English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Efficacy of engineering design education in an interdisciplinary team-based course setting, with exposure to the broader concerns of business, finance and management, interests many educators. This paper reports on the use of design knowledge assessment patterned after the Transferable Integrated Design Engineering Education (TIDEE) Design Team Readiness Assessment (DTRA) I and II [1,2,3,4] to evaluate what aerospace, mechanical, electrical and computer science students learned about engineering design as a result of participating in a Boeing-supported, two-semester, project-based senior capstone design course at Texas A&M University. The Boeing course sequence was designed to provide students with the experience of working in multi-disciplinary teams on a design and implementation project while receiving instruction in elements of project management from a business perspective. Students were assessed using rubric-based instruments and customized team design simulation procedures similar to Parts I & II of the TIDEE Design Knowledge Assessment at the beginning and at the end of their senior capstone design project. This paper will discuss the lessons learned about the design knowledge assessment process to measure the preparedness of students at the beginning of the capstone design class and the evolution of their understanding of the design process at the end of the twosemesters of course work. Pre-to-post treatment group comparisons and control group comparisons were used in the assessment design, which also compared the rubric-based assessment with content analysis of students’ written responses to assessment questions. Results indicated that the content analysis was more effective in capturing students’ increased understanding of the design process, and the reasons for this are explored. Specific changes for improving the assessment process have been implemented for the project in the 2005-06 academic year.

2006 annual conference and exposition proceedings

Lessons Learned In Assessing Senior Engineering Capstone Design Course Learning With A Variation On The Tidee Design Team Readiness Assessment (Dtra) I And Ii