CDIO StandardsConceiving- Designing- Implementing - Operating

Edward CrawleyPeter Gray

Johan MalmqvistPeter Goodhew

June 2010

OBJECTIVES OF DISCUSSION TODAY

The historical development of the CDIO Standards

Proposed modification of the Standards to include specific rubrics

Proposed change in the CDIO application process to include self-evaluation based on the Standards

Proposed creation of a CDIO Certification Program

CDIO APPROACH

CDIO is an approach, a set of resources, and a cooperative network

We are designingdesigning (in the engineering sense) an improved educational approach and implementable resources• Analyze needs: improved student learning, accreditation, faculty

development• Set clear and consistent goals

• Design and prototype in parallel programs with partner programs and universities

• Incorporate results from scholarship on education

• Compare results, evaluate, iterate and develop improved models and materials

• Codify the approach as 12 Standards of Effective Practice

• Create as open source of resources and workshops

• Build a community of programs working together - not a club or prescription - yours already has elements of “CDIO” program

The result of 50+ universities, many creative colleagues - WORKING TOGETHER!

THE NEED

Desired Attributes of an Engineering Graduate

• Understanding of fundamentals

• Understanding of design and manufacturing process

• Possess a multi-disciplinary system perspective

• Good communication skills

• High ethical standards, etc.

Underlying Need

Educate students who:

•Understand how to conceive-design-implement-operate

•Complex value-added engineering systems

•In a modern team-based engineering environment

We have adopted CDIO as the engineering context of our education

GOALS OF CDIO

• To educate students to master a deeper working knowledge of the technical fundamentals

• To educate engineers to lead in the creation and operation of new products and systems

• To educate all to understand the importance and strategic impact of research and technological development on society

And to attract and retain student in engineering

VISION

We envision an education that stresses the fundamentals, set in the context of Conceiving – Designing – Implementing – Operating systems and products:

• A curriculum organised around mutually supporting disciplines, but with authentic CDIO activities highly interwoven

• Rich with student design-build projects

• Featuring active and experiential learning

• Set in both classrooms and modern learning laboratories and workspaces

• Constantly improved through robust assessment and evaluation processes

ENGINEERING EDUCATION CONTEXT

What should be the context of engineering education? - the product lifecycle

• A focus on the needs of the customer• Delivery of products and systems• Incorporation of new inventions and technologies• A focus on the solution, not disciplines• Working with others, and within resources

Water Bike Project Courtesy of Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), Stockholm

BENEFITS OF LEARNING IN THIS CONTEXT

Setting the education of engineers in the context of engineering practice gains the benefits of Contextual Learning

• Increases retention of new knowledge and skills

• Interconnects concepts and knowledge that build on each other

• Communicates the rationale for, meaning of, and relevance of, what students are learning

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE

STANDARD ONE

Adoption of the principle that product, process, and system lifecycle development and deployment -- Conceiving, Designing, Implementing and Operating -- are the context for engineering education

It is what engineers do!It is the underlying need and basis for the skills lists that

industry proposes to university educatorsIt is the natural context in which to teach these skills to

engineering studentsIt better supports the learning of the technical

fundamentals

NEED TO GOALS: WHAT WE TEACH

Educate students who:

•Understand how to conceive-design-implement-operate

•Complex value-added engineering systems

•In a modern team-basedengineering environment

•And are mature and thoughtful individuals

The CDIO Syllabus - a comprehensive statement of detailed Goals for an Engineering Education

1. Technical3. Inter-personal

2. Personal

4. CDIO

Process

Team

Product

Self

THE CDIO SYLLABUS AND UNESCO FOUR PILLARS1.0 Technical Knowledge & Reasoning: LEARNING TO KNOW

Knowledge of underlying sciencesCore engineering fundamental knowledgeAdvanced engineering fundamental knowledge

2.0 Personal and Professional Skills & Attributes LEARNING TO BEEngineering reasoning and problem solvingExperimentation and knowledge discoverySystem thinkingPersonal skills and attributesProfessional skills and attributes

3.0 Interpersonal Skills: Teamwork & Communication LEARNING TO WORKMulti-disciplinary teamwork TOGETHERCommunicationsCommunication in a foreign language

4.0 Conceiving, Designing, Implementing & Operating Systems in theEnterprise & Societal Context LEARNING TO DO

External and societal contextEnterprise and business contextConceiving and engineering systemsDesigningImplementingOperating

CDIO SYLLABUS

• Rational, Comprehensive• Basis for design of curriculum

and assessment of student learning

• In revision: • Alignment with national

standards• Clarity of some topics• Strengthening of

sustainability, international efforts

• Addition of engineering leadership and entrepreneurship

1 TECHNICAL KNOWLEDGE AND REASONING1.1. KNOWLEDGE OF UNDERLYING

SCIENCES1.2. CORE ENGINEERING FUNDAMENTAL

KNOWLEDGE1.3. ADVANCED ENGINEERING

FUNDAMENTAL KNOWLEDGE

2 PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL SKILLSAND AT TRIBUTES2.1. ENGINEERING REASONING AND

PROBLEM SOLVING2.1.1. Problem Identification and Formulation2.1.2. Modeling2.1.3. Estimation and Qualitative Analysis2.1.4. Analysis With Uncertainty2.1.5. Solution and Recommendation

2.2. EXPERIMENTATION AND KNOWLEDGEDISCOVERY

2.2.1. Hypothesis Formulation2.2.2. Survey of Print and Electronic

Literature2.2.3. Experimental Inquiry2.2.4. Hypothesis Test, and Defense

2.3. SYSTEM THINKING2.3.1. Thinking Holistically2.3.2. Emergence and Interactions in

Systems2.3.3. Prioritization and Focus2.3.4. Tradeoffs, Judgment and Balance in

Resolution2.4. PERSONAL SKILLS AND ATTITUDES

2.4.1. Initiative and Willingness to TakeRisks

2.4.2. Perseverance and Flexibility2.4.3. Creative Thinking2.4.4. Critical Thinking2.4.5. Awareness of One’s Personal

Knowledge, Skills, and Attitudes2.4.6. Curiosity and Lifelong Learning2.4.7. Time and Resource Management

2.5. PROFESSIONAL SKILLS ANDATTITUDES

2.5.1. Professional Ethics, Integrity,Responsibility and Accountability

2.5.2. Professional Behavior2.5.3. Proactively Planning for One’s Career2.5.4. Staying Current on World of Engineer

3 INTERPERSONAL SKILLS: TEAMWORK ANDCOMMUNICATION3.1. TEAMWORK

3.1.1. Forming Effective Teams3.1.2. Team Operation3.1.3. Team Growth and Evolution3.1.4. Leadership3.1.5. Technical Teaming

3.2. COMMUNICATION3.2.1. Communication Strategy3.2.2. Communication Structure3.2.3. Written Communication3.2.4. Electronic/Multimedia Communication3.2.5. Graphical Communication3.2.6. Oral Presentation and Interpersonal

Communication

3.3. COMMUNICATION IN FOREIGNLANGUAGES

3.3.1. English3.3.2. Languages within the European Union3.3.3. Languages outside the European

Union

4 CONCEIVING, DESIGNING, IMPLEMENTINGAND OPERATING SYSTEMS IN THEENTERPRISE AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT4.1. EXTERNAL AND SOCIETAL CONTEXT

4.1.1. Roles and Responsibility of Engineers4.1.2. The Impact of Engineering on Society4.1.3. Society’s Regulation of Engineering4.1.4. The Historical and Cultural Context4.1.5. Contemporary Issues and Values4.1.6. Developing a Global Perspective

4.2. ENTERPRISE AND BUSINESS CONTEXT4.2.1. Appreciating Different Enterprise

Cultures4.2.2. Enterprise Strategy, Goals and

Planning4.2.3. Technical Entrepreneurship4.2.4. Working Successfully in Organizations

4.3. CONCEIVING AND ENGINEERINGSYSTEMS

4.3.1. Setting System Goals andRequirements

4.3.2. Defining Function, Concept andArchitecture

4.3.3. Modeling of System and EnsuringGoals Can Be Met

4.3.4. Development Project Management4.4. DESIGNING

4.4.1. The Design Process4.4.2. The Design Process Phasing and

Approaches4.4.3. Utilization of Knowledge in Design4.4.4. Disciplinary Design4.4.5. Multidisciplinary Design4.4.6. Multi-objective Design

4.5. IMPLEMENTING4.5.1. Designing the Implementation Process4.5.2. Hardware Manufacturing Process4.5.3. Software Implementing Process4.5.4. Hardware Software Integration4.5.5. Test, Verification, Validation and

Certification4.5.6. Implementation Management

4.6. OPERATING4.6.1. Designing and Optimizing Operations4.6.2. Training and Operations4.6.3. Supporting the System Lifecycle4.6.4. System Improvement and Evolution4.6.5. Disposal and Life-End Issues4.6.6. Operations Management

EFFECTIVE PRACTICE

STANDARD 2

Specific, detailed learning outcomes for personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills, as well as disciplinary knowledge, consistent with program goals and validated by program stakeholders

“Resolves” tensions among stakeholdersAllows for the design of curriculumBasis of student evaluationTells us what to teach

EQF AND CDIO SYLLABUS

European Qualifications Framework (EQF) is a framework to allow correspondence between degree programs in different (European) nations • 8 levels from schools to university degrees to lifelong

education• Levels are generic, but cite proficiency, autonomy and

context but no topic CDIO Syllabus cites topics, university develops proficiency,

and has no autonomy or context DOCET project developed correspondence between EQF and

CDIO that allows linkage of Syllabus topics to levels in EQF framework

A way to engage stakeholders, and simplify international comparison of programs

See paper in W4C Overview of Engineering 16:40 today

THE CDIO STANDARDS: EFFECTIVE PRACTICE FRAMWORK

1. CDIO as Context*Adoption of the principle that product and system lifecycle development and deployment are the context for engineering education 2. CDIO Syllabus Outcomes*Specific, detailed learning outcomes for personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills, consistent with program goals and validated by program stakeholders 3. Integrated Curriculum*A curriculum designed with mutually supporting disciplinary subjects, with an explicit plan to integrate personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills4. Introduction to EngineeringAn introductory course that provides the framework for engineering practice in product and system building, and introduces essential personal and interpersonal skills 5. Design-Build Experiences*A curriculum that includes two or more design-build experiences, including one at a basic level and one at an advanced level6. CDIO WorkspacesWorkspaces and laboratories that support and encourage hands-on learning of product and system building, disciplinary knowledge, and social learning

7. Integrated Learning Experiences*Integrated learning experiences that lead to the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge, as well as personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills8. Active LearningTeaching and learning based on active experiential learning methods9. Enhancement of Faculty CDIO Skills*Actions that enhance faculty competence in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills10. Enhancement of Faculty Teaching SkillsActions that enhance faculty competence in providing integrated learning experiences, in using active experiential learning methods, and in assessing student learning11. CDIO Skills Assessment*Assessment of student learning in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills, as well as in disciplinary knowledge12. CDIO Program EvaluationA system that evaluates programs against these 12 standards, and provides feedback to students, faculty, and other stakeholders for the purposes of continuous improvement

*essential

CDIO STANDARDS

Guides to effective practice

- Based on benchmarking, our development and scholarship on learning

- Provide guidance for program design and evaluation

- Provide framework for organizing our activities (book, web site, workshops, etc.)

- Provide framework for discussions and co-development

- Basis for program self-evaluation in 2005 and 2008

Originally created to answer the question from industry “how would I know a CDIO Program if I saw one?” in answer to our question “would you pay a graduate from a CDIO program more than other graduates?”

EVOLUTION OF STANDARDS

Original Standards drafted and approved in 2004• Standard, Description, Rationale, and Evidence• 7 Standards “essential” and remaining 5 good practice

Added 5 level rubrics for self evaluation in 2005 for first self evaluation

4: Complete and adopted program-level plan and comprehensive implementation at course and program levels, with continuous improvement processes in place

3: Complete and adopted program-level plan and implementation of the plan at course and program levels underway

2: Well-developed program-level plan and prototype implementation at course and program levels

1: Initial program-level plan and pilot implementation at the course or program level

0: No initial program-level plan or pilot implementation

PROPOSED CHANGES TO STANDARDS

No changes to Standard, Description, Rationale Add one level to form 6 generic rubrics

5: Evidence related to the standard is regularly reviewed and used to make improvements.

4: There is documented evidence of the full implementation and impact of the standard across program components and constituents.

3: Implementation of the plan to address the standard is underway across the program components and constituents.

2: There is a plan in place to address the standard.

1: There is an awareness of need to adopt the standard and a process is in place to address it.

0: There is no documented plan or activity related to the standard.

Create specialized rubrics for each Standard, which suggests evidence Create document with sample evidence

COMPARITIVE RUBRICS

5 Evidence related to the standard is regularly reviewed and used to make improvements

4 Complete and adopted program-level plan and comprehensive implementation at course and program levels, with continuous improvement processes in place

There is documented evidence of the full implementation and impact of the standard across program components and constituents

3 Complete and adopted program-level plan and implementation of the plan at course and program levels underway

Implementation of the plan to address the standard is underway across the program components and constituents

2 Well-developed program-level plan and prototype implementation at course and program levels

There is a plan in place to address the standard

1 Initial program-level plan and pilot implementation at the course or program level

There is an awareness of need to adopt the standard and a process is in place to address it

0 No initial program-level plan or pilot implementation

There is no documented plan or activity related to the standard

SPECIALIZED RUBRICS FOR STANDARD 3

5 Evidence related to the standard is regularly reviewed and used to make improvements

Internal and external stakeholders regularly review the integrated curriculum and make recommendations and adjustments as needed.

4 There is documented evidence of the full implementation and impact of the standard across program components and constituents

There is evidence that personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills are addressed in all courses responsible for their implementation.

3 Implementation of the plan to address the standard is underway across the program components and constituents

Personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills are integrated into one or more years in the curriculum.

2 There is a plan in place to address the standard

A curriculum plan that integrates disciplinary learning, personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills is approved by appropriate groups.

1 There is an awareness of need to adopt the standard and a process is in place to address it

The need to analyze the curriculum is recognized and initial mapping of disciplinary and skills learning outcomes is underway.

0 There is no documented plan or activity related to the standard

There is no integration of skills or mutually supporting disciplines in the program.

USE OF STANDARDS WITH RUBRICS

Periodic self evaluation of CDIO programs

Self evaluation as part of the certification process?• Better acquaint programs with effective practice• Focus self improvement• Greater barrier to adoption

As part of CDIO Standard program?• Some governments and bodies now recommending CDIO• Quality control• How to recognize a CDIO program – student, peer,

industry or government?• How to protect the “brand” of CDIO?

PROPOSED CERTIFICATION PROGRAM

Desirable traits of a certification program• Built on Standards and rubrics• Voluntary• Help university program to improve• Transparent and visible to stakeholders• Simple and consistent with current practices

Certification (compliance with Standards), not accreditation (right to grant degree or professional status)

Three levels of “certification”• Collaborator – the current term and the default • Implementer – with an evaluation of 2 or more on all 7

essential Standards• Certified – with an evaluation of 4 or more on all 7

essential Standards, and 2 or more on the other 5

THE CDIO STANDARDS: EFFECTIVE PRACTICE FRAMWORK

1. CDIO as Context*Adoption of the principle that product and system lifecycle development and deployment are the context for engineering education 2. CDIO Syllabus Outcomes*Specific, detailed learning outcomes for personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills, consistent with program goals and validated by program stakeholders 3. Integrated Curriculum*A curriculum designed with mutually supporting disciplinary subjects, with an explicit plan to integrate personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills4. Introduction to EngineeringAn introductory course that provides the framework for engineering practice in product and system building, and introduces essential personal and interpersonal skills 5. Design-Build Experiences*A curriculum that includes two or more design-build experiences, including one at a basic level and one at an advanced level6. CDIO WorkspacesWorkspaces and laboratories that support and encourage hands-on learning of product and system building, disciplinary knowledge, and social learning

7. Integrated Learning Experiences*Integrated learning experiences that lead to the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge, as well as personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills8. Active LearningTeaching and learning based on active experiential learning methods9. Enhancement of Faculty CDIO Skills*Actions that enhance faculty competence in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills10. Enhancement of Faculty Teaching SkillsActions that enhance faculty competence in providing integrated learning experiences, in using active experiential learning methods, and in assessing student learning11. CDIO Skills Assessment*Assessment of student learning in personal, interpersonal, and product and system building skills, as well as in disciplinary knowledge12. CDIO Program EvaluationA system that evaluates programs against these 12 standards, and provides feedback to students, faculty, and other stakeholders for the purposes of continuous improvement

*essential

CERTIFICATION PROCESS

Same procedure as application to join the Collaborative

Program performs self-evaluation and applies for certification, submitting about a 1+12 page evidence document (backup available for review)

Region reviews the evidence, and sends recommendation to CDIO Council

Council approves

Web site lists certified programs, with link to the local program site

SUMMARY

The CDIO Standards has been a powerful, stable, and useful instrument for half a decade

The framework for CDIO development, sharing, evaluation Propose modest modification to the rubrics for the

Standards Consider asking new applicants to perform self-evaluation Propose Certification Program

• Transparently identifies true adopters of CDIO

• Protects the CDIO brand

This is a proposal, which we provide for comment and debate