacturing processes, which has resulted in the emergence of design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) to capitalize on AM’s capabilities. In order to support the increasing use of AM in engineering, it is important to shift from the traditional design for manufacturing and assembly mindset, towards integrating DfAM. To facilitate this, DfAM must be included in the engineering design curriculum in a manner that has the highest impact. While previous research has systematically organized DfAM concepts into process capability-based (opportunistic) and limitation-based (restrictive) considerations, limited research has been conducted on the impact of teaching DfAM on the student’s design process. This study investigates this interaction by comparing two DfAM educational interventions conducted at different points in the academic semester. The two versions are compared by evaluating the students’ perceived utility, change in self-efficacy, and the use of DfAM concepts in design. The results show that introducing DfAM early in the semester when students have little previous experience in AM resulted in the largest gains in students perceiving utility in learning about DfAM concepts and DfAM self-efficacy gains. Further, we see that this increase relates to greater application of opportunistic DfAM concepts in student design ideas in a DfAM challenge. However, no difference was seen in the application of restrictive DfAM concepts between the two interventions. These results can be used to guide the design and implementation of DfAM education.

Break It Down: Comparing the Effects of Lecture- and Module-Style Design for Additive Manufacturing Educational Interventions on Students’ Learning and Creativity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Educational Intervention ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Evaluation Metrics ◽  
Single Session ◽  
Information Retention ◽  
Design Creativity ◽  
Am Processes ◽  
Design For Am

Abstract Given the growing presence of additive manufacturing (AM) processes in engineering design and manufacturing, there has emerged an increased interest in introducing AM and design for AM (DfAM) educational interventions in engineering education. Several researchers have proposed AM and DfAM educational interventions; however, some argue that these efforts might not be sufficient to develop higher-level skills among engineers (e.g., identifying design opportunities that leverage AM capabilities). Prior work has shown that longer, distributed educational interventions are more effective in encouraging learning and information retention; however, these interventions could also be time-consuming and expensive to implement. Therefore, there is a need to test the effectiveness of longer, distributed DfAM educational interventions compared to shorter, lecture-style interventions. Our aim in this research is to explore this research gap through an experimental study. Specifically, we compared two variations of a DfAM educational intervention: (1) a module-style intervention spread over two sessions with the introduction of DfAM evaluation metrics, and (2) a lecture-style intervention completed in a single session with no evaluation metrics introduced. From our results, we see that students who received the module-style intervention reported a greater increase in their DfAM self-efficacy. Additionally, students who received the module-style intervention reported having given a greater emphasis on part consolidation and feature size. Finally, we observe that the structure of the educational intervention did not influence the creativity of ideas generated by the participants. These findings highlight the utility of module-style DfAM educational interventions towards increasing DfAM self-efficacy, but not necessarily design creativity. Moreover, these findings highlight the need to formulate educational interventions that are effective and efficient.

Fresh in My Mind! Investigating the Effects of the Order of Presenting Opportunistic and Restrictive Design for Additive Manufacturing Content on Creativity

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Manufacturing Processes ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Undergraduate Engineering ◽  
Traditional Manufacturing ◽  
Order Of Presentation ◽  
Am Processes ◽  
Design For Am

Abstract Additive manufacturing (AM) processes present designers with creative freedoms beyond the capabilities of traditional manufacturing processes. However, to successfully leverage AM, designers must balance their creativity against the limitations inherent in these processes to ensure the feasibility of their designs. This feasible adoption of AM can be achieved if designers learn about and apply opportunistic and restrictive design for AM (DfAM) techniques at appropriate stages of the design process. Researchers have demonstrated the effect of the order of presentation of information on the learning and retrieval of said information; however, there is a need to explore this effect within DfAM education. In this paper, we explore this gap through an experimental study involving 195 undergraduate engineering students. Specifically, we compare two variations in DfAM education: (1) opportunistic DfAM followed by restrictive DfAM, and (2) restrictive DfAM followed by opportunistic DfAM, against only opportunistic DFAM and only restrictive DfAM training. These variations are compared through (1) differences in participants’ DfAM self-efficacy, (2) their self-reported DfAM use, and (3) the creativity of their design outcomes. From the results, we see that only students trained in opportunistic DfAM, with or without restrictive DfAM, present a significant increase in their opportunistic DfAM self-efficacy. However, all students trained in DfAM — opportunistic, restrictive, or both — demonstrated an increase in their restrictive DfAM self-efficacy. Further, we see that teaching restrictive DfAM first followed by opportunistic DfAM results in the generation of ideas with greater creativity — a novel research finding. These results highlight the need for educators to account for the effects of the order of presenting content to students, especially when educating students about DfAM.

Exploring the Effects of Additive Manufacturing Education on Students' Engineering Design Process and its Outcomes

2019 ◽  
Vol 142 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Engineering Design ◽  
Educational Intervention ◽  
Classroom Environment ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Integrate Design ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Design Freedom

AbstractResearch in additive manufacturing (AM) has increased the use of AM in many industries, resulting in a commensurate need for a workforce skilled in AM. In order to meet this need, educational institutions have undertaken different initiatives to integrate design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) into the engineering curriculum. However, limited research has explored the impact of these educational interventions in bringing about changes in the technical goodness of students' design outcomes, particularly through the integration of DfAM concepts in an engineering classroom environment. This study explores this gap using an experimental study with 193 participants recruited from a junior-level course on mechanical engineering design. The participants were split into three educational intervention groups: (1) no DfAM, (2) restrictive DfAM, and (3) restrictive and opportunistic (dual) DfAM. The effects of the educational intervention on the participants' use of DfAM were measured through changes in (1) participants' DfAM self-efficacy, (2) technical goodness of their AM design outcomes, and (3) participants' use of DfAM-related concepts when describing and evaluating their AM designs. The results showed that while all three educational interventions result in similar changes in the participants' opportunistic DfAM self-efficacy, participants who receive only restrictive DfAM inputs show the greatest increase in their restrictive DfAM self-efficacy. Further, we see that despite these differences, all three groups show a similar decrease in the technical goodness of their AM designs, after attending the lectures. A content analysis of the participants' design descriptions and evaluations revealed a simplification of their design geometries, which provides a possible explanation for the decrease in their technical goodness, despite the encouragement to utilize the design freedom of AM to improve functionality or optimize the weight of the structure. These results emphasize the need for more in-depth DfAM education to encourage the use of both opportunistic and restrictive DfAM during student design challenges. The results also highlight the possible influence of how the design problem is stated on the use of DfAM in solving it.

Teaching Design Freedom: Exploring the Effects of Design for Additive Manufacturing Education on the Cognitive Components of Students’ Creativity

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rohan Prabhu ◽  
Scarlett R. Miller ◽  
Timothy W. Simpson ◽  
Nicholas A. Meisel
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Domain Knowledge ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Design For Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Task Motivation ◽  
Cognitive Components ◽  
Traditional Manufacturing ◽  
Education Groups

Design for manufacturing provides engineers with a structure for accommodating the limitations of traditional manufacturing processes. However, little emphasis is typically given to the capabilities of processes that enable novel design geometries, which are often a point of focus when designing products to be made with additive manufacturing (AM) technologies. In addition, limited research has been conducted to understand how knowledge of both the capabilities (i.e., opportunistic) and limitations (i.e., restrictive aspects) of AM affects design outcomes. This study aims to address this gap by investigating the effect of no, restrictive, and both, opportunistic and restrictive (dual) design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) education on engineering students’ creative process. Based on the componential model of creativity [1], these effects were measured through changes in (1) motivation and interest in AM, (2) DfAM self-efficacy, and (3) the emphasis given to DfAM in the design process. These metrics were chosen as they represent the cognitive components of ‘task-motivation’ and ‘domain relevant skills’, which in turn influence the learning and usage of domain knowledge in creative production. The results of the study show that while the short (45 minute) DfAM intervention did not significantly change student motivation and interest towards AM, students showed high levels of motivation and interest towards AM, before the intervention. Teaching students different aspects of DfAM also resulted in an increase in their self-efficacy in the respective topics. However, despite showing a greater increase in self-efficacy in their respective areas of training, the students did not show differences in the emphasis they gave to these DfAM concepts, in the design process. Further, students from all three education groups showed higher use of restrictive concepts, in comparison to opportunistic DfAM.

Predictors of Engineering Self-Efficacy Among Latino/a and White Engineering Students

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Y. Flores ◽  
Rachel L. Navarro ◽  
Hang-Shim Lee ◽  
Laura Luna
Keyword(s):  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Engineering Students

Development of a multimedia intervention to improve pneumoconiosis prevention in construction workers using RE-AIM framework

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jieling Chen ◽  
Cho Lee Wong ◽  
Bernard Man Hin Law ◽  
Winnie Kwok Wei So ◽  
Doris Yin Ping Leung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Asian ◽  
Educational Intervention ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Intervention Mapping ◽  
Intervention Development ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Construction Workers ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Cohen’S D ◽  
Cohen's D

Summary Pneumoconiosis is a common occupational lung disease among construction workers. Educational interventions targeting specific ethnic groups of construction workers are of benefit for pneumoconiosis prevention. The aim of this study was to develop a multimedia educational intervention for pneumoconiosis prevention for South Asian construction workers, and to evaluate its feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness in increasing knowledge of pneumoconiosis, modifying beliefs about pneumoconiosis, and enhancing intention to implement measures for its prevention among the workers. This evaluation was performed using the Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance framework. A one-group design was adopted and intervention mapping was used to guide the process of intervention development, while the Health Belief Model guided the development of intervention content. The intervention was delivered at construction sites, ethnic minority associations and South Asian community centres. Data were collected via surveys completed at pre-intervention, post-intervention and 3 months after the intervention. A total of 1002 South Asian construction workers participated in the intervention. The participants reported a moderate-to-large increase in knowledge, perceived susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits, cues to action and self-efficacy (Cohen’s d: 0.37–0.89), a small reduction in perceived barriers (Cohen’s d = 0.12) and a moderate improvement in attitudes and intention to practice (Cohen’s d: 0.45, 0.51) at post-intervention. A follow-up survey of 121 participants found that the implementation of preventive measures appeared to increase. Overall, the findings demonstrate that the implementation of a culturally adapted multimedia educational intervention could be an effective approach to improving knowledge, self-efficacy and intention regarding pneumoconiosis prevention among South Asian construction workers.

scholarly journals Engineering students’ attitudinal beliefs by gender and student division: a methodological comparison of changes over time

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Madison E. Andrews ◽  
Anita D. Patrick ◽  
Maura Borrego
Keyword(s):  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
Value Engineering ◽  
Longitudinal Analyses ◽  
Utility Value ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Targeted Interventions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background Students’ attitudinal beliefs related to how they see themselves in STEM have been a focal point of recent research, given their well-documented links to retention and persistence. These beliefs are most often assessed cross-sectionally, and as such, we lack a thorough understanding of how they may fluctuate over time. Using matched survey responses from undergraduate engineering students (n = 278), we evaluate if, and to what extent, students’ engineering attitudinal beliefs (attainment value, utility value, self-efficacy, interest, and identity) change over a 1-year period. Further, we examine whether there are differences based on gender and student division, and then compare results between cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses to illustrate weaknesses in our current understanding of these constructs. Results Our study revealed inconsistencies between cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of the same dataset. Cross-sectional analyses indicated a significant difference by student division for engineering utility value and engineering interest, but no significant differences by gender for any variable. However, longitudinal analyses revealed statistically significant decreases in engineering utility value, engineering self-efficacy, and engineering interest for lower division students and significant decreases in engineering attainment value for upper division students over a one-year period. Further, longitudinal analyses revealed a gender gap in engineering self-efficacy for upper division students, where men reported higher means than women. Conclusions Our analyses make several contributions. First, we explore attitudinal differences by student division not previously documented. Second, by comparing across methodologies, we illustrate that different conclusions can be drawn from the same data. Since the literature around these variables is largely cross-sectional, our understanding of students’ engineering attitudes is limited. Our longitudinal analyses show variation in engineering attitudinal beliefs that are obscured when data is only examined cross-sectionally. These analyses revealed an overall downward trend within students for all beliefs that changed significantly—losses which may foreshadow attrition out of engineering. These findings provide an opportunity to introduce targeted interventions to build engineering utility value, engineering self-efficacy, and engineering interest for student groups whose means were lower than average.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document