Undergraduate students’ beliefs about diverse approaches to making engineering design decisions: Exploring change during a capstone course

• Published in: International journal of technology and design education 2023-11, Vol.33 (5), p.1959-1989
• Main Authors: Leonard, Alexia, Guanes, Giselle, Dringenberg, Emily
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Attitude Change; Capstone Experiences; College students; Decision Making; Decisions; Design; Design engineering; Education; Educational Technology; Engineering Education; Learning and Instruction; Qualitative analysis; Reliability engineering; Resilience (Psychology); Science Education; Student Attitudes; Students; Undergraduate Students; Undergraduate study
• ISSN: 0957-7572; 1573-1804
• DOI: 10.1007/s10798-022-09802-w

Well-structured, de-contextualized problems that can be solved using solely technical approaches remain a large component of the engineering education curriculum. As a result, students may mistakenly believe that all engineering work can be done the same way—without the use of other approaches. Capstone design courses are an established way of exposing undergraduate students to ill-structured design tasks that more realistically reflect engineering practice. Yet, little is known about the influence of their capstone design experiences on their beliefs about how engineering design decisions are made. Our study compared students’ beliefs about four diverse approaches (technical, empathic, guess-based, and experience-based) to making engineering design decisions at the start of their capstone to their beliefs held at the end of their capstone. We conducted and analyzed qualitative transcripts from one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with 17 capstone students. We found little evidence that students’ experience in capstone courses changed their beliefs about diverse approaches to making engineering design decisions. The minimal change that we did find in students’ beliefs was primarily about guess-based approaches, and that change was not uniform amongst the students who did demonstrate change. Our findings point to the resiliency of students’ beliefs about approaches to design decisions throughout an engineering capstone design experience. Therefore, we recommend instructors foster reflexivity within their classrooms to disrupt these limited, normative beliefs about the approaches needed to make engineering design decisions.