Incorporating Cooperative Design
Strategies into Aerospace
Engineering Education
Scottie-Beth Fleming
Dissertation Proposal Presentation
October 1st, 2014
Advisor: Dr. Amy Pritchett
Committee: Dr. Brian German
Dr. Ute Fischer
& Dr. Jennifer Turns
1
Aerospace Engineering Design Process
Fabrication
Requirements
Conceptual Design
Preliminary Design
Detailed Design
Initial aircraft sizing,
performance, and
configuration
Transition to a
more static aircraft
configuration
Entrance to fullscale aircraft
development
Advanced
technology
exploration
Design and
evaluation of
technological
components
Component
fabrication and
integration
Roskam, 1990; Raymer, 2006; Nicolai & Carichner, 2010
2
Aerospace Engineering Design
Industry has expressed a need for engineering graduates to use
effective approaches to system design, integration, and synthesis
Dutson et al., 1997
Images from
http://wonderfulengineering.com/
http://www.geaviation.com/
http://www.airbus.com/
http://www.boeing.com/
3
Aerospace Engineering Design Education
Capstone design can cultivate students’ skills to
+ Collaborate on multidisciplinary teams [ABET student outcome (d)]
+ Communicate effectively [ABET student outcome (g)]
+ Use understanding of the engineering design process to examine the full context of the
design problem [ABET student outcome (c)]
Senior Design
Capstone Course
ABET, 2014; Woods et al, 2000; Paretti, 2008
Images from
http://wonderfulengineering.com/
http://www.geaviation.com/
http://www.airbus.com/
http://www.boeing.com/
4
Aerospace Engineering Design Education
However, novice aerospace engineers are often unable to
+ integrate multidisciplinary design considerations
+ translate preferences, constraints, and decisions to others also engaging in the
design process
Senior Design
Capstone Course
Ahmed et al, 2004; Daly et al., 2001; Fleming & Coso, 2014; Gertler,
2014; Griffin, 2005; NTSB, 2013; Oakley et al, 2004; Richey, 2005
Images from
http://wonderfulengineering.com/
http://www.geaviation.com/
http://www.airbus.com/
http://www.boeing.com/
5
Principles of Cooperative Design
 Design process recognizes disciplinary interdependencies
and supports multidisciplinary integration
 Design process directs all designers to integrate their
efforts toward achieving shared high-level goals
 Design process promotes integrated design decisions
through deliberate collaboration processes
6
Research Goal
To design and evaluate an intervention to
enhance cooperative design strategies in
novice aerospace engineers
77
Research Goal
To design and evaluate an intervention to
enhance cooperative design strategies in novice aerospace engineers
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Research Question 1
How does aerospace engineering
currently integrate cooperative
design strategies into the
complex system design process?
Research Question 2
To what extent do novice
aerospace engineers enter
capstone courses able to apply
cooperative design strategies ?
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Research Question 3
What are the appropriate educational
interventions to enhance cooperative
design strategies in novice AE designers?
88
Research Goal
To design and evaluate an intervention to
enhance cooperative design strategies in novice aerospace engineers
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Contribution
• Characterize principles of
cooperative design
• Define cooperative design
strategies within an AE context
Contribution
• Define the necessary
specifications for the design of
educational interventions
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Contribution
• Develop methods for assessing students’ use of cooperative
design approach
• Address the gap between aerospace engineering education and
the needs of industry
99
Research Design
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Research Question 1
How does aerospace engineering
currently integrate cooperative
design strategies into the
complex system design process?
Research Question 2
To what extent do novice
aerospace engineers enter
capstone courses able to apply
cooperative design strategies ?
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Research Question 3
What are the appropriate educational
interventions to enhance cooperative
design strategies in novice AE designers?
10
10
RQ1: How does aerospace engineering currently integrate cooperative design
strategies into the complex system design process?
Characterize Principles of Cooperative Design
Identify critical behaviors
Frame the design context
Aerospace Engineering
Design Process
Literature from Org
Behavior, I/O Psych,
Education, Design
Aerospace
Vehicle Design
Case Studies
11
Frame the Design Context:
Aerospace Engineering Design
Fabrication
Requirements
Conceptual Design
Preliminary Design
Detailed Design
Aerospace engineering design process is
Multidisciplinary
Integrated
Roskam, 1990; Raymer, 2006; Nicolai & Carichner, 2010
Collaborative
12
Identify Critical Cooperative Behaviors:
Literature Exploration
Designers have an awareness of disciplinary interdependencies
 Designers should have an awareness of component interactions with
different disciplines to create a common understanding of complex
issues
Design process is directed by design goals
 While teams share at least one high-level goal, more detailed goals
and design requirements should remain consistent with the high-level
goals
Design teams should use appropriate collaborative processes
 Effective teams apply, coordinate, and communicate team member
knowledge and skills appropriately
Ahmed et al., 2004; Bunderson & Sutcliffe, 2002; Hackman & Morris, 1975; Jehn & Shah, 1997;
Jordan, 2010; Klein, 2004; Klein, 1990; Marks et al, 2001; Mesmer-Magnus & DeChurch, 2009;
13
RQ1: How does aerospace engineering currently integrate cooperative design
strategies into the complex system design process?
Characterize Principles of Cooperative Design
Identify critical behaviors
Frame the design context
Literature Exploration
Aerospace Engineering Design Process



Multidisciplinary
Integrated
Collaborative



Awareness of disciplinary
interdependencies
Directed by design goals
Use of appropriate collaborative processes
Aerospace
Vehicle Design
Case Studies
14
Principles of Cooperative Design
 Design process recognizes disciplinary interdependencies
and supports multidisciplinary integration
 Design process directs all designers to integrate their
efforts toward achieving shared high-level goals
 Design process promotes integrated design decisions
through deliberate collaboration processes
15
RQ1: How does aerospace engineering currently integrate cooperative design
strategies into the complex system design process?
Characterize Principles of Cooperative Design
Identify critical behaviors
Frame the design context
Literature Exploration
Aerospace Engineering Design Process



Multidisciplinary
Integrated
Collaborative



Awareness of disciplinary
interdependencies
Directed by design goals
Use of appropriate collaborative processes
Aerospace
Vehicle Design
Case Studies
16
 Design process recognizes disciplinary interdependencies
and supports multidisciplinary integration
Aerospace engineering designers must recognize the value and
importance of other disciplines
C-5 Galaxy
Incorporated expertise from
multiple disciplines at start of
design process
Griffin, 2005; NTSB 2013
Boeing 787 Dreamliner
Technical system integration led to
late delivery and major technical
problems in flight, particularly with
the Lithium Ion Batteries
Images from
http://www.af.mil/
http://www.boeing.com/
17
 Design process directs all designers to integrate their
efforts toward achieving shared high-level goals
Design teams should specify and prioritize goals early in the design process, and
continuously monitor progress toward mission accomplishment
C-5 Galaxy
High-level design goal explicitly
defined and understood at the
start of the design process
Griffin, 2005; Richey, 2005
F-111 Aardvark
Conflicting high-level design
goals caused the Navy to
terminate the F-111B variant
Images from
http://www.af.mil/
http://aviationheritagepark.com/
18
 Design process promotes integrated design decisions
through deliberate collaboration processes
Design teams should develop a collaborative strategy which incorporates
information about team resources, member expertise, critical design events, and
the changing nature of the design environment
Rolls-Royce Design Teams
Informal communications across
working groups allows for timely
task feedback and reflection
Baird et al, 2000; NTSB, 2013
Boeing 787 Dreamliner
Chief project engineer for 787
recognized communication and
collaboration failures
Images from
http://www.af.mil/
19
Research Design
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Research Question 1
How does aerospace engineering
currently integrate cooperative
design strategies into the
complex system design process?
Research Question 2
To what extent do novice
aerospace engineers enter
capstone courses able to apply
cooperative design strategies ?
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Research Question 3
What are the appropriate educational
interventions to enhance cooperative
design strategies in novice AE designers?
20
20
Engineering Students’ Understanding
Purpose: To gather baseline information on student understanding and utilization of
cooperative design strategies
Data Sources:
Informal Instructor
Interviews
Graffiti Wall
Student
Evaluation #1
Preliminary Analysis
Fall 2014
Week 1 Week 2
Spring 2015
Week 13 & 14 Week 15 Week 1
th
Lectures, Lab sessions, 5 individual
project
4 Individual projects
Mid-Term Design
Review
End of
Spring 2015
Team-based design project
21
Engineering Students’ Understanding
Informal Instructor
Interviews
Graffiti Wall
 Inquired about common challenges the students faced
in the design process
 Students anonymously responded to 3 statements written
on easel paper and posted on the classroom wall
o Define integrated design.
o How do aerospace engineers practice integrated design?
o Why is an integrated design so difficult to achieve?
22
Engineering Students’ Understanding
Student Evaluation #1
Piloted: Summer 2014
Self-Efficacy in Design Scale
(Carberry et al. 2010)
Interdisciplinary Competence Scale
(Lattuca et al., 2012)
with open-ended follow-up question
Scenario-Based Design Task Part 1:
Discipline-Based Design Resources
Scenario-Based Design Task Part 2:
Conflicting Design Requirements
Sample: 50 senior engineering students
Distributed: Fall 2014
Data analysis:
• Confirmatory Factor Analysis
• Descriptive Statistics
• Thematic analysis
o Integrated results of Evaluation 1,
informal interviews, and the
Graffiti Wall
Demographic Information
23
Engineering Students’ Understanding
Preliminary Results
• Students exhibited confusion as to how to integrate multidisciplinary
considerations into the final design
• Students demonstrated limited strategies of problem decomposition, scoping, and
design goal alignment.
• Students expressed importance of justifying design decisions, but lack the
necessary skills to communicate design justifications in practice
• Students perceived collaborative decision-making as the most difficult aspect of
design integration
 Findings supported by another study of a similar population
Coso, 2014
24
Educational Intervention Specifications
① Shall provide students with an integrated view of
multidisciplinary design.
② Shall demonstrate methods to align design goals.
③ Shall provide students with an approach for effectively
communicating design decisions.
④ Shall model a variety of effective approaches to managing
team processes within cooperative design.
25
Research Design
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Research Question 1
How does aerospace engineering
currently integrate cooperative
design strategies into the
complex system design process?
Research Question 2
To what extent do novice
aerospace engineers enter
capstone courses able to apply
cooperative design strategies ?
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Research Question 3
What are the appropriate educational
interventions to enhance cooperative
design strategies in novice AE designers?
26
26
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Proposing 5 Educational Interventions
Weekly Progress Reports
Incorporating Individual Reflection
In-Class
Evaluation #1
Fall 2014
Week 1
Week 2
Cooperative Design
Strategies Part 1
with ReflectionBased Evaluations
Week 13 & 14 Week 15
Lectures,
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
5th
individual
project
Cooperative Design
Strategies Part 2
with ReflectionBased Evaluations
Spring 2015
Week 1
Facilitated
Team
Reflection
Mid-Term
Design Review
Assessment
of Students’
Final Projects
End of
Spring 2015
Team-based design project
27
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Weekly Progress Reports
• Addresses
intervention
Incorporating
Individualspecifications:
Reflection
Cooperative Design
Strategies Part 1
with ReflectionBased Evaluations
In-Class
Evaluation #1
1.
Shall provide students with an integrated view of
multidisciplinary design.
2.
Shall demonstrate methods to align design goals.
3. Shall
provide students with an approach for effectively
Cooperative
Design
communicating design decisions.
Strategies Part 2
Assessment
Facilitated
• Supports
current design
with
Reflection-and enhances
of Students’
Team
Basedcurriculum
Evaluations
Final Projects
Reflection
• Incorporates cognitive and situative
pedagogical frameworks
Fall 2014
Week 1
Week 2
Week 13 & 14 Week 15
Lectures,
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
5th
individual
project
Newstetter & Svinicki, 2014
o
o
Authentic exercises
Spring 2015
End ofof the content
Mid-Term
Individual
and group exploration
Week 1 • Assessed
Spring 2015 student
Design
Review post-intervention
through
evaluation
Team-based design project
28
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Weekly Progress Reports
Incorporating Individual Reflection
• Addresses intervention
specification:
4.
Shall model a variety of effective
approaches to managing team
processes within cooperative design.
Cooperative Design
• Supports and enhances
Strategies Part 1
current
design
curriculum
with ReflectionIn-Class
Based Evaluations
Evaluation
#1
• Incorporates
cognitive
and
Cooperative Design
Strategies Part 2
with ReflectionBased Evaluations
Facilitated
Team
Reflection
Assessment
of Students’
Final Projects
situative pedagogical
frameworks
o Authentic exercises
Fall 2014 o Individual and group exploration Spring 2015
Week 2 Week 13 & 14 Week 15
Week 1
Week 1
of the content
• Assessed through post5th
intervention
student
Lectures,
individual
evaluation
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
project
Newstetter & Svinicki, 2014
Mid-Term
Design Review
End of
Spring 2015
Team-based design project
29
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Weekly Progress Reports
Incorporating Individual Reflection
Cooperative Design
Cooperative Design
• EncouragesStrategies
and supports
application
Part 1 student Strategies
Partof2
design
strategies
ReflectionIn-Classcooperativewith
with Reflection-
BasedAgile
Evaluations
Evaluation
#1
Based Evaluations
• Modeled
after
Project Management
Facilitated
Team
Reflection
Assessment
of Students’
Final Projects
o Short-term goal-setting
o Continuous progress updates
o Reflective behavior examination and modification
Fall 2014
Week 1
Spring 2015
•Week
Piloted
in December
2014
2 Week
13 & 14 Week
15
Week 1
• Assessed through
Mid-Term
Design Review
End of
Spring 2015
• Analysis of report submissions
5th
•Lectures,
Design team observations
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
Drury-Grogan (2014)
individual
project
Team-based design project
30
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Weekly Progress Reports
Incorporating Individual Reflection
Cooperative Design
Cooperative Design
• Facilitated by
a trained
“expert”
designer
Strategies Part 2
Strategies
Part
1
with Reflectionwithteams
ReflectionIn-Class
• Student design
will
Based Evaluations
Based Evaluations
Evaluation #1
o Reflect on midterm design review feedback &
collaborative processes
o Develop an action-based strategy for the
remaining design tasks
Fall 2014 • Assessed through
Week 2 Week 13 & 14 Week 15
Week 1
Spring 2015
Week 1
Facilitated
Team
Reflection
Mid-Term
Design Review
o Student interviews
o Examination of finalthdesign project submission
Lectures,
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
5
individual
project
Newstetter & Svinicki, 2014
Assessment
of Students’
Final Projects
End of
Spring 2015
Team-based design project
31
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Weekly Progress Reports
Incorporating Individual Reflection
• Integrates
design
strategies with
Cooperative
Design
Cooperative
Designcooperative
Facilitated
Strategies Part 2
Strategies
Part 1 expectations
instructors’
Team
with Reflectionwith Reflection• Trained outside judges will examine the student
Reflection
Based Evaluations
Based Evaluations
In-Class
Evaluation #1
projects based on this rubric.
Assessment
of Student
Projects
• Assessed through
Fall 2014
Week 1
Week 2
o Feedback from outside judges
o Feedback
from
instructors Mid-Term
Spring
2015
Week 13 & 14 Week 15
Lectures,
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
5th
individual
project
Newstetter & Svinicki, 2014
Week 1
Design Review
End of
Spring 2015
Team-based design project
32
Intervention/Research Timeline:
Proposing 5 Educational Interventions
Weekly Progress Reports
Incorporating Individual Reflection
In-Class
Evaluation #1
Fall 2014
Week 1
Week 2
Cooperative Design
Strategies Part 1
with ReflectionBased Evaluations
Week 13 & 14 Week 15
Lectures,
Lab sessions,
4 Individual projects
5th
individual
project
Cooperative Design
Strategies Part 2
with ReflectionBased Evaluations
Spring 2015
Week 1
Facilitated
Team
Reflection
Mid-Term
Design Review
Assessment
of Students’
Final Projects
End of
Spring 2015
Team-based design project
33
Research Goal
To design and evaluate an intervention to
enhance cooperative design strategies in novice aerospace engineers
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Research Question 1
How does aerospace engineering
currently integrate cooperative
design strategies into the
complex system design process?
Research Question 2
To what extent do novice
aerospace engineers enter
capstone courses able to apply
cooperative design strategies ?
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Research Question 3
What are the appropriate educational
interventions to enhance cooperative
design strategies in novice AE designers?
34
34
Research Goal
To design and evaluate an intervention to
enhance cooperative design strategies in novice aerospace engineers
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
• Examined engineering design
process, design cases, & team
literature
• Conceptualized cooperative
design approaches into four
dimensions
• Explored understanding of
novice engineering designers
• Outlined gaps in understanding
using preliminary observations
• Defined specifications for
educational interventions
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
• Select pedagogy for educational interventions
• Design educational interventions
• Complete evaluation of intervention impact
35
35
Research Goal
To design and evaluate an intervention to
enhance cooperative design strategies in novice aerospace engineers
Phase 1:
Examine Current Design Practices and Identify Gaps
Contribution
• Characterize principles of
cooperative design
• Define cooperative design
strategies within an AE context
Contribution
• Define the necessary
specifications for the design of
educational interventions
Phase 2:
Design Educational Intervention and Assessment Tools
Contribution
• Develop methods for assessing students’ use of cooperative
design approach
• Address the gap between aerospace engineering education and
the needs of industry
36
36
Selected References, 1
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
ABET. (2013). 2014-2015 Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. Baltimore, MD. Retrieved from
http://www.abet.org/
Ahmed, S., & Wallace, K. M. (2004). Understanding the knowledge needs of novice designers in the aerospace
industry. Design Studies, 25(2), 155–173. doi:10.1016/j.destud.2003.10.006
Baird, F., Circus, D., Moore, C. J., & Jagodzinski, A. P. (2000). An ethnographic study of engineering design teams at
Rolls-Royce Aerospace. Design Studies, 21, 333–355.
Bunderson, J. S., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2002). Comparing Alternative Conceptualizations of Functional Diversity in
Management Teams: Process and Performance Effects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 875–893.
Carberry, A. R., Lee, H.S., & Ohland, M. W. (2010). Measuring Engineering Design Self-Efficacy. Journal of Engineering
Education, 71–79.
Daly, J. R., Augustine, N. R., Davis, J. B., Covert, E. E., & Gray, G. J. (2001). Report to the Panel of to Review the V-22
Program. Arlington, VA.
Coso, A. E. (2014). Preparing Students to Incorporate Stakeholder Requirements in Aerospace Vehicle Design. Georgia
Institute of Technology.
Drury-Grogan, M. L. (2014). Performance on agile teams: Relating iteration objectives and critical decisions to project
management success factors. Information & Software Technology, 56(5), 506-515. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2013.11.003
Dutson, A. J., Todd, R. H., Magleby, S. P., & Sorenson, C. D. (1997). A Review of Literature on Teaching Engineering
Design Through Project- Oriented Capstone Courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 86(1), 17–28.
Fleming, E.S., & Coso, A.E. (2014). Viewing an Interdisciplinary Human-Centered Design Course as a Multiteam
System: Perspectives on Cooperation and Information Sharing. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Design Thinking
Research Symposium (DTRS14). Purdue
Gertler, J. (2014). F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ( JSF ) Program. Washington DC.
Gibson, J. E., Scherer, W. T., & Gibson, W. F. (2007). How to do Systems Analysis. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Griffin, J. M. (2005). C-5A Galaxy Systems Engineering Case Study. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.
Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness:
A review and proposed intergration. In L. L. Beckowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 47–101).
New York: Academic Press.
37
Selected References, 2
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Jehn, K. A., & Shah, P. P. (1997). Interpersonal Relationships and Task Performance: An Examination of Mediating
Processes in Friendship and Acquaintance Groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(4), 775–790.
Jordan, S. (2010). Success in Virtual Cross-Disciplinary Engineering Design Teams in Industry. Purdue University.
Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity : history, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Klein, J. T. (2004). Disciplinary Origins and Differences. Paper presented at the Fenner Conference on the
Environment, Australian Academy of Science, Canberra.
Lattuca, L. R., Knight, D. B., & Bergom, I. M. (2012). Developing a Measure of Interdisciplinary Competence for
Engineers. In 119th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. San Antonio, TX.
Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A Temporally Based Framwork and Taxonomy of Team
Processes. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 356–376.
Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & Dechurch, L. a. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: a meta-analysis. The
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535–46. doi:10.1037/a0013773
Newstetter, W. C., & Svinicki, M. (2014). Learning theories for engineering education practice. In Cambridge
Handbook for Engineering Education Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Nicolai, L., & Carichner, G. E. (2010). Fundamentals of Aircraft and Airship Design: Volume 1. Reston, VA: American
Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
NTSB. (2013). Boeing 787 Battery Investigative Hearing. Washington DC. Retrieved from
http://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/2013/B787_hearing/agenda.html
Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2004). Turning Student Groups into Effective Teams. Journal of Student
Centered Learning, 2(1), 9–34.
Paretti, M. C. (2008). Teaching Communication in Capstone Design : The Role of the Instructor in Situated Learning.
Journal of Engineering Education, 97(4), 491–503.
Raymer, D. (2009). Aircraft Design - A Conceptual Approach. AIAA Education Series.
Richey, G. K. (2005). F-111 Systems Engineering Case Study. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH.
Roskam, J. (1990). Airplane Design, Parts I - VIII. DAR Corporation.
Woods, D. R., Felder, R. M., Rugarcia, A., & Stice, J. E. (2000). The Future of Engineering Education III. Developing
Critical Skills. Chem. Eng. Ed., 34(2), 108–117.
38
Thank you! Questions?
This work was sponsored by the NSF, grant number DGE-0644493
39
39