TY - GEN
T1 - How do I choose? The influence of concept selection methods on student team decision-making
AU - Zheng, Xuan
AU - Miller, Scarlett R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2016 by ASME.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - While research has been conducted to study the use of concept selection methods in design education, few studies have focused on the influence of these methods on individual students' and teams' thought processes in grade-dependent class projects. In order to fill this research gap, the current study was designed to compare the influence of two concept selection methods, the Concept Selection Matrix (CSM) and a new adjective assessment method called the Tool for Assessing Semantic Creativity (TASC), through an experimental study in two sections of a first year engineering design class. The results of the study show that while students were equally confident in the concept ratings from the CSM and TASC methods, they reported that they were more likely to select ideas ranked highly in the CSM method. However, subsequent analysis revealed no difference between the common elements in the ideas rated highly by the two methods and the final design ideas produced.
AB - While research has been conducted to study the use of concept selection methods in design education, few studies have focused on the influence of these methods on individual students' and teams' thought processes in grade-dependent class projects. In order to fill this research gap, the current study was designed to compare the influence of two concept selection methods, the Concept Selection Matrix (CSM) and a new adjective assessment method called the Tool for Assessing Semantic Creativity (TASC), through an experimental study in two sections of a first year engineering design class. The results of the study show that while students were equally confident in the concept ratings from the CSM and TASC methods, they reported that they were more likely to select ideas ranked highly in the CSM method. However, subsequent analysis revealed no difference between the common elements in the ideas rated highly by the two methods and the final design ideas produced.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85007350186&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85007350186&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1115/DETC2016-60333
DO - 10.1115/DETC2016-60333
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85007350186
T3 - Proceedings of the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference
BT - 18th International Conference on Advanced Vehicle Technologies; 13th International Conference on Design Education; 9th Frontiers in Biomedical Devices
PB - American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
T2 - ASME 2016 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, IDETC/CIE 2016
Y2 - 21 August 2016 through 24 August 2016
ER -