Enhancing design thinking in engineering students with project‐based learning

• Published in: Computer applications in engineering education Vol. 31; no. 4; pp. 814 - 830
• Main Authors: Jiang, Cuiling, Pang, Yilin
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01-07-2023
• Subjects: Algorithms; Artificial intelligence; Artificial neural networks; Collaboration; Cooperation; Creativity; creativity and innovation; Data analysis; Design engineering; Design thinking; design thinking (DT); Engineering; Engineering education; Hardware; Innovations; Learning; learning motivation; project‐based learning (PBL); Qualitative analysis; Software; Students; Training
• ISSN: 1061-3773; 1099-0542
• DOI: 10.1002/cae.22608

Modern society requires increasing creative talents. As an educational concept, design thinking (DT) has been successfully applied in education to foster innovation. However, educational research on improving the engineering design ability of engineering students through the design process and practice is limited. Research has shown that project‐based learning (PBL) is an effective engineering education method. This research integrates DT and PBL (DT–PBL) in teaching the course “Introduction to Artificial Intelligence and Basic Algorithm Training” and discusses the teaching method and implementation of DT–PBL in detail through an example of a comprehensive training project of software and hardware collaboration based on a convolutional neural network and Raspberry Pi. This study considers the impact of DT–PBL on engineering students in terms of learning motivation and creativity using the pretest and posttest mixed method. Data analysis of quantitative tests and qualitative interviews shows that (1) The experimental group is superior to the comparison group in terms of overall learning motivation. Through a comprehensive training project of software and hardware collaboration, students can reflect on the required professional knowledge and skills, and improve their DT, engineering application, and innovation abilities and (2) The experimental group was superior to the comparison group in terms of overall creativity (adventure, curiosity, imagination, and challenge). Students in the experimental group can think more quickly and put forth more creative ideas from the perspective of user needs.