PETER TÖRLIND PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIOPedagogic portfolio following the structure for Luleå University of Technology

Peter teaching, from LTU annual report 2011 For an updated KPI: http://staff.www.ltu.se/~petert/KPI/

PhD

Licentiate

MsC (examiner)

MsC (supervisor)

BsC (examiner)

BsC (supervisor)

Average course satisfaction

13500Total numbers of teaching hours

SUPERVISION

Thesis supervised125

Pedagogical papers10

Teach courses11

QUICK FACTS

Textbooks sold4850

Research papers53

593Citations

12h-index

h

2Best papers awards

55

5546

1113

External examiner (PhD)4

2 PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

CONTEXT

My backgroundOne of my interests in life has been scouting, and this is also where my basic pedagogical ideas have been formed. The scout movement is based on “learning by doing” and team-work, something that I have brought with me in my role as an educator.

As a university teacher, I began teaching as a supervisor in Computer Aided Design (CAD) courses when I was a PhD-student and as a coach in product development courses. Here I got my first experiences of implementing new ped-agogical ideas when developing the Participatory Product Innovation process for the capstone product development course Sirius where we introduced individual logbooks and individual coaching. The course was inspired by the human-centred prototype driven design approach used at Stanford University from ideas pioneered by Rolf Faste, Bernie Roth and Larry Leifer at Stanford University with concepts as Ambidextrous Thinking (Faste, 1994), Design Thinking (Brown 2008) and Needfinding (Faste 1987). For several years we performed the Sirius course in collabora-tion with Stanford University.

As a graduate student, I became more and more interested in people and how teams collaborate. During this time, I coached many global engineering teams, which became the focus of my dissertation in Distributed engineering. Quite early on, I understood that as a coach of a capstone course, it is important to dare to take a step back – the role is to fa-cilitate the students, not to be their project leader.

During my first years as a senior lecturer, I mainly taught product development, creativity and teamwork. Here I be-gan to realise the hidden potential available in a group – if you manage to collaborate and think together.

Current positionIn 2011, significant organisational changes were made at LTU, and I started teaching more at the Industrial Design Engineering programme instead of the Mechanical Engi-neering programme. This was a step in the right direction

For someone else to understand how things are connected, it is essential to understand the context surrounding the infor-mation. In the design process, this phase is critical. To develop a product without understanding the context – who are the users, what are their needs and in which environment do they use the product and what do they want to achieve – it often ends up with a bad design. In this case, it is vital to describe me and in what environment I teach.

because I believe that design should always start from the needs and desires and not from requirements. Since 2013 I am an Education leader and responsible for the develop-ment) of Industrial Design Engineering programme (IDE). The responsibility includes quality control and develop-ment.

In 2015 LTU joined the CDIO-initiative, and since then, I have been actively implementing the CDIO-approach (Crawley et al. 2007) at the IDE programme. The implemen-tation is performed in close collaboration with the teachers in the program, and most of the implementations on the program level has been developed with my colleague Åsa Wikberg Nilsson at Industrial Design.

CredoAs a leader, educator and supervisor, I want to inspire oth-ers and be positive and creative. The work in my research group and my courses should be fun, and I want to find the hidden potential of people around me. To find that poten-tial, I try to challenge people to cope with ambiguity and do new things that they have not done before (e.g. from pre-senting in a new way to using research methods and inno-vative working methods that they are not familiar with).

Research subjectMy research subject is currently Product Innovation, where I focus on team-based innovation and creativity. Current projects focus on Additive manufacturing of space applica-tions. I am also responsible for the DEPICT LAB.

Pedagogic educationBecause of my interest in pedagogical development, I have attended several pedagogical courses. At the moment, I have completed seven pedagogical courses (18 ECTS), four supervision courses, four leadership courses, and several other courses that are relevant for teaching, for detailed list of courses see Appendix B.

Thinking together is a concept where diversity and competen-cies of the whole team can be utilized and where team members can think together rather than merely exchange information, opinions and divide work. (Törlind et al. 2005)

Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) is a Master program at Luleå University of Technology (LTU), Sweden. The IDE pro-gram integrates industrial design with engineering design and uses human needs as the main incentives for developing stu-dents’ products, processes, and systems building skills. By tradi-tion, various subjects such as usability, aesthetics, design meth-ods, ergonomics, human work environment and design theory have been interspersed with more traditional engineering sub-jects such as maths, physics, solid mechanics, material science.

Sirius is a final capstone course for Mechanical Engineering and involves multi-disciplinary teams of students carrying out product development project in close co-operation with industry partners. The course was designed around a Participatory Product Inno-vation process. For several years we also collaborated with Stan-ford University and the ME310 course.

DEPICT LAB (Decision, Emotion, Perception & CogniTion Lab-oratory) is a lab where scientists can visualise and analyse hu-man behaviour using the latest technology in the field. The lab can measure psychometric responses using Eye tracking, EEG, GSR, EMG, and facial expressions. The lab is us both for research and education. https://www.ltu.se/depict

DETAILS

APPENDIXB

Ambiguity “a crucial part of design education is the ability to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity. Whilst the established approach for product development focuses on decreasing all uncertainty as soon as possible, for more open-ended or wicked problems that are common in design it is essential to preserve ambiguity”. (Törlind , 2019)

“A designer must have a willingness to em-brace ambiguity, paradox and uncertainty.”

Gelb 2009

3PETER TÖRLIND

TEACHING EXPERIENCE1997- 2002 Graduate years (ca. 1700 hours)During my graduate years before getting my PhD, I was mostly helping out as a teaching assistant in several CAD courses and as acoach in the Sirius course. The Sirius was also used as an experimental platform for my research in collaborative design, where I focused on team interaction and informal communication (Törlind & Larsson, 2002; Larsson et al., 2002).

2003-2007 Post-doc (ca. 1700 hours)During my post-doc, I was focusing on team-based inno-vation and continued to use the Sirius/ME310 course as a platform to collect data for my research. Because of the close collaboration with Stanford University, I also spend a lot of time at Stanford University working in several research pro-jects and supporting the Sirius/ME310 (Larsson et al. 2003). We also created a PhD course in Collaborative Work in De-sign.

During 2005-2007 I was responsible for the distance course in Computer Aided Design (M0010T) for the Bachelor pro-gramme in Automotive Engineering (situated in Älvsbyn and Arjeplog). In the parallel research project DITRA, we developed studios for distance education and remote work.

2008-2012 Senior lecturer (ca. 1700 hours)In 2008 I created a new course, Creative concept development, based on the experience and pedagogical ideas from Stan-ford University. The underlying pedagogical ideas in this course were to work on a much more personal level with the students, challenge them, and try to be creative. Details are described in Törlind (2019b); see Appendix I5. A more advanced version of the course was also developed as a PhD course (Creativity and Product Innovation). In 2009 we recognised that we needed a course that was a mix between business development and product development and there-fore created a course with LTU Business: IDÉ-developers; this course is often used as a starting point for students to work on entrepreneurial endeavours.

2013-19 redesign of the IDE (ca. 5000 teaching hours)In 2013 I became responsible for being the Educational lead-er for Industrial Design Engineering, and I have spent about

1500 hours of management and pedagogic development within the program. During this time, I took a lot more re-sponsibility as a teacher and educational leader and became more active in pedagogic conferences and in the strategic pedagogic development at the university. I also took over duties for several courses and co-developed several courses in the programme. One course was Introduction to Indus-trial Design Engineering, in this course, we mixed theoreti-cal design knowledge with design-implement experiences. Later on in the programme, when students have created a broad base of knowledge and design skills, another de-sign-implement experience is done in the course Product and Production Design. This course was developed to inte-grate knowledge and skills acquired earlier in the program and focus on improving teamwork and interpersonal skills in a product design project.

2020- COVID challenge (ca. 1400 hours)When Corona struck in spring 2020, I had to adapt my courses to distance education or hybrid education. Due to my research background in distributed collaborative work, it was easy for me to adjust to the new requirements. I was challenged to create courses that really used modern tools and pedagogy to enhance learning.

The complete list of courses is available in Appendix C.

SupervisionI have supervised 5 PhD students to PhD and over 100 stu-dent thesis (MSc and BSc). I’m currently supervising two PhD students.

I have changed my supervision over the years, and today I am much more of a coach who challenges students to go outside their comfort zone to deliver excellent results. The thesis work should be the most exciting learning experience they go through, and my role is to help them through the process, not decide how to perform the job. The complete list of thesis supervised is available in Appendix D.

Since I started teaching in 1997, I have been teaching in more than 30 different courses and have about 8 years of full-time teaching. To describe my development as a teacher, I have divided my educational evolution into five stages.

Introduction to IDE (Design: Process and method) is an introduc-tory course that provides the framework for engineering practice in product, process, and system building and introduces essen-tial personal and interpersonal skills (CDIO Standard 4).

“I feel it was really good! One of the more fun cours-es I have had, even irl.”

“I am very satisfied with how this course was on distance”

“I think this course is one of the best courses I’ve had on distance since corona”

Feedback on Creative Concept development course 2021 Appendix F7

M0010T the course used a blended learning approach with in-teractive self-study material to enhance the learning experience for the students. Below is an example from one of the interactive videos.

design-implement experience (CDIO standard 5) denotes a range of engineering activities central to the process of develop-ing new products and systems. In these experiences, students develop product, process, and system building skills and the ability to apply engineering science in design-implement expe-riences integrated into the curriculum.

DETAILS

APPENDIX

C+D

4 PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

TEACHING SKILLSSubject knowledge Scientific competence Design and developm

ent Problem solving Communication skills Project m

anag

emen

t

Per

sona

l qua

lities

P

rofes

siona

l conduct

LTU

TEKNISK DESIGNER

WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONSNOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Understand use and format a basic template

Apply a variety of reporting methods (lab reports, project reports, workbook, pm etc.)

Evaluate, assemble and convincingly formulate work, results and arguments in a credible manner

Select and develop the structure, content and for-mat of written communica-tion for different audiences

Communicate in writing in English

In Sweden, the goals for an education program are regu-lated by the Higher Education Ordinance (1993:100). Both teachers and students perceive these goals as abstract as they refer to the final level of the degree but do not illus-trate what qualities the student needs to have to move on to the next level. When implementing CDIO in 2015, Åsa Wikberg Nilsson and I developed a competence profile for the IDE program to communicate learning objectives for the IDE program.

IDE Competence profileThe competence profile was introduced in an introductory course in 2015 and has since been further improved in sev-eral stages and is currently implemented in several courses where students can reflect on their progression. Now, we are prototyping a competence profile application that stu-dents can use to visualize their progression.

An example of how this is implemented in the program and in a course will use the category Communication skills and the sub-skill Written communication. In the Higher Education Ordinance, this is described as “Show ability to orally and in writing present and discuss information, problems and solutions in dialogue with different groups.” (1993:100). This is reformu-lated as written communication for IDE (see the table be-low). To achieve progression of written communication in the program, it is further broken down into learning objec-tives, assignments and assessments for different courses in the program, creating a competence chain (Appendix E1). To describe how this can be implemented in a course, I have chosen the capstone course Product and Production Design (A0013), in which I am the primary developer and exami-nator.

Self assessment of competences in A0013AIn the course, student redesigns an existing product and present their status at four design reviews (DR). At each DR, they receive formative feedback both on the oral and written presentation. At the end of the course, each student assesses their progression on different subcategories from the competence profile:

1. First the student assesses their competencies and abili-ties and describe how they meet the learning objectives (with examples from the course).

2. The student’s self-assessment is then reviewed by their team members, who give feedback on their individual assessments.

3. Teachers review the assessment and have the possibility to adjust the assessment.

4. The teacher also assesses the quality of the feedback giv-en to team members.

In the feedback, team members often highlight personal competencies that students themselves may not be aware of and perform a ‘sanity -filter’ so the students cannot take credit for something they did not commit. By completing this assessment, students can assess their abilities and com-pare them to the requirements and the teachers’ formal evaluation. This type of self-assessment agrees with Rendon (1994), which points to the importance of formative feed-back on student competence. The difference between the student’s self-assessment and teachers’ final assessment is about 5%. About 20% of the students receive another grade than their team members. The implementation is described more in detail in Törlind (2019a, Appendix I4). More exam-ples of competence chains is described in Appendix E1.

This section shows some examples of how I plan, implement, and evaluate my teaching to support learning. Because I am responsible for Industrial design engineering, I have chosen a top-down approach from a program perspective down to individual learning objectives in a course and how they are assessed.

competence profile is used to break down the goals of the Industrial Design Engineering programme into eight categories. Each category is further divided into subcate-gories that can be visualised as a progression chart where the student begins as a beginner and can develop into an expert. Read more in Wikberg-Nilsson & Törlind (2016). Appendix I2

competence profile app consists of an application where students could individually map their current status and visualise their progression in the IDE-programme.

DETAILS

APPENDIXE

5PETER TÖRLIND

DEVELOPMENT AND RENEWAL

PM1 v.1DR

Peer review x4DR + 4h

Facilitated peer review session

PM1 v.2DR +1d

PM1 v.2DR +1d

Feedback from coach

PM2

Weakness from PM1 adressed in PM2

PM1-4 v.3Appended to

final documentation

facilitated peer-review a process designed to help students per-form their first peer-review (where I go through what the stu-dents should think about how to give criticism, etc.). Students also have the opportunity to discuss their feedback and how they have individually assessed PM in small groups. With the help of this peer review, students receive feedback from four dif-ferent people on three occasions and group feedback. They also receive formative feedback four times from teachers. (Törlind, 2019, Appendix I4).

Program level Evaluation of a program takes place in several ways, both bottom-up (mandatory course evaluations in each course and feedback to teachers) and top-down, where we focus on a more strategic level. In addition to the formal evaluation (program council and bi-annual self-evaluations) we have created opportunities for informal feedback on the program using open program meetings where we invite all students as well as the TD-Challenge (Törlind & Wikberg-Nilsson 2014), where we run a thematic day where all students are invited to work together on a specific theme at one of this open events we invite stakeholders from industry to give alumni feedback. An example of a bi-annual self asessment can be found in Appendix F2.

Continuous development of a courseAs an example of continuous development, I have cho-sen the course Product and Production Design. I have been responsible for this course since the start in 2012. During the last nine years, there has been constant development (a detailed description of the changes is described in Appen-dix F1), and an example of how changes and feedback from course evaluations are presented to students is available in Appendix F3.

Feedback One of the ideas for the course from the beginning was that students should receive continuous feedback throughout the course. Formative feedback allows students to improve their performance and better supports students’ motivation and willingness to work more constructively towards spe-cific goals (Biggs and Tang, 2011).

In the first years, student only received feedback from the teachers on the assignments. In 2014 we introduced feed-back templates that clarified what was expected for the dif-ferent assignments, and in 2015, we introduced a facilitated peer-review. This feedback process dramatically helps the teachers, as the quality of the submitted work is significant-ly increased. For example, during the 2018 course, three individual peer reviews and a group review group, with 56 students, represent over 180 completed peer reviews

where teachers are not involved. Students will also be well acquainted with what is expected, and they will become ac-customed to giving feedback and that they actually spend time reading and judging the work of others. Peer review is supplemented with teachers’ written formative feedback four times per team. The final assessment is seen as quality control and is only done on the final documentation.

From the course evaluations, we can see that most students appreciate the peer review sessions, and they believe that it has improved the quality of the written documentation. Students also believe that by reading other people’s docu-mentation, they have improved their own documentation.

Adaptation to CoronaIn 2020 the course quickly had to be redesigned for dis-tance education due to COVID-19. This was a formidable task though much of the lectures was designed on an active learning approach where we moved between more theoret-ical presentations, group work and reflections.

New tools such as shared team whiteboards were imple-mented and Mentimeter to create more interactive lectures. Also, the break-out rooms in Zoom were used to switch between lecture mode and team mode. Due to the lack of informal communication that usually occurs in a lecture hall, I introduced status update each lecture to identify and respond to problems. Course evaluation form Spring 2020 with feedback on Corona adaptation is available in Appen-dix F4.

Other examples of development and renewalAfter each course, the rest of the teaching teams and I go through informal and formal course evaluation and reflect on the course. This is documented in a Course development report. Appendix F5-F7 have examples of Course develop-ment reports from three different courses to show how sys-tematic development is performed each year. The develop-ment reports show several examples of how I use informal feedback sessions, mid-semester reviews and informal feed-back sessions at many lectures.

As an educational leader for IDE, I am responsible for the systematic and continuous improvement of the program, some-thing we do in several ways (feedback from students, faculty and alumni). As a teacher, I always try to use evaluation to get students to reflect and help me improve my teaching.

DETAILS

APPENDIXF

alumni feedback is typically done at an open event each year where a group of alumni is invited to talk about cuttent trends in industry. The picture is from a program-council meeting with alumni using the competence profile to identify new areas.

6 PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPROACH

My role as a teacherProduct development and learning are closely linked. When I teach design, I tell students that the first idea they come up with will just be an idea. You have to test, evaluate and dispute your idea! In design, we call this phase prototyping, the vital thing – it is an iterative process; we cannot stop after the first attempt; we learn and move on. Therefore, it is crucial as a teacher to use feedback to improve, both when I teach (give feedback to students) and when I learn (get feedback from students). As a teacher, I try to challenge the students and also myself. In the course Creative concept de-velopment, I end each semester with an exercise where stu-dents have to suggest challenges for me. I may get 15-20 challenges, and I select a couple that I try to implement the following year.

Both for educational development and design, it is essential to have a design intent. I have to decide; what is the pur-pose of my course? What should students learn? For me, the design intent is similar to the concept of constructive align-ment. We have an Objective (why do I do this, i.e. what is the goal of the program and how do I break it down to goals in my course), Implementation (how should this be implement-ed in the course, i.e. what learning activities do we need) and Examination (how should I ensure that we can assess that the student meets the learning objective). Just as Frank Lloyd Wright explained that intent drives design with the credo “form follows function”, my courses are specifically de-signed according to what I want to achieve with that par-ticular course. A good teacher/designer has a clear sense of the overall purpose of their creation; outstanding teachers/designers can say, “That’s why we made that decision”, about a thousand details.

Active learningActive learning is for me to go from a boring lecture when the teacher describes what’s in the textbook to a dynamic teaching experience where the student is part of designing and reflecting over that journey. I have been inspired by a couple of role models, Rolf Faste and Bernie Roth, from Stanford University, which I have had the opportunity to

For me, it is crucial to engage students in and outside of the classroom; lectures shall not only be a passive transmission of information. I activate students with problem-solving activities to experience the design process and reflect on what they have done.“Students do not learn much by sitting in class-

es listening to teachers, memorizing pre-pack-aged assignments and spitting out answers,. They must talk about what they are learning, write about it, relate it to past experiences, ap-ply it to their daily lives. They must make what they learn part of themselves.”

Chickering and Gamson, 1987

“I really liked was that we had at least one practical exercise in each lecture, in most courses you just sit down and listen for 1-3 hours, and when you are on your way home and you don’t really remember what it was about. But in this course you really re-member what it was about, and you could apply the things you learnt in the team exercise”

From student reflection video, M7016T (2017)

“I went to the first class and expecting something completely different to be honest. I was kind of surprised by how much I had to put myself out there. What I thought was just another product develop-ment course, turned out to be the best thing that could happened to me. I had to work on my own weakness, more than ever, being forced to use ways of thinking in creative methods that I have never used or tried before.”

From student reflection video, M7016T (2019).

Learning Management System can be used to sup-port a blended learning experience – before, dur-ing and after the physical lectures and seminars. An example is presented in Appendix G1 and another on my blog: https://peter-onl.blogspot.com/2020/09/LMS-blended.html

meet and collaborate during several seminars and work-shops. I think that they changed the way I think and behave when I teach. For me, the most crucial part was to bring students out of their comfort zone and challenge them to try new things and be as creative as possible.

Creating an active learning structureTo describe how a typical lecture could look like, I use the structure from the M7016T course (Törlind 2019, Appen-dix I5). I like to create some familiarity and structure in the course and an active approach that switches between differ-ent modes.

1. Introduction, in this phase, students adapt to the class-room (move out chairs, tables, etc.).

2. Theory lecture, to introduce new concepts and theory. Lectures include activities to activate the students such as think-pair-share, small group discussions, reaction to video etc.

3. Break between the lecture and the exercise; often, a small game is performed to raise the energy in the room.

4. Exercise. Students divide into small teams and imple-ment things they have learned from the first part of the lecture.

5. Presentation, here my role is to ask questions and try to find the rationale of the students’ choice of methods and how they decided to perform the task.

6. Reflection. All students have to reflect on the exercise and give feedback.

Student feedback from the course can be found in the course evaluation in Appendix G2 and in Appendix F7 .

Blended learningThe lectures should not be the only interaction in the course. I activate students between classes to create a blended learning experience and enforce social interactions between students.

The Learning Management System should connect lec-tures, exercises, quizzes, in-depth material and teamwork to create a coherent learning journey.

DETAILS

APPENDIXG

7PETER TÖRLIND

COLLABORATIONI like to learn from others, and I believe in the power of multi-disciplinary teams. And therefore, I have worked in several courses to bring students from different disciplines together. I have also performed international teaching exchange with four international universities.

Design society (2001-)Design Society (DS) is my primary research network, and I have been active since 2000. I regularly attend conferences and are engaged in the Scientific Advisory Board of several DS endorsed conferences. Since 2013 I am a member of the DS Advisory board and responsible for the Young Members Committee (coordinating activities for students).

ME310 and Sirius (2001-2007)For several years, I collaborated between Luleå Universi-ty and Stanford University, where we had one or several collaborative student teams working together to solve an industrial challenge. The collaboration was performed in the Sirius course (LTU) and ME310 (Stanford). Also several research papers on collaboration came out of this collabora-tion (Törlind & Larsson, 2002; Larsson et al. 2002; Törlind et al. 2005).

During this time, I was influenced by the human-centred design and prototype-driven product development ap-proach at Stanford University.

PIEp (2007-2016)Product Innovation Engineering programme (PIEp) was a Swedish national program to strengthen innovative prod-uct- and business development. In the program, we devel-oped both engineering education and graduate education with close collaboration with Stanford University. With-in PIEp, I was responsible for the LTU node, the graduate course Creative Concept development and the Tiger Team Writing Workshop.

Innovation pilots (2012-2014)The innovation pilots were a collaborative project between several universities in Sweden. In the project, we recruit-ed master students responsible for working as innovation pilots (change agents) in different companies and organi-sations.

CDIO (2015-)Since LTU joined the CDIO-initiative in 2015 LTU, I have been active at the national and international CDIO are-

na, participated in several conferences, and presented our CDIO-implementation in several national presentations

UNIVERSEH (2020-)Within the European Space University for Earth and Hu-manity, I am the LTU coordinator for WP5 (Entrepreneur-ship and Innovation), in which we are developing a joint innovation curriculum. I am also involved in hybrid teach-ing, development of micro-credentials, and online modules.

Collaboration within the universityDuring the years I have been involved in several capstone design courses where we bring students from different dis-ciplines together (see Appendix H2-3). As an example the Interdisciplinary education project where we brought students from Industrial Design Engineering together with students from Occupational Therapy. In the implementation, we used a flipped-classroom approach for an Introduction to design thinking. After the introduction, the students got a challenge to find a problem during their clinical placement period. During the next semester, the multidisciplinary teams worked together to solve the problem.

DEPICT LAB in educationIn the strategic pedagogical development project Self-study modules for DEPICT general modules was developed that can easily be integrated as a component in the university’s existing courses.

International exchangeI have been quite active in international exchange and teach abroad. I really like to learn and get inspired by others. I have done teaching exchange with Stanford University, Grenoble University, Zagreb University and Aalto Univer-sity. I have spent a total of seven weeks teaching creativity and facilitation in Zagreb. Together with Grenoble Univer-sity, I created an International summer school in Design ob-servation. Details in Appendix H4.

HDETAILS

APPENDIX

Introduction to design thinking is a flipped classroom imple-mentation for students in Occupational Therapy. It is designed as a short introduction video combined with a half-day interactive workshop. The video lecture is available here: https://play.ltu.se/media/Design-thinking/0_70ik2r93 and some of the feedback from the workshop is available below. The complete feedback is avail-able in Appendix H6.

Self-study modules for DEPICT in the project, a wiki with in-formation about the lab, instruments and software was devel-oped. By integrating this in Canvas LMS, it is easy to export parts of the room (so-called Commons) which can then be used in other courses.

8 PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

PEDAGOGICAL KNOWL-EDGE DEVELOPMENT Academic dissemination

I have currently published 10 papers with a pedagogical fo-cus (Appendix I1) and try to write a pedagogical papers at least once per year. Firstly it gives me time to reflect and deep-dive into a certain topic and you really have to reflect over why yo do certain things in a course. And by attending at least one pedagogical conference each year such as the International CDIO Conference or International conference on engineering and product design education (EPD&E) I have the possibility to focus on teaching and pedagogy for a couple of days. At every conference I bring something home that I will try to implement at the IDE programme or one of my courses. I also participate in national educational confer-ences. In 2019 I was part of the local organising committee for the 7:th development Conference for Swedish Engineer-ing education.

TextbooksIntroduction to Industrial Design Engineering is a 15-credit introductory course with the idea of integrating disciplinary knowledge with practical skills and providing a framework for industrial design engineering. When developing the course, we found no suitable textbook that included what we needed. Therefore we created our own textbook – Snow-flake. By using the book in the first implementation of the course, we gathered feedback and experiences. Subsequent-ly, the textbook was heavily reworked into Design: process och method (Swedish for Design: Process and Method) published in 2015 by Studentlitteratur. A second edition was developed 2021.

The idea to write the 4I4I book came from the experience that current textbooks for design thinking was too over-whelming, and we needed something fun and easy to read, so we decided to create “My first design thinking workbook”. The 4I4I has been used as a framework to perform quick workshops and innovation races.

Other publicationsOne of the results from the Faste research project was the Radical Innovation workshop method. These methods were integrated into a framework for creating innovative facilitated workshops – FUNC3 (Ericsson & Törlind, 2013).

As a researcher, I believe that we should spread knowledge to others and also learn from others. Therefore, I am active in several different communities to share what I have learned and to gain new knowledge.

Design: process och metod is a text-book that was developed for the in-troduction to industrial design engi-neering at LTU and is currently used at more than ten universities in Sweden. (Wikberg Nilsson, Eriksson & Törlind, 2021).

4I4I Four I:s For Innovation is now used in several courses at the univer-sity. It is also used by LTU Business in the Innovation factory competitions (Bergström, Ericson, Törlind & Lars-son, 2011).https://www.ltu.se/research/subjects/product-innovation/4I4I

DETAILS

APPENDIXI

FUNC3 Workbook is an interac-tivemulti media workbook pub-lished in the Apple Book format.https://www.ltu.se/research/subjects/product-innovation/FUNC3

pilots project, the FUNC3 Workbook was developed to guide students on applying the FUNC3 process.

Active on social media Since March 2020, when we had to adapt to COVID-19, I have been active on several social media channels such as the “Digital omställning i högre utbildning NU” (Digital transformation in higher education).

I also started to write a pedagogical blog (https://peter-onl.blog-spot.com/) when participating in the course Open Networked Learning and has continued to use it to share my experience of networked and on-line learning. In the blog, I present practical advice on how to enhance online teaching.

Pedagogic development at LTUCurrently, I am active in pedagogical development within the IDE programme where we have reoccurring meetings to develop an updated version of the Industrial Design En-gineering programme. As the Educational leader for IDE, I am also active in the CDIO group at the university.

9PETER TÖRLIND

PEDAGOGIC LEADERSHIP

JDETAILS

APPENDIX

Strategic workWhile I was head of the Division of Innovation and design (2011-17), I was part of the management team for the depart-ment, I had the opportunity to influence the department’s strategic work. One of the things I was involved in was the underlying framework to help teachers to improve. We identified the importance of creating incentives for teachers so that they see that their pedagogical development pays off.

We implemented this by creating a support structure where teachers attending pedagogical courses recive reduce teach-ing time. The same approach was implemented for interna-tional teacher exchange to avoid that educational exchange leads to an increased teaching load on the teacher. Other-wise, we punish active teachers that wants to learn from others. Finally, we created ‘scholarships’ to attend educa-tional conferences and time to publish and present at peda-gogical conferences..

The role of the educational leaderWhen I took over as an education leader, one of my goals was to change the structure of education leaders for pro-grams. Today, the responsibility for a program is divided into a variety of roles within the university, and there is a need for a more transparent and formal responsibility for the educational leaders. We have a formal responsibility on paper, but today we have no real powers to change what other research subjects and examiners do. Also, much of the program is based on general courses (which are common to all engineering programs at LTU), and we can hardly influ-ence these introductory courses! To change this structure is, unfortunately, a prolonged process and an agreement with-in all programs.

In 2015, a strategic decision was made at LTU, where all ed-ucational leaders should undergo training in pedagogical leadership. For me, this was an exciting course as we had the opportunity to discuss how we work today and how we should work in the future and discussed strategies on how to involve the faculty in the continuous development of the program.

On the program level, I have a structure of reoccurring meet-ings with students, faculty, and alumni to identify courses that have the potential for improvements.

By competence mapping the facultys pedagogical educa-tion, I can recommend teachers attend pedagogical courses to enhance their pedagogical knowledge.

During the CDIO-implementation at LTU, IDE was one of the pioneers, and we identified the need to implement CDIO-training for all teachers. The training was implement-ed by developing a new course, Program-driven course devel-opment, and a seminar series with experienced CDIO-ex-perts. We decided that all teachers that taught in the program should read the Program-driven course development course. This strategy was very successful because we could change the IDE program on a strategic level (top-down), and at the same time, we changed the content in the courses and pedagogical ideas (bottom-up), thereby ensuring that the CDIO was impacting the whole program and also visi-ble in the individual classes.

At LTU, I am active as a guest lecturer in several of the courses organized by the Centre for pedagogical develop-ment, including the Program-driven course development and Qualifying course for university teachers (see a list of presenta-tions in Appendix J2).

Visions for the futureOne of the thing I just have started with is to challenge other teachers to improve their education through informal men-torship. As I try to write a pedagogical papers at least one per year, in the future I will involve a teacher that is less ex-perienced than me and write a paper together. The last ped-agogical paper I wrote together with one of my collegues that had newer written to a pedagogical conference before (Appendix I6).

Finnaly I need to advocate for a shared project framework so we can bring students from different complementary programs together to solve Grand Challenges instead of the limited and simplified projects we run with our students today.

competence mapping of the faculty is used as a strategic tool to identify teachers suitable for pedagogic development.

Grand challenges is inspired by DARPA Grand Challenge (a prize competition for a specific challenge) and Challenge based ed-ucation where students solve real societal problems.

As an educational leader, I am responsible for the program and should have a holistic view of the program, including quality control and development. I am also responsible for leading pedagogical development work at the program.

10 PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

OTHER MERITSEngineering workspacesI have been involved in the development of several state-of-the-art environments for collaborative work and teaching.

iMeetIn this project, I was involved as an expert to develop inno-vative lecture halls for distance education designed to sup-port hybrid teaching. See Appendix K1 for details.

The Studio

The Studio was developed in 2001 as a research environ-ment for collaboration. It includes a large visualisation wall used in research and education to visualise digital models.

LTU Design ObservatoryWas built in 2007 to study design collaboration in realistic settings and situations and let design students experience distributed collaboration. The Design observatory is de-scribed in Appendix K3 and the underlying rationale in Lar-son et al. (2005).

Multi-studio is a flexible studio designed as a large open space that can be reconfigured for different types of inter-actions. From traditional lecture mode, to group work in a couple of minutes, for details see Appendix H1.

Researchers night autumn 2020 presenting opportuni-ties and challenges of Additive manufacturing for invited High school students.

DETAILS

APPENDIXK

IDE workspacesPhysical learning environments is an integral part of design teaching as much of the design process is based on working iteratively where students create, test and evaluate. There-fore, it is of the utmost importance that students have access to collaborative environments where they can work togeth-er as well as labs for developing and testing prototypes.

In 2014, we had the opportunity to redesign the physical learning environments for Industrial design engineering, and I was responsible to coordinate the department inter-ests. During the design phase, we worked in workshop form together with students and the faculty to develop both classrooms, design laboratories, collaboration rooms, pro-ject rooms, meeting rooms and informal learning environ-ments specially adapted for our program. The new learning spaces encourage practical learning, prototype develop-ment and facilitate group activities and social interaction. The environment can be divided into three floors; the bot-tom floor contains lab rooms for prototype development and multi-studio; the middle floor contains classrooms and design studios as well as informal learning environments and a café. On the top floor includes offices for the faculty.

Central to the education is a large multi-studio designed as a flexible space with an associated garage for storage. Multistudio has been very popular, not only in education, by users from all over the university.

Delta blockSince 2020 I have worked part time in the Delta structure project (new block at the LTU campus) focusing on devel-oping research and educational facilities. The sucess of the multi-studio has led to that at least six new multi-studios will be built (expected to be completed in 2025).

Popular science presentationsI try to present my research not just within academia and and are active in the region, doing presentations etc.

I have been part of Europeans researcher’s night and the research week organised in Luleå by Teknikens hus (Luleå Science Centre) 2017, 2019 and 2020. Some examples of pop-ular sience presentation is available in Appendix K.

I have always been interested in physical environments for research and collaboration and creating creative, exciting and efficient spaces for innovation. I also like to present my research to society.

11PETER TÖRLIND

REFERENCESOwn pedagogical papers and textbooksPapers and books sorted by time of publication.Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2021). Design: process och

metod (2:nd ed.). Lund: Studentlitteratur. ISBN: 978-91-4414339-2Törlind, P & Eklöf, L. (2021) Strategic Development of Personal and

Interpersonal Skills, International conference on engineering and product design education, 9-10 September 2021, Via University Col-lege, Herning, Denmark.

Törlind, P. (2019b). Implementation of integrated learning experiences and active learning in a creative concept development course. In 7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar. Luleå

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2019). Implementation of workbooks as an active learning tool for Industrial Design Engineering. In 7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar. Luleå.

Törlind, P. (2019a). Improving written Communication – Implementation at Industrial Design Engineering, Proceedings of The 15th Internatio-na CDIO Conference.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å. Jörgen Normark, C., Törlind P., & Öhrling, T. (2017) Experiences of educational reform - Implementation of CDIO at Industrial Design Engineering. Proceedings of The 13th International CDIO Conference.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2016). Student Competence Profiles: a complementary or competitive approach to CDIO. Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2015). Design: process och metod. Lund: Studentlitteratur. 237 p. ISBN: 978-91-4410-885-8

Håkansson, A., & Törlind, P. (2014). Enhancing Student motivation: “raise the bar”. In proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands 4th - 5th September 2014. (pp. 414-419). Chapter 9. Glasgow: Design Society.

Törlind, P., & Wikberg-Nilsson, Å. (2014). TD-Challenge: erfarenheter från temadag för Teknisk design. In NU 2014 : Umeå 8-10 oktober : abstracts. (pp. 191). Umeå: Umeå universitet. Pedagogiska institu-tionen.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å. & Törlind, P. (2013) Snowflake: en bred bok om design- och utvecklingsprocesser, Luleå: Luleå University of Technology. 79 p. ISBN: 978-91-7439-700-0

Bergström, M., Ericson, Å., Törlind, P., Larsson, A., 2011, 4I4I - Four I:s for Innovation (2:nd ed.). Division of Functional Products, Luleå. ISBN: 978-91-7439-148-0

Ericson, Å., Bergström, M., Larsson, A., Törlind, P. (2009) Design thinking challenges in education, In proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’09): Design Society, Au-gust 24-27, 2009, Stanford, CA, USA.

Larsson, A., Törlind, P., Bergström, M., Löfstrand, M. & Karlsson, L. (2005) Design for versatility: the changing face of workspaces for collaborative design, Proceedings of the 15th International Confer-ence on Engineering Design (ICED’05): Design Society, August 15-18, 2005, Melbourne, Australia.

Larsson, A., Törlind, P., Karlsson, L., Mabogunje, A., Leifer, L., Larsson, T. & Elfström, B. (2003), Distributed team innovation: a framework for distributed product development, In proceedings of the 14th Interna-tional Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’03).

Other referencesCDIO Standards 2.0, http://cdio.org/implementing-cdio/stand-

ards/12-cdio-standardsCrawley, E., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., & Brodeur, D. (2007). Rethinking

engineering education. The CDIO Approach, 302, 60-62.Ericson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2013). A deep dive into creative thinking: the

now-wow-how framework. Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Design for Harmonies. (p. 337-346). Nr 7, Vol. 75. Design Society

Faste, R. (1994) Ambidextrous Thinking, Innovations in Mechanical Engineering Curricula for the 1990s, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, vol. November, 1994.

Faste R. A. (1987), Perceiving needs SAE Journal, no. 871534.Gelb, M. J. (2009) How to think like Leonardo da Vinci: Seven steps to

genius every day, DellHigher Education Ordinance (1993: 100) Högskoleförordningen

(1993:100) Stockholm: Sveriges RiksdagBrown, T. Design thinking, Harvard business review, vol. 86 (6), pp.

84-92, 2008. Rendon, L. (1994) Validating Culturally Diverse Students Toward a New

Model of Learning and Student Development. Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 19, No.1, Fall 1994

I have chosen to present an overview of my pedagogical work in this portfolio, for a more in-depth theoretical discussion and the relation to the existing body of knowledge you have to read the papers.

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX

A – EDUCATIONAL DEGREES

B –PEDAGOGICAL EDUCATION

C – TEACHING EXPERIENCE

D – SUPERVISION

E – TEACHING EXPERTISE

F – PEDAGOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND RENEWAL

G – PEDAGOGICAL APPROACH

H – PEDAGOGICAL COLLABORATION

I – PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT

J – PEDAGOGIC LEADERSHIP

K – OTHER PEDAGOGICAL MERITS

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX A

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

A EDUCATIONAL DEGREES • 2020, Associate professor/ Docent, Product innovation, Luleå University of Technology.

• 2002, Ph. D., Computer-Aided Design, Luleå University of Technology. Thesis: Distributed engineering: tools and methods for collaborative product development

• 1999, T. Lic., Computer-Aided Design, Luleå University of Technology. Thesis: Product models and environment for distributed engineering.

• 1996, M.Sc., Mechanical Engineering, Luleå University of Technology. Thesis: Specification of tolerance inspection in I-DEAS:

A1 Formal Associate Professor Competence To be promoted to Associate professor LTU has a requirement to attend a supervision course stage 2.

Because of my interest in supervision and academic leadership, I have also attended the Supervision course stage 3.

• Supervisor course stage 3, Luleå University of Technology 2009. (Appendix B7)

• Supervisor course stage 2, (Associate Professor Course), Luleå University of Technology 2006. (Appendix B8)

Appendix

A2 PhD Certificate, LTU, 2002

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX B

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

B PEDAGOGICAL EDUCATION At the moment, I have completed seven pedagogical courses (18 ECTS), four supervision courses, as well as four leadership courses and several other courses that are relevant for teaching. Below I describe them and reflect on the impact they had on my teaching.

B1 Formal Pedagogical education

• Higher Education 4.0: Certifying Your Future, Dublin City University, 2021 In the UNIVERSEH, one of the goals is to develop different types of online courses using micro-credentials. To get more experience and knowledge in this area, I joined the online course focusing on Higher Education 4.0.

• Open Networked Learning, LTU, 2020 (3 ECTS) The course focused on Networked learning, and the timing was a bit uncanny – as soon as I started to read this course, we had to switch remote teaching because of the Coronavirus. So meant that I could directly implement and test many ideas in the course in my own courses. My pedagogic blog has a more extended reflection: https://peter-onl.blogspot.com/2020/05/final-reflection-of-onl-ourse.html)

• Academic writing, LTU, 2018 (3 ECTS) The course focused on how to meet challenges with students’ academic writing. In this course, I had the opportunity to analyse the academic writing in one of my courses and introduce activities to improve the final project documentation. This was also presented at CDIO 2019 (Törlind 2019a). See also Appendix I3. I currently present this approach as an example of improving feedback in the Basic Pedagogy course at LTU.

• Leadership for pedagogical leaders, LTU, 2015-16 (3 ECTS) In 2015, a strategic decision was made at LTU, where all educational leaders should undergo training in pedagogical leadership. For me, this was an exciting course as we had the opportunity to discuss how we work today and how we should work in the future and strategies to involve the faculty in the continuous development of the program.

• Program-driven course development), LTU 2015-16 (3 ECTS) This course was part of the strategic CDIO implementation. For me, the ideas presented by Kristina Edström and Jakob Kuttenkeuler “The teacher’s trick” Where they suggested ideas on how to improve students’ learning without spending more time as a teacher. Something that I brought with me and implemented in one of my courses. The implementation is described more in detail in Törlind (2019a) Appendix I3.

• Entrepreneurial approach within the education at LTU, Spring 09 (3 ECTS) This course was part of introducing Entrepreneurial learning for students, something that I have used in many of my courses, and I urge my students try to continue to work with ideas that they have developed at the university.

• Pedagogical Development, LTU (3 ECTS) This was the fundamental course in pedagogic development that provided me with constructive alignment and writing learning objectives.

B2 Supervision courses • Supervisor course stage 3, Luleå University of Technology 2009.

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX B

• The new global research system - challenges facing young supervisors of today. Supervisor course for PhD-supervisors, NordForsk, Estonia 16-19 September 2008.

• Supervisor course stage 2 (Associate Professor Course), Luleå University of Technology 2006 (entire course five days).

• Coaching and Creativity, PIEp Workshop (taught by Bernie Roth and Larry Leifer, Stanford University), KTH Aug 19-22, 2007.

B3 Leadership courses • Chefsprogrammet, (Management program) Luleå University of Technology, 2013 (total nine days) • Development of the personal leadership within LTU, Leadership course, Personal Management

International, 04-05 (total 14 days).

B4 Other courses • Design Kit: The course for human-centred design, Acumen and IDEO.org, 2015 (seven-week

course, about 50h total) • PIEp Media course, Chalmers University of Technology, Jan 27-28, 2011. • Media course. Course for interaction with media. Luleå University of Technology, December

15-16, 2008. • Managing Teams for Innovation and Success, Stanford Graduate School of Business June 2-6 2008. • Turning Foresight Thinking into Action, PIEp Workshop, Stanford, March 31-April 4, 2008.

APPENDIX

B5 Supervisor course stage 2, LTU, 2007 B6 Managing Teams for Innovation and Success, Stanford, USA, 2008. B7 The new global research system, Nordforsk, 2008 B8 Supervisor course stage 3, LTU, 2009. B9 Management program (Chefsprogrammet), LTU, 2013 B10 Design Kit: The course for human-centred design, Acumen and IDEO.org, 2015 B11 Program-driven course development, LTU, 2016 B12 Leadership for pedagogical leaders, LTU, 2016 B13 To meet challenges with students’ academic writing skills, LTU, 2018 B14 Open Networked Learning, Luleå University of Technology, 2020 B15 Higher Education 4.0: Certifying Your Future, 2021

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX C

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

C TEACHING EXPERIENCE Since 1997 I have about 13500h of teaching (including managerial roles and pedagogic development) at the university. I am currently teaching eleven different courses and are an examiner of six courses. Table C1 summarises most of the courses I have been involved in or are responsible for (examiner) for a more extended period. For graduate courses, I have only attached courses that were part of a national or international programme.

Table C1 Main courses that have taught.

Course ID

Name Level ECTS Role Size

Developer of course

Time

A0013A Product and production design B 7,5 E, T25 L Main developer 2012-

D0017A Product design B 15 T20 M 2015-17

D0030A DESIGN: process and method B 15 T20 L Co-developer 2015-17

D0031A User interfaces: design and implementation

B 7,5 T30 M Co-developer 2018-

D0039A Design: Interaction and prototypes B 15 T20 M Co-developer 2017-19

D0045A Design: project and depth B 15 E, T80 S Main developer 2018-20

D7006A Advanced product design M 15 T15 M

2014-2018

D7011A Advanced prototyping M 7,5 E, T50 M Main developer 2016-20

D7017A Product visualisation M 7,5 E, T50 M Co-developer 2015-

I0013N IT Innovation B 7,5 T80 XL Main developer

2012-2013

K7004N Customer centred product development

M 7,5 T10 L 2009-15

M0010T Computer Aided Design B 7,5 T25 L Co-developer 1997-10

M0024T Project course C B 7,5 T5 L 2013-

M0027T IDE-developer B 7,5 E S Main developer 2009-

M7004T Sirius - Creative Product Design Process

M 30 T10 M Co-developer 2001-07

M7013T Integrated Engineering Design and Production

G 7,5 T10 M Co-developer 2005-14

M7014T Product Development Processes M 7,5 T20 M Co-developer 2007-15

M7016T Creative Concept Development M 7,5 E, T80 M Main developer 2008-

O7008N Advanced Project Management M 7,5 T10 XL Co-developer 2010-

T7027T Additive Manufacturing - Process, Material, Product

M 7,5 T25 M Co-developer 2019-

Collaborative Work in Design G 5 T30 S Co-developer 2003-04

Graduate school of space technology: Product Innovation for space applications

G 7,5 T20 S Co-developer 2017-

Production2030: Production innovation

G 7,5 T15 S Co-developer 2014-19

PV31 Modelling and Simulation in Product Development

G 7,5 E, T50 S Co-developer 2005-11

IDON Doctoral course G 5 T30 S Co-developer 2009-11

PIEp: Creativity and product innovation

G 7,5 E, T90 S Main developer 2010-13

Scientific Communication G 5 E, T60 S Co-developer 2021-

Introduction to Biometric research G 5 E, T80 S Main developer 2021-

Level: B = Bachelor, M=Master, G=Graduate Size: S = 5-15 students, M = 16-45, L = 46-90, XL = 90+ Role: E = Examiner, T=Teacher and the approximate teaching load of the course per cent (i.e., T90 = Teach 90%)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX C

Figure C1 Teaching and pedagogical activities.

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX D

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

D SUPERVISION I currently supervise three PhD student and has previously supervised five PhD students (all to PhD) and more than 80 Master thesis students.

D1 Supervisor for Ph. D Students I have supervised two students as the main supervisor until licentiate thesis and supervised five students as an assistant supervisor to Pd. D.

D1.1 Ongoing

• 2020-present: main supervisor Didunoluwa Obilanade • 2016-present: assistant supervisor Erika Lind (Licentiate planned June 18 2020) • 2015-present: assistant supervisor Brenda Viveros

D1.2 Completed

• 2015-2020: assistant supervisor for Christo Dordlofva Ph. D: Qualification Aspects in Design for Additive Manufacturing: A Study in the Space Industry, Doctoral thesis, Luleå University of Technology, 2020.

• 2009-2014: Anna Karlsson Ph. D: Nurturing Innovations: idea development in R&D projects, Doctoral thesis, Luleå University of Technology, 2014. (assistant supervisor) Licentiate: A study of R&D projects: how teams innovate. Licentiate thesis, Luleå University of Technology, 2012. (main supervisor)

• 2011-2014: assistant supervisor for Jörgen Normark Ph. D: The User as Interface Designer: Personalizable Vehicle User Interfaces, Doctoral thesis, Luleå University of Technology, 2014.

• 2007-2009: assistant supervisor for Mikael Nybacka Ph. D: Exploring technologies for service provision in automotive winter testing. Doctoral thesis, Luleå University of Technology, 2009. Licentiate: Distributed vehicle testing: dynamic simulation for automotive winter testing. LTU 2007:28.

• 2004-2009: assistant supervisor for Mattias Bergström Ph. D: Probing for innovation: how small design teams collaborate, Doctoral thesis, Luleå University of Technology, 2009. (assistant supervisor) Licentiate: Getting physical: tangibles in a distributed virtual environment. LTU 2006:01 (main supervisor)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX D

D2 Assessment of graduate work

External examiner for graduate students (6)

• External examiner (opponent) for Lian Gong, Developing extended reality systems for the manufacturing industry, PhD, June 9, 2020.

• External examiner for Philip Ekströmmer, A first sketch of Computer-Aided Ideation – Exploring CAD tools as externalisation media in design ideation, TLic, LiU November 18, 2019.

• External examiner for Carlo Kriesi, Wayfaring in the Biomedical Sector: A Call for Re Introducing the Toolmaker, PhD, NTNU, Norway. December 18, 2018.

• External examiner for Kamila Kunrath, Designer’s Professional Identity: understanding composition, development, and perceptions, PhD, DTU April 23, 2019

• External examiner (betygsnämnd) for Giana Carli Lorenzini, Toward Inclusive Pharmaceutical Packaging – An Innovation and Design Process Perspective, PhD, Lund University, May 18, 2018.

• External examiner for Phil Cash, Characterising the Relationship Between Practice and Laboratory-Based Studies of Designers for Critical Design Situations, PhD, Bath University June 1, 2012.

D3 Supervisor/examiner for master thesis projects (87) 1. David Stålbring, Design of a device for ski boot fitment – Increasing comfort and decreasing injuries, in progress

(supervisor) 2. Kaerina & Wazema, Optimisation of hydroponic systems, in progress (supervisor) 3. Niklas Bagge, Improving the user experience in consumer computer assembly, in progress (supervisor) 4. Christoffer Ekman, Designing an adjustable railing system with a human-centered design approach, in progress

(supervisor) 5. Tom-Oskar Barreflod & Matilda Nilsson, Designing sustainable alpine skis – Combining user needs with ecological,

social and economical sustainability, 2020 (reviewer) 6. Markus Ahlberg, Attenuation and awareness? Designing a method for measuring accuracy and certainty of sound

identification wearing a HPD, 2020 (reviewer) 7. David Almqvist, William Johansson, Finger mounted ultrasound for inexperienced users - Development of a portable

ultrasound device for examinations of stomas in rural Sweden, 2020 (reviewer) 8. Linnéa Daniels, UI for Additive Manufacturing - A digital user interface for an additive manufacturing process in a new

environment, 2020 (reviewer) 9. Daniel Andersson & Robin Florbrant, Design of a test Equipment - Measuring data on hydraulic quick couplings used

in the excavation industry, 2020 (supervisor) 10. Rebecka Skarin, UX Design of Augumented Reality House Configurator – Mobile AR Application and Administration

Interface Design, 2020 (supervisor) 11. Tobias Persson, Design of a workstation for teleoperated forwarders - Exploring the future work within forestry, 2020

(supervisor) 12. William Odevik &Viktor Wästersved Nyberg, Modular sound absorbing unit, A system solution for implementation of

noise abatement appliance in indoor environments, 2020 (reviewer) 13. Therese Andersson & Amanda Wikberg, Seating in autonomous trucks - The design of a new driver’s seat for autonomous

long haulage trucks, 2019 5(reviewer) 14. Mikaela Zernell, Design of a ski mountaineering helmet, 2019 (reviewer) 15. Serena Wu, Process development: how to evaluate scent in Quality and experience design – An adapted process for a quality

design team in Electrolux, 2019 (reviewer) 16. Johan Niklasson, Fastening Concept for Managing Frontal Collision - Product Development of Rear-facing Child Car

Seat (reviewer) 17. David Sundvall, Increasing access to freashwater in the Phillipino archipelagos – development of an off-grid greywater

purifier, 2019 (supervisor) 18. Victor Hansson & Felix Stare, User experience and occupant Safety: Concept development of restraint system

for the automobile outboard rear sear positions, 2019 (supervisor) 19. Anton Nordmark, Designing multimodal warning signals for cyclists of the future, 2019 (reviewer) 20. Viktor Österberg, Utveckling av mattransportlösning för IKEA, 2019 (supervisor) 21. Axel A Egerlid & Fredrik Westin, Creation of FA-100 – A portable screening tool for filter cloth selection, 2018

(reviewer)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX D

22. Marcus Jonsson, Design of Multifunctional and Sustainable Backpacks - Combining skiing, snowboarding, and Urban Usage, 2018 (reviewer)

23. Malin Sundberg, Paper bag for fruit and vegetables, 2018 (reviewer) 24. Sara Kafi & Josefin Petterson, Welding Safety Equipment: Design of head protection for welding with a human-centered

focus on ergonomics, usability and user experience, 2018 (reviewer) 25. Viktor Björnström, Redesigning a Locking System for a Railroad Dumper, 2018 (Supervisor) 26. Alexander Grothage, Development of a roof mounted led-ramp, 2018 (supervisor) 27. Marika Linde, Fire extinguisher mount for vehicles - Adapted for mining conditions and emergencies, 2018 (supervisor) 28. Emelie Larsson, Wax-accessory for cross-country skiers – Development of a wax-bench that collect waste, 2018 (supervisor) 29. Zakarias Envall, Robot Racking - A Racking Solution for Autonomous Production, 2018 (supervisor) 30. Henrik Axelsson and Melanie Boman, Design and Optimization of Body in White Components using Carbon Fiber-

Reinforced Polymer, 2018 (supervisor) 31. Emma Styf, Visual Communication Between Truck Drivers and the Surroundings, 2018 (reviewer). 32. John Hedlund, Eye tracking in usability – A methodology study, 2018 (reviewer). 33. Amanda Bjurenberg, E-Sea Power – The Design and Standardisation of Chargers for Electric Boats, 2018 (supervisor). 34. Emma Strålberg & Sandra Pettersson, Redesign of rails for an overhead system – A development work to make the system

more effective, 2017 (supervisor). 35. Minette Näslund, Transportation of Police Dogs - A new solution with focus on usability and user experience 2017

(supervisor). 36. Annika Nyberg & Sofia Ödling, A Future Vertical Support Solution for an Overhead System – Concept development of

a new vertical support system at Liko Hill-Rom 2017 (reviewer). 37. Paula Tomás Malón, Improving the University Learning Experience - Service design of a framework for learning, 2017

(reviewer). 38. Ida Jakobsson, Encourage Sedentary Workers to use 3D Training, 2017 (reviewer) 39. Joakim Forsberg, Aesthetical Perspectives in street lightning – A study of future potential in LED street lightning, 2016

(reviewer). 40. Felicia Aneer & Carl Hansols, Design of driver environment – Interior design for slag hauler SH 60 with focus on

ergonomics and safety. 2016 (reviewer). 41. Zeinab Al-shatrawi & Erika Andersson, Development of a new CAD-methodology – for Tool CAE-Analysts at

GestampHardtch, 2016 (reviewer) 42. Viktor Lindholm, Design of a mobile cash distribution system for social welfare allowance, 2016 (reviewer) 43. Filip Lanneld & Filip Wessman, Applications of camera monitoring system replacing truck mirrors -an investigating study

in the automotive industry, 2016 (reviewer) 44. Patrik-Patricio Azócar Nordeman, Solar powered outdoor lighting, The heart of a competitive modular solar powered

lighting system, 2016 (Supervisor). 45. Karolina Spets Granvik and Amanda Åkerström, Intelligent medical dosage unit - Product design from a user perspective,

2016 (reviewer) 46. Anna-Klara Nilsson, Designing an interface for aircraft maintenance and the possibilities of augmented reality–

An iterative user-centered design process, 2016 (reviewer). 47. Calle Pettersson and Robin Öhlund, Transitions of Ceiling Lifts between different types of Overhead Systems –Concept

development of a new Traverse switch at Liko Hill-rom, 2016 (reviewer) 48. Martin Ferm, Operators table Design of weapon bracket and operators table for the infantry Combat Vehicle CV90, 2015

(reviewer) 49. Therese Hagberg, Viltvarnare – en studie på viltvarnevisslare, 2015 (supervisor) 50. Angelica Löfberg, Ice Sensor – design of an enclosure, 2015 (supervisor). 51. Daniel Kron, Quick coupler S40 Designed for a higher level of safety and easier usage, 2015 (supervisor) 52. Caroline Edlund, Development of details for innovative steel construction – Product design with focus on functionality,

simplicity and ergonomics, 2015(examiner) 53. Victor Björklund & Pontus Karlsson, Reuse of manufacturing data in development, 2015 (examiner) 54. Elin Lund, Utveckling av knivkoncept, 2015 (examiner) 55. Emma Pettersson, Implementing an existing modular motor-drive design in a new type of tap-changer, 2015 (supervisor) 56. Andreas Mörtberg, Visualization of a graphical user interface based on exterior lightning conditions, 2015 (examiner) 57. Erik Danielsson, Redesign av stångräknare: Konceptutveckling och detaljkonstruktion, 2015 (examiner) 58. Emma Svensson, Adhesives as non – drilling solutions: The investigation of complementing screws with alternative solutions,

2014 (examiner)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX D

59. Hanna Gerdeskans, Seat Comfort Evaluation Process, 2014 (examiner) 60. Sofia Nayström, Lightweight B-pillar CFRP reinforced crash beam, 2014 (supervisor) 61. Mattias Karlström, Railcleaner - Produkt för underhåll av järnvägsväxlar vid snö och isbildning, 2014 (examiner) 62. Jonas Näsström, CAD/CAM/PLM - Integration between CAD and CAM preparation for press hardening tools, 2014

(examiner) 63. Karin Forsberg, Concept development of a Mobile Fuel Filter Test Bed, 2014 (examiner) 64. Elise Offerman, Användarcentrerade designmetoder, 2014 (Examiner) 65. Joakim Olander, Virtual Genba Designing 3D visualisation in a production status application towards understand the

production process, 2014 (Supervisor) 66. Ove Lindmark & Amanda Nilsson A method for turning needs to ideas and requirements for innovative products, 2014

(Examiner) 67. Johanna Hamne, CFD Modeling of Mud Flow around Drill Bit, 2014 (Supervisor and Examiner) 68. Kristofer Grankvist Park och Samuel Johnsson, Method development for Rearward Visibility Rating - Research and

development of an objective evaluation method for benchmarking and rating of rearward visibility in cars, 2014 (Supervisor) 69. Elias Risberg, Self-sealing fuel tank CV90, 2014 (Supervisor) 70. Malin Bergqvist, Packing Innovation - In regards to usability, sustainability and market interaction, 2014 (Examiner) 71. Daniel Berggren, Konceptutveckling av stänkskärm - för lastbilars andra framaxel, 2013 (Examiner). 72. Erik Thorsell, Utveckling av handtag för reducering av skadliga stavkrafter vid rullskidåkning, 2013 (Supervisor) 73. Francisco Javier Rodríguez Pérez: Design and Analysis of Container Washing System, 2011(Examiner) 74. Massimo Pannarotto, Creative methods for Sustainability Driven Innovation, 2011 (Supervisor and examiner). 75. Stefan Inglen: Val av vägbelysningsteknik ur ett LCC-perspektiv, 2010:107 (Supervisor & examiner) 76. Ikechukwu Ekene Ubaka, Multicultural effects in global virtual team: communication challenges, LTU 2010:074

(Supervisor and examiner). 77. Erik Hjort: Verifikation av process för laminering, 2010:047 (Supervisor and examiner) 78. Pijoan Forcada, Meritxell: CAR 2.0: interaction between cars and their drivers in twenty years time LTU

2010:01(Supervisor and examiner, received Best Master thesis 2010 by PIEp). 79. Pablo Garrido: Exploring designers behaviour in collaborative design meetings: A graphic approach, LTU 2009:128

(Supervisor and examiner). 80. Brännström, Erik; Sundberg, Pontus; Wenngren, Johan; Åhman, Jenny: Mímir global product development of an

atmospheric water generator, LTU 2009:037 (co-supervisor) 81. Bergquist, Tobias; Eriksson, Anders: Alternative layouts for 25-30 variants of SEP, LTU 2009:037 (Supervisor and

examiner) 82. Andersson, Joel: Effektivare produktframtagning vid kundanpassning, LTU 2009:037 (Supervisor and examiner) 83. Carlsson, Martin: Studie av Amoskoncept för SEP samt elektriskt manövrerad torngrind, LTU 2007:074 (supervisor) 84. Sjöström, Robert; Sandberg, Gustav: Utveckling av motoriserad antenn för satellitkommunikation, LTU 2007:033

(supervisor) 85. Palmgren, Mauricio: Supporting decision-making in distributed design, LTU 2004:202 (supervisor) 86. Isaksson-Lutteman, Gunnika: Utformning av en studio för distribuerat arbete, LTU 2004:176 (supervisor) 87. Axelsson, Stefan: Distribuerat ingenjörsarbete: en möjlighet för Ferruform?, LTU 2004:004 (supervisor)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX D

D4 Supervisor/examiner for Bachelor Thesis (19) 1. Johan Gavelin, Förbättring av användargränssnitt på Stridsbåt 90, in progress (supervisor) 2. Lukas Olofsson, Biocomposite lightning fixtures, in progress (supervisor) 3. Elin Bryggman, Optimal "Belt-in-Seat": A study to evaluate the optimal positioning of a Belt in a car's frontal seats, 2020

(reviewer) 4. Jennie Olausson & Emma Åsberg, Energiklossen En normkreativ fordonsartefakt som bidrar till lek och lärande, 2020

(supervisor) 5. Hanna Gunséus, Hur skapar vi rörelse?, 2020 (supervisor) 6. Malin Mulder & Josefine Ramn, Användarvänlig ambulansmodul – Design av ambulansmiljö till drönare, 2019

(supervisor) 7. Pär Tagesson, Northern Star & Exit: A board game design process, 2019 (supervisor) 8. Linnéa Halatchev & Lisa Helme, Utveckling av verktyg för lossning och montering av masterpinne i larvkedja, 2019

(supervisor) 9. Victoria Gustavsson, Utveckling av AdBlue tank för skogsmaskiner, 2019 (supervisor) 10. Linnea Bohwalli, Utveckling av vinkelkoppling – Produktutveckling av en verktygsfri lösning för sammankoppling av

aluminiumprofiler, 2018 (examiner). 11. Erik Jarskär, Improving Microwave Oven Safety in Truck Cabins - Preventing Projectiles on Crash/Brake, 2018

(supervisor). 12. Robin Bergman, Inomhusodling, Produktutveckling i samarbete med Clas Ohlson, 2015 (supervisor) 13. Henrik Norberg, Innovating the electrical installation, Adapting to the modern method of house building, 2015

(supervisor) 14. Fredrik Öhlin, Framtagning av ett lyftdonskoncept – Vid flödet borrkronor, Sandvik Mining AB, 2015 (examiner) 15. Emma Wulff, Utveckling av infästning för interiördetalj i bil, 2015 (examiner) 16. Evelina Lindström, Utveckling av belysningsarmatur för offentlig miljö, 2015 (examiner) 17. Andreas Nilsson, Betongblandarskopa - Ett redskap till entreprenadmaskiner, 2015 (examiner) 18. Jonas Wasara, Development of a ventilation system for use in production areas in sublevel caving, 2011 (supervisor and

examiner). 19. Jonas Almkvist, Radical Innovation: A new approach to creative product development at Sandvik Coromant AB, 2009

(Supervisor and examiner). 20. Per-Martin Bergfjord, Justerbar serveringsmodul, 2007 (supervisor)

D5 External examiner for master thesis (4) 1. Eirik Ulsaker Jacobsen, Sustainable fibre materials for replacing plastics in 3D-forming applications, NTNU

2017 2. Osmund Olav Bøe, The Smart Chair: Inducing dynamic seating through integration of smart technology in

chairs, NTNU 2017 3. Christopher Lange, Development of a new Alpine Touring Binding, NTNU 2017 4. Leif Erik Bjørkli, Automatically Quantifying Human Activity in Design Activities: With Microsoft Kinect

Depth Sensors, NTNU 2015.

D6 External supervisor for master thesis and research internships (4) I have been an external supervisor for Master students that have visited the DEPICT laboratory for research internship. All student has now a PhD position at various universities

1. Fanika Lukačević, Identifying subassemblies and understanding their functions during a design review in immersive and non-immersive virtual environments, University of Zagreb, 2020.

2. Alessandro Mazza, Neuropsychological Correlates of Creative Idea Generation, University of Turin, 2019. 3. Samuele Colombo, Brain Activities in Creative Thinking Tasks, Politecnico di Torino, 2019 4. Alessandro Laspia, A New Approach to Investigate the Design Process: Contrasting Divergent and Convergent Thinking

by Means of Electroencephalography and Eye Tracking, University of Turin, 2018

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX E

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

E TEACHING EXPERTISE

E1 Break down of communication skill into course goals Example from Törlind (2019a) as well as Wikberg-Nilsson & Törlind (2016)

The communication skill In the Higher education ordinance is described as “Show ability to orally and in writing present and discuss information, problems and solutions in dialogue with different groups.” (Högskoleförordningen 1993:100).

For IDE, this is rewritten as the Communication skills in Table E1.

Table E1 Communication skills

Then the subcategory Written communication is further broken down into learning objectives, assignments, and assessments in different courses in the program, creating a competence chain with a progression within the program, See Table E2.

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX E

Table E2 Progression in written communication in IDE YEAR Design ID ECTS NAME TYPE OF WRITING

1 D1 D0030A 15 Design: process and method

Presentation-Poster-Posters-Presentation (group) Workbook v,1, v.2 (individual)

1 A0014A 7,5 Ergonomics 1 Theory presentation (individual), Project report (group)

1 A0011A 7,5 Industrial production environment

Investigation report (group)

2 D2 D0037A 15 Design: theory and practice

Workbook x 2 (individual)

3 D3 A0013A 7,5 Product and production design

PM x 4 (individual) + technical documentation (group)

4 D4 D7007A 7,5 Form giving Workbook (individual)

3-4 D7011A 7,5 Product visualisation

Process poster (individual) Workbook (individual)

4 D7015A 7,5 Interaction design Workbook (individual)

4* A7004A 7,5 Research project An academic paper in English

5* D7017A 7,5 Advanced prototyping

Storybook (group)

5 D5 D7006A 15 Advanced product design

Project plan, presentation x 4 (group) Workbook v.1, v.2 (individual)

5 D7018A 7,5 Design science An academic report in English

5 D7014A 30 Master thesis Thesis in English

* Elective course

APPENDIX

E2 Competence Chains for academic writing, Presentation CDIO Workshop 201209.pdf

CDIO IMPLEMENTATION

COMPETENCE CHAINS FOR ACADEMIC WRITING FOR IDE

PETER TÖRLIND & ÅSA WIKBERG-NILSSON INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ENGINEERING LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

LO ON PROGRAM LEVEL [STD 2]

Å Wikberg-Nilsson & P.Törlind, Student Competence Profiles, CDIO 2016.

Skills and Abilities Show ability to orally and in writing present and discuss information, problems and solutions in dialogue with different groups.

Högskoleförordningen

IMPLEMENTATION

ASSIGNMENTS WRITING – TITDGYEAR ID ECTS NAME TYPE OF WRITING

1 D0030A 15 Design: process and method Presentation-Poster-Posters-Presentation (group) Workbook v,1, v.2 (individual)

1 D0031A 7,5 User interfaces: design and implementation

Theory presentation (individual), Project report (group)

2 D0037A 15 Design: theory and practice Project report (group) Workbook x 2 (individual)

2 D0018A 7,5 Graphical design Poster (individual) Portfolio (individual)

2 A0013A 7,5 Product and production design PM x 4 (individual) + technical documentation (group)

2 A0017A 7,5 Ergonomics and cognition Ergonomic assessment report (group)

3 D0045A 15 Design project Theory paper (individual) Method section (individual) Project report (group) Self assessment on LO (individual)

3 D0046A 7,5 Usability and user experience Report (group)

3 D0051A 7,5 Design immersion Academic paper (group), Academic report – theory (2 thesis group) Academic report + poster (method)

3 D0050A 15 Master thesis Thesis in Swedish

* Elective course

A0013A –Product and production design

D0045A –Design project

D0051A –Design immersion

D0051A –Thesis

Writing introductionGroup: Reports – motivation for design, using references Individual: Workbooks – methods, theories and learning

TITDG

Small teams – 4 persons Each person

one oral presentation One written PM

A0013A PRODUCT AND PRODUCTION DESIGN

Törlind, P. (2019). Improving Written Communication , CDIO 2019.

Learning objective Demonstrate the ability to critically analyze and motivate how design and material selection affect product and production design.

WRITING PROCESS1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PM1 PM2 PM3 PM4 Final documentation

PM1-4 appended

FEEDBACK PROCESS1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PM1 PM2 PM3 PM4 Final documentation

Peer Review 1 individual

Peer Review 2 individual

Peer Review 3 group

Peer Review 4 individual

PM1-4 appended

Grading

FEEDBACK PROCESS

PM1 v.1 DR

Peer review x4 DR + 4h

Facilitated peer review session

PM1 v.2 DR +1d

PM1 v.2 DR +1d

Feedback from coach

PM2

Weakness from PM1 are adressed in PM2

PM1-4 v.3 Appended to

final documentation

FACILITATED FEEDBACK1. Read trough PM 5 min 2. Go trough common errors 3. Detailed read trough of PM 30 min 4. Reviewers discuss their views 10 min 5. Team A1-5, B1-2, gives feedback 10 min 6. Team B3-B5, C1-4 gives feedback 10 min

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

FEEDBACK TEMPLATES FEEDBACK TEMPLATES

FEEDBACK TEMPLATES

BLOOMS TAXONOMI

FEEDBACK TEMPLATES

CHECKLIST & SELF ASSESSMENT

EXAMINATION - TEAM EXAMINATION –INDIVIDUAL

SJÄLVVÄRDERING

GRUPP ID IDEAL NAMN STUDENT

De olika kriterierna bygger på varandra: för att uppnå nivån skicklig måste du även uppfylla de lägre nivåerna: novis, avancerad nybörjare och kompetent.

KOMMUNIKATION Muntlig presentation Jag har demonstrerat förmågan att:

NOVIS AVANCERAD NYBÖRJARE KOMPETENT SKICKLIG EXPERT

Muntligt presentera ett arbete på ett strukturerat sätt, genom att hålla reda på tiden och använda lämpliga hjälpmedel.

Presentera idéer och argument på ett repeterat, säkert och övertygande sätt.

Identifiera, bearbeta och använda ett brett utbud av presentationsteknik för olika mottagare och situationer.

Genom tydlighet, intonation, rytm, interaktion etc. skapa intresse för presentationen, samt besvara frågor och argumentera sakligt med olika mottagare

Presentera på engelska på ett säkert och övertygande sätt.

Beskriv på vilken nivå du har uppfyllt detta mål och din argumentation för det.

Skriftlig kommunikation Jag har demonstrerat förmågan att:

NOVIS AVANCERAD NYBÖRJARE KOMPETENT SKICKLIG EXPERT

Bearbeta och sammanställa ett arbete utifrån en grundläggande mall, med korrekt språk och grammatik. Stödja påståenden med grundläggande referenser.

Identifiera källor, samt bearbeta och sammanställa en olika informativa skriftliga texter (labbrapporter, projekt-rapporter, arbetsbok, PM etc).

Övertygande skapa sammanhang genom rubriksättning, struktur och budskap med koppling till flera kritiskt granskade källor, samt med utgångspunkt i vedertaget referenssystem

Medvetet välja kanal och medium, dvs. designa struktur, ton, innehåll, språk och format av informativa skriftliga texter för olika målgrupper

Skriftligt kommunicera tydligt och informativt sammanhang och mening på engelska

Beskriv på vilken nivå du har uppfyllt detta mål och din argumentation för det.

Visuell kommunikation Jag har demonstrerat förmågan att:

NOVIS AVANCERAD NYBÖRJARE KOMPETENT SKICKLIG EXPERT

Bearbeta och använda Bearbeta och använda flera Visuellt kommunicera Medvetet designa visuell Professionellt och övertygande

Forces the students to reflect of their own competence in written communication

D0045A - LEARNING OBJECTIVE

Demonstrate insight into industrial design engineering, user-centered design and product development by implementing relevant theory and method, and by being able to argue in writing and orally for ideas and solutions in relation to the theory

D0045A - IMPLEMENTATION

LECTURE SCIENTIFIC WRITING

WORKSHOP SCIENTIFIC WRITING

HOMEWORK WRITE DRAFT

WRITE DRAFT 2

PEER REVIEW

ASSESSMENT ACADEMIC WRITING

CLASS INDIVIDUAL TEACHER

x 2 THEORY

METHOD

1

D0045A - ASSESSMENT

D0045A - EXAMINATION D0051A - DESIGN IMMERSION Demonstrate the ability to analyze, apply

and describe design methodology Demonstrate the ability to communicate

design science orally, in writing and visually

THEORY + METHOD

D0051A - DESIGN IMMERSION

INTRODUCTION TO DESIGN RESEARCH METHODS

WRITE FINAL PAPER

WRITE DRAFT

PEER REVIEW

ASSESSMENT A4 POSTER

CRASH COURSE IN ACADEMIC WRITING SCIENTIFIC WRITING

READ DESIGNATED PAPERS

ASSESSMENT A1 ACADEMIC WRITING

ASSESSMENT A2 DESIGN RESEARCH

METHODS

ASSESSMENT A3 DESIGN THEORY

IMMERSION

METHOD CARD

FINAL DOCUMENT

DESIGN IMMERSION

THEORYMETHOD

3-4

2-3

1

CRASH COURSE

w1 –READ PAPERS

w2 –WORKSHOP

CRASH COURSE IN ACADEMIC WRITING

WRITE DRAFT

FEEDBACK

REFINE

w3 –FINAL PAPER

3-4

EXAMINATION (IMMERSION) EXAMINATION (IMMERSION)

POSTER

VETENSKAPLIG RAPPORT

ASESSMENT (IMMERSION) ASESSMENT (IMMERSION)

ASESSMENT (IMMERSION)

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX F

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

F PEDAGOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AND RENEWAL

F1 Example of continuous development The following section is based on a paper presented at the CDIO 2019 conference (Törlind 2019a) focusing on improving written communication and now updated to reflect the changes in 2020-21.

One of the crucial parts of CDIO is evaluating the programme and individual courses to enable continuous improvement. Since the start of the course, it has constantly changed and improved based on the students’ feedback. Each introductory lecture has gone through important feedback from the previous year and changes that have been implemented (See also Appendix F3). Table F1 provides an overview and more details below.

Table F1 Progression in written communication in IDE.

Cou

rse

mem

o

[nr w

ords

]

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

Cou

rse

eval

uatio

n (1

-6) Templates Assessment, ECTS Points

PM

Asse

ssm

ent

Form

ativ

e fe

edba

ck o

n PM

Peer

revi

ew

Self-

asse

ssm

ent –

com

pete

nce

prof

ile

Self-

asse

ssm

ent o

f fin

al

docu

men

tatio

n

Num

ber o

f PM

Fina

l pre

sent

atio

n

Fina

l doc

umen

tatio

n

Proc

ess

Self-

asse

ssm

ent

Oth

er

HT2012 2551 48 4,6 2 1 3 1,5 HT2013 4513 56 4,3 x x 4 1,5 2 HT2014 4599 50 4,9 x x x 4 1,5 2 VT2015 4535 15* 5,1 x x x x 4 1,5 2,25 2,25 1,5 VT2016 Canvas 68 4,9 x x x x x 4 1 3 3,5 VT2017 Canvas 61 5,0 x x x x x 4 1 3 3,5 VT2018 Canvas 56 - x x x x x x 4 1 3 3,5 VT2019 Canvas 57 4,4 x x x x x x 4 1 3 3,5 VT2020 Canvas 45 5,1 x x x x x x 3 1 3 3,5 VT2021 Canvas 47 x x x x x x 3 1 3 3,5 *Only bachelor students

• HT2012, the course is implemented for the first time

• HT2013, removed a submission on production technology after feedback from students. Scheduled coaching meetings were introduced (previously, the students had to book coaching meetings with the teachers, but many did not use this). Clearer expectations for the various DRs and PMs with assessment templates. Document templates were introduced for both PM and final documentation.

• HT2014, clarified the study guide, introduced feedback templates for written PM (used only by teachers).

• Spring 2015, the course moved to the spring term, and a facilitated peer-review was introduced for each PM (4 times), and a lecture and coach session was performed before the final presentation. Also, the feedback from PM1-4 was used only to provide formative feedback, and the examination was done only on the final documentation.

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX E

• VT2016 introduced the Canvas LMS system and then moved the course memo to Canvas (instead of a pdf document) to get a more uniform structure and make it easier to find and hyperlink to different types of information. Also, self-assessment with student feedback with the help of competence profile was introduced.

• VT2017 introduced an agile template and SCRUM methods to facilitate the planning of the project. Facilitated peer review was performed two times, then the peer-review was done by a team, and the last peer-review was done individually by each student.

• VT2020, the course had to be adapted to Covid-19 and redesigned for distance education. The start of the courses was delayed one week, and we integrated two phases and reduced down to four phases. The SCRUM templates were also redesigned on a shared whiteboard (see Figure F1 and F2).

Figure F1 Template for the SCRUM dashboard in MURAL.

Figure F2 One of the team’s shared SCRUM board at the end of the course.

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX E

more about part of this adaption to COVID-19 is available on my pedagogical blog:

o Facilitated peer review on distance https://peter-onl.blogspot.com/2020/04/facilitated-peer-review-on-distance.html

o How to support teams on distance https://peter-onl.blogspot.com/2020/12/how-to-support-student-teams-in.html

• VT2021, we refined the course based on feedback; students liked to have four phases, and teachers agreed that it was less stressful for the students. This year we extended the last phase – Detail design, so we had time for an extra week for this phase.

APPENDIX

F2 Bi-annual program evaluation for Industrial Design Engineering 2019 (in Swedish) F3 Excerpts from the introduction in A0013A focusing on how I present changes and feedback

from previous years (in Swedish). F4 Course evaluation from A0013A reflecting on the feedback from the adaption to distance

course (in Swedish) F5 Course development report D0045A, 2020 (in Swedish) F6 Course development report D7011A, 2021 (in Swedish) F7 Course development report M7016T, 2021 (in Swedish)

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

1

Självvärdering program och huvudområden

Instruktioner Universitetets modell för utveckling och utvärdering av utbildning berör samtliga program, huvudområden och examina. Modellen är en del av Universitetets kvalitetsarbete och innefattar självvärderingar och kvantitativa programdata, som vid behov kompletteras med peer-review eller fördjupad studie. Utbildningsledare för respektive utbildning eller huvudområde leder självvärdering och rapportering enligt mall. Institutionsledningen säkerställer att resurser och underlag tillgängliggörs för självvärderingen. Självvärderingen skickas till fakultetsnämnd via ansvarig handläggare Ann-Britt Almqvist (abal@ltu.se) senast 2020-02-24 med kopia till huvudansvarig utbildningsledare. Fakultetsnämnderna analyserar redovisningarna och en sammanfattande slutrapport beslutas före sommaren som gör underlag för återföringsdialoger med utbildningsledare. Självvärderingsrapporten omfattar tre delar: A) Måluppfyllelse samt åtgärdsbeskrivningar B) Analys av kvantitativa programdata (särskilt meddelande om tillgänglighet efter årsskiftet) C) Programområdesspecifika analyser samt utvecklingsaktiviteter och -behov Använd detta dokument som en mall för rapporten! Kortfattade instruktioner finns under varje del om vad redovisningen förväntas omfatta. Instruktioner utgör stöd och tas bort i den slutliga rapporten. Skriv koncist och det som är relevant för respektive fråga.

Teknisk design – TCTDA

Peter Törlind & Åsa Wikberg Nilsson

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

2

A) Måluppfyllelse samt åtgärdsbeskrivningar

B) Analys av kvantitativa programdata

C) Programspecifika analyser samt utvecklingsaktiviteter och -behov

A. Måluppfyllelse samt åtgärdsbeskrivningar Syftet med detta avsnitt är att:

• Dokumentera hur aktuell programstruktur uppfyller HF:s mål och lokala examensmål. • Identifiera utvecklingsbehov och möjligheter i och mellan program och processer. • Stödja utveckling av programmet för att säkerställa måluppfyllelse.

A1.Hur har processen sett ut för uppdatering av målmatris sedan förra självvärderingen? Bifoga aktuell målmatris, inkluderande HF:s mål och lokala examensmål.

Utbildningsledare har gått igenom och uppdaterat målmatrisen efter samtal med examinatorer/lärare. Förutom de ordinarie programråden har vi även haft ett stort programråd där alla studenterna på TD fått möjlighet att uttrycka i vilka kurser de anser att de olika målen behandlas. Detta gav insikter i behov av att tydliggöra hur examensmålen behandlas i de olika kurserna.

A2.Vilka åtgärder för måluppfyllelse har genomförts sedan förra årets självvärdering? Hänvisa till målmatrisen.

Det stora arbetet har varit att implementera mål för jämställdhet, vilket har förts in som examinerande moment i flera av kurserna, något som dock inte syns i målmatrisen. Vi har sedan två år tillbaka infört mer fokus på social hållbarhet redan från introduktionskursen år 1 till examensarbetena år 5.

A3. Vilka åtgärder för måluppfyllelse är aktivt pågående, men ännu inte genomförda? Hänvisa till målmatrisen.

Hållbarhet och etik Just nu jobbar vi med att fördjupa arbetet att integrera hållbarhet i stort, men även specifikt social hållbarhet och etik i flera kurser, där de idag finns med men ofta inte examineras. Detta kopplar till TDs specifika inriktning mot människa-teknik i samspel.

Kartläggning av designmetoder Ytterligare ett arbete som genomförts är en kartläggning av designmetoder och progressionen av dessa i programmet. Detta arbete är även kopplad till kompetensprofilen som är ett verktyg vi arbetar med för att tydliggöra examensmålen för Teknisk design.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

3

Kompetensprofil Vi arbetar med att utveckla/implementera ett nytt sätt att presentera examensmålen för Teknisk design genom något vi kallar kompetensprofil1, där vi bryter ner TDs examensmål i åtta kategorier som sedan bryts ner på en nivå som är enklare att förstå (tex att skapa prototyper, att välja material, att muntlig presentation, etik). Den är idag implementerad i flera kurser där studenterna får reflektera hur långt i progressionen de har nått. Just nu jobbar vi i detalj med att bryta kunskapsområdena och mappa mot den tänkta progressionen i kurserna.

Vi prototypar och testar även hur studenterna individuellt skulle kunna använda en applikation för att visualisera sina egna mål, se Figur 1.

Figur 1 Prototyp på en applikation där studenterna kan värdera sin progression.

Industrisamarbete I flera kurser genomför studenterna skarpa uppdrag mot industrin, dessa är idag mer fokuserade på de sista åren (med några undantag). Nu arbetar vi med en modell för att stärka industrikontakter/nätverkande inom TD området och för att utveckla ett strukturerat genomförande i hela utbildningen.

A4. Identifierade behov för framtida åtgärdsarbete? Hänvisa till målmatrisen.

Vi har en mängd idéer och identifierade behov kring utveckling av programmet, det som saknas är tid och resurser för att genomföra förändringsarbetet.

1 Wikberg-Nilsson, Å. & Törlind, P. (2016) Student Competence Profiles, Proceedings of CDIO 2016.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

4

B Analys av kvantitativa programdata (särskilt meddelande om tillgänglighet efter årsskiftet)

Syftet med detta avsnitt är att: • Analysera nuläget i relation till LTU:s styrmått (problem/möjligheter?) • Analysera varför respektive mått har förändrats (eller inte förändrats) över tid • Identifiera åtgärder för att adressera negativa trender.

Fakultetsnämnden är fullt medveten om att utbildningsledaren inte sitter på alla svar, men förväntar sig att han/hon för en dialog med relevanta personer om dessa kvantitativa mått och gör sitt allra bästa för att ge fakultetsnämnden underlag för att kunna avgöra om det behövs insatser, antingen centralt eller vid institutionen, för att hantera eventuell problematik.

Tabell 1 Samanställning, kvantitativa programdata TCTDA

TCTDA Civilingenjör, Teknisk design

Mått 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Antal förstahandssökande per registrerad student 0,7 0,7 0,9 0,9 1,0 1,0 0,8 0,6 0,9

Genomströmning på kurs (%) 90 90 87 87 82 93 89 94 88

Andel kvarvarande studenter efter 1 år (%) 93 91 80 90 74 84 83 88 80

Studenternas rekommendationsvilja av utbildningen (%) 78 79 81 82 82 82 64

Tabell 2 Samanställning kvantitativa data alla civ. program

B1 Genomströmning Analysera nuvarande genomströmning (är den tillfredsställande—ja/nej—och behövs det åtgärder?); Analysera varför genomströmningen har förändrats eller inte förändrats över tid; Identifiera åtgärder för att adressera eventuella negativa trender. Genomströmningen kan naturligtvis vara bättre men vi ligger i topp bland civilingenjörs-utbildningarna på LTU. Programmet jobbar aktivt tillsammans med programföreningen TED med tentamensstuga i multistudion, där vi bjuder in lärare, bjuder på kaffe osv., något som uppskattas av studenterna. När vi analyserar vilka kurser som studenterna har kvar ser vi att det är baskurserna och främst matematik.

B2 Kvarvarande studenter efter år 1 Analysera kvarvarande studenter efter år 1 (är andelen tillfredsställande—ja/nej—och behövs det åtgärder?); Analysera varför kvarvarande studenter år 1 har förändrats eller inte förändrats över tid; Identifiera åtgärder för att adressera eventuella negativa trender.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

5

Antalet kvarvarande studenter efter ett år är 80%, vilket vi naturligtvis inte är nöjda med, vi har de tidigare åren legat mellan 73-93%. Ser vi på LTU i stort så har 2019 fyra civilingenjörsprogram bättre värden och åtta sämre värden. Vi har valt att analysera även genomströmningen genom hela programmet (Källa Power BI) för att förstå när vi tappar studenter och har därför valt att följa studenter som blev inskrivna hösten 14 och 15 och precis har gått igenom programmet. Vi ligger alltså bra till på LTU i stort men kommer naturligtvis att jobba för att förbättra detta.

Figur 2 Kvarvarande studenter inskrivna HT2014, där ligger TD bäst till av alla civ. ing. program på LTU.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

6

Figur 3 Kvarvarande studenter inskrivna HT15, där ligger vi näst bäst till av alla civ. ing. program på LTU.

B3 SöktryckAnalysera söktryck (är söktrycket tillfredsställande—ja/nej—och behövs det åtgärder?); Analysera varför söktrycket har förändrats eller inte förändrats över tid; Identifiera åtgärder för att adressera eventuella negativa trender. Söktrycket är definitivt inte tillfredställande. Om vi ser nationellt så har liknande utbildningar på Chalmers, KTH och Lund mycket högre antal sökande och därmed är intagningskraven mycket högre. Jämför vi på LTU är det endast tre civilingenjörsutbildningar där det är konkurrens om platserna, Industriell ekonomi, Datateknik och Arkitektur. En idé är att utveckla en tydligare profil för TD som särskiljer Teknisk design LTU från andra utbildningar och därmed öka nivån av förstahandssökande.

Tabell 3 Statistik från UHR – CivilingenjörTeknisk design

Antal sökande Urval 1 Urval 2 Poäng**

Totalt 1:a hand Antagna Reserver Antagna Reserver

Chalmers tekniska högskola 1036 212 40 318 30 150 20,73 Kungl. Tekniska högskolan 1101 164 71 246 53 119 19,21 Luleå tekniska universitet 284 27 41 0 23 0 * Lunds universitet 541 98 28 183 18 92 21,09 Mittuniversitetet 126 18 12 0 10 0 * * Alla antagna **Antagningspoäng – BI (utan komplettering)

B.4 NSI-Nöjd StudentIndex

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

7

Studenternas rekommendationsvilja av utbildningen (NSI) är nu endast på 64% vilket är ett rejält tapp från året innan, något som naturligtvis är mycket oroande. Tyvärr ser vi samma oroande trend på andra utbildningar på ETS och LTU. Teknisk design har de senaste 6 senaste åren pendlat mellan 78 och 82%, men har 2019 tappat till 65%.

Här ser vi en mycket oroande trend på flera utbildningar, se tex Tabell 4 där droppet är kraftigt både på TD och I. Läser vi frisvar på NSI så finns det en mycket stor frustration kring campusmiljön, brist på studieplatser och grupprum (biblioteket, avstängda hus, avstängda hus på kvällstid) samt lokalproblemen. Något som givetvis kommer att lösas på lång sikt men kräver krafttag redan nu för att inte ge ännu färre sökande.

Tabell 4 Statistik Nöjd Student Index för ETS ämnen

2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013

TCIEA Civilingenjör, Industriell ekonomi 65 73 75 76 74 80 90

TCTDA Civilingenjör, Teknisk design 64 82 82 81 79 79 78

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

8

C Programspecifika analyser samt utvecklingsaktiviteter och -behov Syftet med detta avsnitt är att:

• Dokumentera hur institutionens processer ser ut för att identifiera och adressera förbättringsbehov på programmet

• Analysera vilka resurser som finns tillgängliga för att ge programmet på ett tillfredsställande sätt, både idag och på längre sikt (5-10 år)

C1 Beskriv programmets utvecklingsprocess Hur ser rutiner och tillvägagångssätt ut för att ständigt utveckla och förbättra programmet som helhet, och dess ingående kurser? I beskrivningen inkluderas arbetet i exv programråd, lärarkollegium samt externa nätverk och samarbeten. Ta gärna stöd i pedagogisk idé eller CDIO.

Sedan UKÄ utvärderingen har vi bedrivit ständiga förbättringar i form av utvecklandet av nya kurser där det funnits behov samt genomfört mindre förändringar i kurser för att säkerställa examensmålsuppfyllelse. Detta arbete sker kontinuerligt och säkerställs vid genomgång av kursplaner och lärarkollegier. De två inriktningarna har förutom lärarlag, regelbundna möten med de lärare som är inblandade i kurserna för att överföring av kunskap mellan kurser etc. Utbildningsledarna samarbetar tätt med TED programrådsförening som bildades 2016/2017. Tillsammans arrangeras bland annat TD-dagen, öppet hus, aktiviteter under nolleperioden, tentastugor etc. TED har även ett utbildningsutskott som jobbar med utbildningsledarna för att öka feedback från studenter till programmet. I undersökningar genomförda på tex TD-dagen och stort programråd så upplever studenterna att de har stor möjlighet att påverka programmet genom de olika aktiviteter som genomförs (TD-dag, gästföreläsningar, stort programråd, visionsdag) samt kursutvärderingar.

Figur 4 Utvärderingar från Stort programråd 2019.

Årssnurran för Teknisk Design Nätverkande: Teknisk design LTU är del av ett nationellt nätverk för utbildningar inom området teknisk design/design och produktutveckling som träffas 1 ggr/år och diskuterar området i stort och utvecklingsbehov ner i minsta detalj. Nästa träff sker på LTU i november 2020. Lärarkollegie: innan terminen startar har vi lärarkollegier inom respektive ämnesområde där vi går igenom de olika kurserna och vilka förändringar som sker i dem. Här diskuteras uppgifter i olika kurser och hur de kan samverka för att göra studenternas utbildningsväg så tydlig och strukturerad som möjligt. LP1 Programråd som behandlar LP4 föregående läsår, detta blir en introduktion för de nya studenterna som har börjat åk 1. Informationsträff om examensarbete som förberedelse för åk 4-5 studenter.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

9

Detta är även ett tillfälle att diskutera innehåll och kurser i programmet med både lärare och studenter. LP2 Programråd som behandlar LP1. TD-dag för alla studenter med inbjudna gästföreläsare från näringsliv/industrin. 2019 var fokus framtid och inbjudna föreläsare pratade om såväl Industri 4.0 som en helt förändrad TD utbildning med inspiration från Nederländerna. LP3 Stort programråd där alla TD-studenter bjuds in. Fokus: övergripande utveckling av programmet. I samband med det stora programrådet hålls ett vanligt programråd som bland annat behandlar kurser i LP2. Informationsmöte om val av inriktning för åk 3 där lärare från respektive inriktning beskriver innehåll, framtid och kurser i produktions- respektive produktdesign. Mötet är ett bra tillfälle att diskutera innehållet i programmet och varför upplägget ser ut som det gör.

LP4 Externt programråd med där alumni medverkar och på en övergripande nivå diskuterar vad som händer i arbetslivet och vilka behov av förändring som detta medför för utbildningen.

C2 Lärare, kompetens, kapacitet samt resurstilldelning Hur väl möter institutionens resurser (tex lärare, kompetens, kapacitet, etc) det behov som finns för att kunna ge programmet på ett tillfredsställande sätt (idag och på längre sikt)? Vi har sedan förra självutvärderingen rekryterat flera lärare bland annat:

• Anders Warell, Ämnesföreträdare/Professor Industriell design sedan feb 2019 som är aktivt engagerad i utvecklingen av programmet som helhet och med design/produktsemiotik/formgivning som specialområden.

• Andre Liem, Docent Industriell design, med kompetens inom strategisk design, ergonomic design och design thinking vilket ska påverka kurserna i programmet.

• Eva-Lena Bäckström, universitetslektor Industriell design, med kompetens inom formgivning, designentreprenörskap, strategisk design etc. som nu finns med i flera kursmoment i utbildningen.

• Lars Eklöv, universitetsadjunkt Industriell design, som kommer från industrin och har kompetens inom 3Dmodellering, projektledning etc. och som nu finns med i flera av programmets kurser.

• David Larsson, universitetslektor Industriell design, industridesigner med kompetens inom 3D prototyper, 3D modellering, visualisering/rendering och formgivning som nu finns med i flera av kurserna på utbildningen.

Vi håller även på med rekrytering av fler universitetslektorer inom Industriell design främst med fokus på att stärka designaspekterna i vissa av kurserna. Vi ser ett behov av att utveckla studenternas förmåga att se kopplingen mellan teknik-ingenjörsvetenskap- design- formgivning i förhållande till människans upplevelse att använda design.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

10

Förutom några av de nykrekryterade har lärarkåren relativt bra pedagogisk utbildning, något vi tryckt starkt på vid nyanställningar etc. Vi ser ett behov av att vidareutveckla programmets pedagogik och hur vi möjliggör en tydlig lärandeupplevelse för studenterna genom tydliga kursmål, tydlig progression och väl utformade uppgifter och övningar av ökande komplexitetsgrad som bidrar till god måluppfyllelse avseende examensmålen.

C3 Lärmiljöer Hur väl möter LTU:s lärmiljöer det behov som finns för att kunna ge programmet på ett tillfredsställande sätt (idag och på längre sikt)? Vi upplever en stor brist, nu när Grafisk design finns fullt ut så har vi ca 50 fler studenter och därför är det en lokalbrist när vi arbetar i projektform i kurserna enligt CDIO. Studenterna påtalar bristen av grupprum där de kan arbeta utanför schemalagd tid samt behov av lärmiljöer där det inte är så mycket spring, där de kan displaya sina arbeten på väggar etc.

Övrigt Här kan du addera övriga reflektioner och kommentarer som är av intresse för kvalitetssäkringen av programmet.

FokusområdeVid varje utvärderingsomgång inkluderas ett fokusområde. Syftet med fokusområdet är att regering, rektor eller fakultetsnämnden särskilt vill lyfta någon aspekt, och undersöka hur LTU:s program förhåller sig till och arbetar i relation till det området. I årets omgång finns två fokusområdet enligt nedan.

1. Nydanande utbildning Beskriv möjliga och/eller påbörjade utvecklingsområden eller delar som kopplar till kriterier och beskrivning av nydanande utbildningar.

2. Forskning i utbildningen Beskriv och ge exempel (ett antal) på hur och var forskning nyttiggörs i utbildningen (undervisning och/eller examination).

Nydanande utbildning: Här ser vi ett behov av att utveckla nya undervisningsformer och nytt innehåll som bättre stödjer utvecklingen av framtidens designingenjörer. De två inriktningarna på programmet har olika behov av utveckling och ett arbete har initierats kring detta. Primärt ses ett behov av ökad integrering av olika kärnkurser och förändrade examinationsformer. Vi vill gärna vara föregångare när det gäller just nydanande undervisning/pedagogik och vill att TD ska vara ett program som har rykte om sig att ha just sådana inslag. Forskning i utbildningen: redan tidigt i utbildningen beskrivs forskning inom de olika områdena som utbildningen berör och studenterna har i flertalet kurser uppgifter kopplat till att identifiera aktuell forskning ex. i projektarbeten + workbooks/inlämningsuppgifter av skriftlig karaktär.

Luleå tekniska universitets utvärdering av program/huvudområden - Rapportmall för självvärdering TFN

2019

11

Utbildningsformerna har förändrats radikalt under senare år där ex. workbooks är en ny examinationsform som ska säkerställa forskningsinslag och stödja självreflektion kring egen kompetens och behov av ny kunskap.

Bilaga 1 Målmatris Bifoga en uppdaterad målmatris. Målmatris är ett verktyg för att säkerställa och tydliggöra uppfyllande av högskoleförordningens och eventuella lokala examensmål. Dessa uppdaterats när ändringar sker i kurser och utbildningsordning. Om målmatris saknas, vänligen kontakta handläggare på VSS eller kvalitetsfunktion.

PETER TÖRLIND PRODUCT INNOVATION LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY

A0013A – PRODUCT AND PRODUCTION DESIGN COURSE FEEDBACK

Excerpts from course introduction 2019 which focuses on how I convey feedback and what has improved from previous years

COURSE PLAN

Good Syllabus.

Very good syllabus!

Something you have been

able to lean against!

Clear documentation and

specified steps.

More thoughtful syllabus would have helped.

The Syllabus sucked said !!

SAME SYLLABUS – DIFFERENT OPINIONS

This is an important lesson, we are all different and have different opinions so it is important for me as an examiner to balance opinions and choose how I want to design the course!

SETUP

To be able to apply their

theoretical knowledge to

practice.

It was a very fun and

educational course.

The serious attitude!

Realisticlayout of the various elementsVery!

Really a great course!Very exciting with this kind of course.

PLANNING

Very good that we get to

work under time pressure

and "for real".

Thought the course was

structured well with the

different phases and

design reviews.

The planning has been terribly bad!No account has been taken of how long things take!

SAME SYLLABUS – DIFFERENT OPINIONS

CRITIQUE With criticism from each

design review, you learn

what has gone well and

what needs to be

improved.

even if it hurts to receive negative criticism, once you have learned from the negative critique then it feels so much better afterwards!Good with feedback on our work! We rarely get it and it is really instructive

KURSUTVÄRDERING – TEAM

Also thought it was nice

that the groups were

assigned [randomly] so

you got the chance to

work with new people.

It has been good to

work together as a

group.

Let students choose their own groups.

DESIGNREVIEWS

Design Reviews with

criticism was superb. The

fact that the economy,

design and production

were taken into account

made the project realistic.

Some criticism very

rewarding.

Design reviews - good to get criticism.Good with DR 1,2,3,4 so you did not slip behindGood with constructive criticism on DR.

COACHINGFeeling that I h

ave

developed & worked during

the project has a lot to

do with the supervisor.

The supervisor sessions

have worked well!

I think that XX has been very rewarding in communication and has made it evolveGood support / guidance

Fun and rewarding with a dedicated coach.Good to have a supervisor to discuss with

KURSUTVÄRDERING

I have to say that it was

a rewarding course.

Informative, rich in

content, creative, group

work, training in writing

and getting down the

most important things.

To apply previous knowledge in a concrete project

Heavy course, we may have had greater demands than you teachers ;-)

COURSE DEVELOPMENT

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 1

Dr. Peter Törlind

Produkt- och produktionsdesign (A0013A)Response rate = 37.8 %

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

LegendQuestion text Right poleLeft pole n=No. of responses

av.=Meandev.=Std. Dev.ab.=Abstention

25%

1

0%

2

50%

3

0%

4

25%

5

Relative Frequencies of answers Std. Dev. Mean

Scale Histogram

1. Självbedömning Self-assessment1. Självbedömning Self-assessment

Hur många studietimmar per vecka har du i genomsnitt lagt på denna kurs? (inkludera både schemalagd och ickeschemalagd tid)How many hours of study have you in average dedicated to this course per week, including both scheduled and non-scheduledtime?

1.1)

n=17< 5h 0%

6h-15h 5.9%

16-25h 41.2%

26-35h 41.2%

36-45h 0%

>46h 11.8%

Jag är nöjd med mina insatser under kursen.I am satisfied with my efforts during the course.

1.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,5dev.=0,9

0%

1

0%

2

5,9%

3

5,9%

4

23,5%

5

64,7%

6

Jag har deltagit i kursens allaundervisningsmoment. I have participated in all the teaching and learningactivities in the course.

1.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,8dev.=0,5

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

5,9%

4

5,9%

5

88,2%

6

Jag har förberett mig inför allaundervisningsmoment. I have prepared myself prior to all teaching andlearning activities.

1.4)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=16av.=5,4dev.=0,8ab.=1

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

18,8%

4

25%

5

56,3%

6

2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content

Kursens mål har varit tydliga. The intended learning outcomes of the coursehave been clear.

2.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,3dev.=1

0%

1

5,9%

2

0%

3

5,9%

4

35,3%

5

52,9%

6

Kursens innehåll har bidragit till att uppnåkursplanens mål. The contents of the course have helped me toachieve the intended learning outcomes of thecourse.

2.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,4dev.=0,7

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

11,8%

4

41,2%

5

47,1%

6

Kursplaneringen/studiehandledningen har gettgod vägledning. The course planning and the study guide haveprovided good guidance.

2.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=4,9dev.=1

0%

1

0%

2

11,8%

3

17,6%

4

41,2%

5

29,4%

6

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 2

3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching

Lärarnas insatser har varit ett stöd i mittlärande. The teacher’s input has supported my learning.

3.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,1dev.=1,2

0%

1

5,9%

2

5,9%

3

5,9%

4

35,3%

5

47,1%

6

Kursens undervisningstillfällen med teoretiskkaraktär har varit givande. The teaching and learning activitiesof theoretical nature have been rewarding.

3.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=16av.=4,8dev.=1,2ab.=1

0%

1

6,3%

2

6,3%

3

25%

4

31,3%

5

31,3%

6

Kursens undervisningstillfällen av laborativ,skapande eller verksamhetsförankrad karaktär(t ex laborationer, exkursioner, VFU, projekteller konstnärliga produktioner) har varitgivande. The practical/creative teaching and learningactivities of the course e.g. labs, field trips,teaching practice, placements/internships, projectwork, artwork, music, theater productions havebeen rewarding.

3.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=13av.=5,2dev.=1,2ab.=4

0%

1

7,7%

2

0%

3

7,7%

4

30,8%

5

53,8%

6

Det tekniska stödet för kommunikation (t exlärplattform, e-mötesverktyg) har fungerat bra. The technical support for communication, e.g.learning platform, e-learning resources, has beensatisfactory.

3.4)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,6dev.=0,5

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

0%

4

35,3%

5

64,7%

6

4. Kursmaterial Course materials4. Kursmaterial Course materials

Det anvisade kursmaterialet har varit ett stöd imitt lärande (t ex litteratur, laborations-anvisningar, presentationsunderlag). The materials assigned for the course, e.g. books,lab instructions, presentation frameworks, hassupported my learning.

4.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=14av.=4,5dev.=1,7ab.=3

7,1%

1

14,3%

2

0%

3

21,4%

4

14,3%

5

42,9%

6

5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)

Examinationen har motsvarat kursens mål. The examination was in accordance with theintended learning outcomes of the course.

5.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=12av.=5,7dev.=0,8ab.=5

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

16,7%

4

0%

5

83,3%

6

7. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment7. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment

Arbetsbelastningen i kursen motsvarar kursenspoäng. The workload of the course is appropriate for thenumber of credits given.

7.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=4dev.=1,8

11,8%

1

11,8%

2

11,8%

3

23,5%

4

11,8%

5

29,4%

6

Utifrån kursens mål har kravnivån varittillräckligt hög. Given the aims of the course the level of workrequired has been appropriate.

7.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=4,8dev.=1,5

5,9%

1

5,9%

2

5,9%

3

5,9%

4

35,3%

5

41,2%

6

Mitt helhetsintryck är att kursen varit bra. My overall impression is that this has been a goodcourse.

7.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=17av.=5,1dev.=1,2

0%

1

0%

2

23,5%

3

0%

4

23,5%

5

52,9%

6

Tack för ditt bidrag till att göra denna kurs och din utbildning bättre! / Thank you for helping to improve this course.

Resultatet och ev åtgärder presenteras via Studentportalen. / The results of this questionnaire and any changes made will be available via the Student Portal.

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 3

ProfileSubunit: ETS -Ekonomi, teknik och samhälleName of the instructor: Dr. Peter TörlindName of the course:(Name of the survey)

Produkt- och produktionsdesign

Values used in the profile line: Mean

1. Självbedömning Self-assessment1. Självbedömning Self-assessment

1.2) Jag är nöjd med mina insatser under kursen.I am satisfied with my efforts during the course.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,5 md=6,0 dev.=0,9

1.3) Jag har deltagit i kursens allaundervisningsmoment. I have participated in all the teaching and

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,8 md=6,0 dev.=0,5

1.4) Jag har förberett mig inför allaundervisningsmoment. I have prepared myself prior to all teaching and

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=16 av.=5,4 md=6,0 dev.=0,8

2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content

2.1) Kursens mål har varit tydliga. The intended learning outcomes of the coursehave been clear.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,3 md=6,0 dev.=1,0

2.2) Kursens innehåll har bidragit till att uppnåkursplanens mål. The contents of the course have helped me to

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,4 md=5,0 dev.=0,7

2.3) Kursplaneringen/studiehandledningen hargett god vägledning. The course planning and the study guide have

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=4,9 md=5,0 dev.=1,0

3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching

3.1) Lärarnas insatser har varit ett stöd i mittlärande. The teacher’s input has supported my learning.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,1 md=5,0 dev.=1,2

3.2) Kursens undervisningstillfällen med teoretiskkaraktär har varit givande. The teaching and learning activities

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=16 av.=4,8 md=5,0 dev.=1,2

3.3) Kursens undervisningstillfällen av laborativ,skapande eller verksamhetsförankradkaraktär (t ex laborationer, exkursioner, VFU,

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=13 av.=5,2 md=6,0 dev.=1,2

3.4) Det tekniska stödet för kommunikation (t exlärplattform, e-mötesverktyg) har fungeratbra.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,6 md=6,0 dev.=0,5

4. Kursmaterial Course materials4. Kursmaterial Course materials

4.1) Det anvisade kursmaterialet har varit ett stödi mitt lärande (t ex litteratur, laborations-anvisningar, presentationsunderlag).

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=14 av.=4,5 md=5,0 dev.=1,7

5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)

5.1) Examinationen har motsvarat kursens mål. The examination was in accordance with theintended learning outcomes of the course.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=12 av.=5,7 md=6,0 dev.=0,8

7. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment7. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment

7.1) Arbetsbelastningen i kursen motsvararkursens poäng. The workload of the course is appropriate for

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=4,0 md=4,0 dev.=1,8

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 4

7.2) Utifrån kursens mål har kravnivån varittillräckligt hög. Given the aims of the course the level of work

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=4,8 md=5,0 dev.=1,5

7.3) Mitt helhetsintryck är att kursen varit bra. My overall impression is that this has been agood course.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=17 av.=5,1 md=6,0 dev.=1,2

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

6. Kursspecifika frågor6. Kursspecifika frågor

Har du några kommentarer på hur föreläsningar fungerade på distans?6.1)

Bra, skönt hemmifrån

De fungerade bra och var kommunikativa med oss åhörare.

Det fungera bra.

Det fungerade bra, bra med menti för att få med studenterna.

Det fungerade bättre än jag trodde det skulle göra!

Det gick bra.

Det har fungerar bra, men har haft svårt med idé framtagning på grund av distans.

Det har fungerat bra.

Fungerade Väldigt bra. Kul när lärare orkar trixa med kommunikationsappar som mentimeter.

Fungerade bra! Bra att man kan gå tillbaka och kolla föreläsningar i efterhand!

Fungerade bra, speciellt när man blir involverad genom menti, annars är det lätt att tappa fokus

Föreläsningarna fungerade bra på distans.

Helt ok men föredrar fysiska föreläsningar då det är mer personligt och man har bättre fokus, också enklare att ställa frågor då

Jag tycker att de har fungerat mycket väl och de har varit bra. Den interaktiva aspekten är en stor del av detta då jag tycker att denleder till att föreläsningarna är mycket enklare att hålla fokus under. Zoom har fungerat bra, hade dock väldigt svårt att hitta rätt på allalänkar osv i början av kursen, kändes väldigt rörigt då.

den fungerade bra, kanske ändra vissa mål så som prototyp, då detta ej är relevant för de flesta.

Har du några kommentarer på hur designreviews och feedback fungerade på distans?6.2)

Bra enklet att boka via mail och kan tas när som.

Bra, dock föredrar man nog att ta feedback muntligt, detta är nog från person till person.

Bra. Dåligt att det var en del oklarheter om hur feedback skulle genomföras. Kunde ha skett på samma sätt varje gång. Blevsuperförvirrad.

De fungerade bra

Designreviews fungerade bra på distans.

Feedback fungerade bra, designreviews hade varit fördelaktigt att kunna presentera live istället för online då man saknar ett väldigtviktigt element av fysisk interaktion

Feedback momenten var givande. Såg andras arbete och kunde därmed förbättra egen arbete.

Fungerade bra! Skulle föredra att man gör det i sitt team eller enskilt!

Fungerade utmärkt.

Fungerat bra, kanske lite mycket med allt som man gör i kursen.

Fungerat bra. Vet inte om det var ett val eller något som bara blev att studenter egentligen aldrig hade tid att ge feedback på varandra.Jag anser att åtminstone vi som går civ.ing behöver mer övning på det och det hade varit positivt om det var möjligt. Kändes bådesom att det inte fanns tid för detta och att det kanske inte var planerat för det, vi ämnades kanske att i huvudsak feedbacka via PM?

Jaa de fungerade bra roligt att få feedback från andra studenter

har fungerat bra

helt ok!

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 6

Vad tycker du om att genomföra en självvärdering och ge feedback till dina teammedlemmar?6.3)

Bara positivt. Upplevdes både som ett bra sätt att reflektera som att jag tycker att det är en nyttig övning för alla.

Det går mycket bra

Det var intressant och givande, men det var lite komplicerat själva uppgiften vad vi skulle göra. Sen kommer vi se feedbacken vad deandra skrev

Det är svårt att skatta sin egen prestation men absolut en relevant sak att kunna göra!

Jag tycker det är bra, både för en själv att reflektera över ens egna insatser, Sen även för att kunna undvika att gruppkamrater kanglida på räkmacka.

Kändes lite onödigt, skulle gärna ha gjort på något annat sätt

Känns lite sådär. Inte så kul att läsa eller skriva de.

Lite läskigt. Det är inte kul/lätt att ge feedback till sina medlemmar om man anser att man till stor del fått dra projekt själv. För mingrupps fall var det inget problem med samarbetet egentligen, men motivationen hos vissa var sådär.

Självvärderingen är en mardröm. Det är pinsamt att skriva bra saker om mig själv. Visst det ger mig en stund att tänka på de saker jaglärt mig och vad jag kan göra för att bli bättre. Skulle ha varit bättre att värdera resten av gruppen istället.

Svårt när man inte riktigt håller med de som någon av gruppmedlämmarna säger.

Tycker att det är bra att ge feedback på varandra men att man ska se hur folk har värderat sig själva tycker jag är onödigt. Man skullekunna ge på sig själv och sina klasskamrater i alla fall och sen kan läraren se eventuella skillnader i bedömning.

Tycker att det är bra då hela kursen har varit ett grupparbete och lättare för läraren att se vardera insats.

Tycker det är jobbigt att ge feedback till teammedlemmar då det inte var anonymt. Tycker även det känns som stor press då en annanfår betyg utifrån min värdering. Känns även svårt då flera hade skrivit att de gjort en massa under projektet när de egentligen åkte ivägen vecka på annat och struntade i grupparbetet. Svårt då att skriva att de gjort ett bra arbete när de inte bidragit med så mycket.

Väldigt lärorikt

bra, varit lärorikt

Något annat som du vill tillägga ang att genomföra kursen på distans?6.4)

Det var svårt. Särskilt med tanke på att det var otroligt svårt att göra prototyper och få en bättre bild av hur slutprodukten hade kunnatfungera etc.

Funkar generellt bra men upplevde att det är rätt svårt att göra många av metoderna där det krävs skiss eller visuellt inslag på ettsnabbt och effektivt sätt. Mycket teknik i vägen och tid som går åt till att t.ex. ladda upp skisser osv. Blev snabbt lite knackigt och idéoch konceptfasen tog i min grupps fall ganska mycket stryk av detta.

Hade varit gött att få lite mer fritt val av produkt då de produkter vi jobbar med inte går att testa under vår då det ej finns någon snö....Detta gjorde att man inte alls kunde göra en fysisk prototyp att testa.

Idé och konceptfasen blev väldigt tajt och blev väldigt mycket att göra under kort tid

Kanske inte gäller bara distans men denna kurs har krävt för många timmar. Jag är vaken jag tänker på kursen jag sover ochdrömmer om vad vi behöver göra näst. För att uppnå målen tog det helt enkelt mycket tid och vet inte vad ni kan göra åt det.

Kanske introdusera ett bättre program för att göra idé och koncept framtagen lättare

Nej

Nope.

Svårt att kunna göra prototyper på distans.

Tidsbristen i idefasen pga omställningen. Var katastrofalt lite tid, ca 5 arbetsdagar för det som tidigare varit två faser, om dessa skaslås ihop bör tiden vara mycket längre. Annars tycker jag allt har fungerat över förväntan med distans!

7. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment7. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment

Vad har varit bra i kursen? Exemplifiera! What was good about the course? Please give examples.

7.4)

Bra att få testa på alla faser i ett skarpt läge.

Dr. Peter Törlind, Produkt- och produktionsdesign -LP4/VT20

17.06.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 7

Bra och tydliga delmoment. Jättebra med coachning och snabba svar på frågor. Tycker att det är den första kursen som innefattar ettutförligt desigbarbete genom alla steg. Bra med många engagerade lärare.

Coachmöten och grupparbete tyckte jag var väl strukturerat!

Jag fick gå hela vägen till att producera konceptet den här gången.

Jag tycker det har varit bra att fokusera på ett projekt genom en hel Lp, då kan man verkligen lägga ner hjärta och själ i det.

Kul med projekt,

Man har gått igenom hela processen och fått en insyn på hela processen.

Strukturen med reviews och PM ger ett bra tempo och krav på en aktiv arbetsprocess. Interaktiva föreläsningar, framförallt positivtmed moment som är direkt implementerbara i det fortsatta arbetet t.ex. idégenerering över grupperna inför idéfas.

Väldigt roligt att ta fram ett koncept under en läsperiod och verkligen gå in på djupet hur den fungerar

peters lektioner och föreläsningar har varit superbra.

Om du skulle vara lärare nästa gång kursen går, vilka förbättringar skulle du genomföra? If you were to teach the course next time, what improvements would you make?

7.5)

Förmodligen berodde det på att läsperioden blev kortades ned med en vecka, men det var lite stressigt mellan faserna. Kändes somdet förväntades mer än vi hade möjlighet att göra på så kort tid.

Försökt kapa något annat än idé&konceptfasen då det känns som att denna underbygger kvaliteten i det vidare arbetet mycket. Jagtycker vår process där blev undermålig pga tiden och då var ändå min grupp på övre halvan av "vettiga produkter".

Gett lite tydligare ledning kring hur de olika delarna av projektet kan genomföras, specifikt produktionsdesignen, tydligare vad lärarnavill se för resultat. Se över planeringen lite mer, exempelvis hade vi det tredje coachmötet dagen efter DR2 vilket innebar att man intehade hunnit börja med arbetet och därför inte hade några frågor att ställa.

Hade haft kursen som 15hp istället för 7,5hp. Väldigt mycket som förväntas på kort tid vilket jag tycker är orimligt på denna korta tiden.Detta kändes mer som att utföra ett ex-jobb. Även konstigt att det förväntas att vi ska arbeta 4,5h om dagen då kursen är på 50%.Borde vara 20h i veckan och inte 22,5h i veckan.

Jag är nöjd med hur kursen gick för mig. Kanske

Kanske förtydliga några forsknings rubriker. t.ex. miljöpåverkningar

Längre tid på ide/koncept samt produktionsfasen. Tycker att det behövs vara lite klarare instruktioner för produktionsfasen. Samköraden mer mellan lärarna för det känns som att man fick olika svar kring vad som gällde med tex mallen för företaget.

Mer tid till att göra grejer. Flera studenter har gått in i väggen och kommer ta ett sabbatsår pga den här kursen

Tidsramarna var väldigt korta men jag förstår att det är på grund av omständigheterna som råder!

Va mer tydlig i början att det är snyggt om alla PM följer samma strukturGe mer tid till idé och konceptfasenBerätta tidigare om Ltu-business

jag skulle ha haft mer coachmöten och varit mer delaktig i projekten för att kunna stödja studenterna, vara mer kritisk på coachmötenoch inte enbart på feedback när man lämnat in och känner sig "klar" och vill gå vidare, vi hade behövt mer stöd under processensgång, det hade blivit mer lärorikt då.

Kursutvärderingsrapport D7011A HT20 1

KURSUTVECKLINGSRAPPORT D0045A HT20

Kursnamn och kurskod: Design: projekt och fördjupning D0045A Program eller fristående kurs: Högskoleingenjör Teknisk Design åk 3 Läsperiod: LP 1-2 Kursansvarig: Lars Eklöf Examinator: Peter Törlind Antal studenter i kursen: 6 Antal svar på kursvärderingen: 3

Beskriv de förändringar som genomförts i kursen sedan föregående kurstillfälle Sedan förra genomförandet på kursen har vi inte förändrat kursen speciellt mycket, det vi fick anpassa oss i år var naturligtvis Corona samt att det var en liten grupp studenter som läste kursen i år – endast sex st.

Summering av studenternas synpunkter på kursen, både styrkor och svagheter Dålig respons endast 50% av antalet deltagare i kursen. Kursutvärderingen ser i stort sett bra, det upplevs som kursen tar ganska mycket tid, trots detta så har den fått högt betyg på punkten Arbetsbelastning några utvalda KPI:

• Helhetsintryck 5,7 • Arbetsbelastning 5,3 • Examinationen har motsvarat kurens mål: 6

Helhetsbedömning är tex: ”Att självständigt i grupp starta, driva och avsluta ett projekt där vi har eget ansvar över att hålla kontakt med uppdragsgivare. Tyckte att det var ett smart beslut att låta oss studenter skriva ett CV där vi motiverar vilka projekt vi önskade att arbeta med.” Coaching och feedback från lärare (Lars och Hampus) fick riktigt bra feedback! ” Coachmötena som frekvent utfördes med lärare i denna kursen har varit ett otroligt bra stöd som har bidragit väldigt mycket till mitt lärande” Då vi vet att den formella kursutvärderingen ofta får väldigt få svaranden så utfördes en informell kursutvärdering på sista presentationspasset, här har alla studenter svarat!

Figur 1 Hur nöjda studenterna är med olika aspekter av kursen.

I kursen finns sedan tre år en delinlämning som fokuserar på att studenterna skall identifiera förbättringsområden och sedan jobba med dem under kursens gång, se Figur 2. Något som tidigare har fått mycket bra kritik.

Kursutvärderingsrapport D7011A HT20 2

Figur 2 Grafisk beskrivning av arbetet med de personliga utmaningen

Vi valde i år att göra en specifik utvärdering på just hur den har fungerat, se Figur 3.

Figur 3 Hur nöjda studenterna är med de personliga utvecklingsprocessen som genomförs i kursen

Några av feedbacken från personliga utvecklingsdelen av kursen:

• Lärorikt, man blir mer uppmärksam på hur man faktiskt arbetar och fungerar i grupp. Nyttigt och roligt med personlig utveckling.

• Jag gillar att man verkligen kunde jobba med sig själv • Jag gillar ner och samtala med lärarna. Det var skönt att ha lite av ’terapisamtal’. Man fick

verkligen säga vad man själv kände. • Att svårigheter inom projektet som var lite mer personliga kunde komma till ytan och

diskuteras • Jag gillar att det finns en aspekt som handlar mer om mig som person och inte bara min roll i

arbetet • Jag upplever att en del av det jag delade med mig av förändrade både mig själv och mitt team • Mest lärorika workbooken under hela utbildningen • Jag har bättre koll på mina utvecklings områden och kan kontinuerligt jobba med dem

Vi kommer även rapportera slutsatserna från denna implementering på en utbildningskonferens1 senare i år.

Komplettering från programråd Har inte genomförts innan denna kursinlämning är inlämnad.

1 Törlind, P. & Eklöf, L (2021) Using integrated learning experiences to developing personal and interpersonal skills, Accepted to International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education.

Kursutvärderingsrapport D7011A HT20 3

Summering av lärarnas kommentarer på kursen och kursvärderingen Får genomgående bra kritik. Studenterna levererar i stort ett mycket bra resultat och utmanas verkligen att jobba både med sitt utvecklingsprojekt och sin personliga utveckling.

Summering av kursansvarigs och examinators syn på kursen, dess examination, kurslitteratur/kursmaterial och undervisningsformer Kursen får positiv feedback på kursutvärderingen och det är en mycket uppskattad kurs. Det känns som arbetet med den personliga utvecklingen är väldigt positivt för kursen, vi ser att småproblem och konflikter hinner lyftas upp på ett tidigt stadium och kan undvikas. Det blir också en stor öppenhet mellan lärare och elever.

Summering av planerade åtgärder/beslut • Jobba i lite större projektgrupper (vi har fler studenter nästa år) så vi verkligen kan utnyttja

projektledarna och göra som vi har gjort tidigare år (18-19) där vi har separata möten med projektledare för att höja nivån på kursen ytterligare.

• Ta med kursutvärderingen på sista passet (om vi får mötas fysiskt nästa höst 50% svarsfrekvens är för dåligt!

3 mars 2020 Luleå, Peter Törlind

Kursutvärderingsrapport D7011A HT20 1

KURSUTVECKLINGSRAPPORT D7011A HT20

Kursnamn och kurskod: Avancerad prototypframtagning D7011A Program eller fristående kurs: Teknisk Design åk 5 Läsperiod: LP 1 Kursansvarig: Peter Törlind Examinator: Peter Törlind Antal studenter i kursen: 20 Antal svar på kursvärderingen: 5

Beskriv de förändringar som genomförts i kursen sedan föregående kurstillfälle Sedan förra genomförandet på kursen har vi infört ett feedbackpass till som sker under formbestämningen. Vi har också förtydligat många av inlämningarna på Canvas och lagt upp en mängd tidigare inlämningar (storybook, Behance och videos). Summering av studenternas synpunkter på kursen, både styrkor och svagheter Dålig respons endast 25% av antalet deltagare i kursen. Kursutvärderingen ser i stort sett bra ut förutom på arbetsbelastning där den fick lite lägre, några utvalda KPI:

• Helhetsintryck 5,4 • Arbetsbelastning 3,2 • Examinationen har motsvarat kurens mål: 5,5 • Kursens undervisningstillfällen av laborativ karaktär har varit givande 6

Helhetsbedömning är tex: ”Alla praktiska moment har varit givande”, ”Bra med många praktiska moment där du fått lära dig genom att göra saker på riktigt. Har varit riktigt bra att vi fått jobba relativt självständigt och verkligen fått utveckla våran problemlösningsförmåga.” Ser jag på de inlämnade dagböckerna så är snittet nedlagt i kursen 191 timmar med en standardavvikelse på 43 timmar. Dvs lite under 20h/vecka. I kursutvärderingen var den bedömda tiden 34h/vecka. Vi vet att många studenter upplever att den tar mycket tid men att de rapporterar mindre tid, en av studenterna skrev så här i sin dagbok

”Bör jag räkna in de 30 minuterna jag promenerar till och från skolan senaste veckorna och nästan endast tänkt på detta. Alla gånger jag tagit 5 minuter för att fundera och svara på ett meddelande.

Eller bara tid på kvällarna när jag funderat och planerat för mig själv hur vi ska gå till väga.”

Lerworkshopen i Johans regi fick riktigt bra feedback! ”Lerworkshopen och Johan gav mycket mer än just nya kunskaper i lermodellering, utan även kring designprocessen generellt.” Vi fick kritik på creditsystemet och att vi inte var så noggranna med det! Argumentationen för detta är ju för att få det lite mer verkligt. Innan vi skapade det systemet så skrev några grupper massor av 'onödiga' 3D-utskrifter och gjorde en massa onödiga operationer. Nu tvingar vi er att tänka efter, och argumentera för era ideér, och jag lovar det kommer ni få göra i ute industrin. Komplettering från programråd På programrådet kom det upp som deluppgifterna kom ur synk från kursens upplägg, samt en krock mellan huvudkursen och denna kurs. Nästa gång kursen ges kommer den ges under LP 4 på våren och kommer då läsas parallellt med en valfri kurs. Summering av lärarnas kommentarer på kursen och kursvärderingen Känns som en robust kurs som vidareutvecklas varje år. Får genomgående bra kritik. Studenterna levererar i stort ett mycket bra resultat och utmanas verkligen att analysera ett varumärke, skapa en design och tillverka prototyper med mycket hög kvalitet. Något som två av tre grupper tappade lite var att argumentera för sin design i sin Storybook.

Kursutvärderingsrapport D7011A HT20 2

Summering av kursansvarigs och examinators syn på kursen, dess examination, kurslitteratur/kursmaterial och undervisningsformer Kursen får positiv feedback på kursutvärderingen och det är en mycket uppskattad kurs. Att öka på antalet feedbackpass var positivt och vi såg även vad vi skall fokusera på i tidigare kurser (tex Avancerad modellering - D7010A som både Lars och Anders undervisar i). Att använda sig av projektdagbok är ett mycket bra sätt för examinator att se vad som verkligen händer i projekten. Här får jag som examinator också många idéer på vad som kan förbättras och kan även fånga upp frustration som kan åtgärdas till nästa iteration av kursen. Summering av planerade åtgärder/beslut

• Kursen kommer att flyttas till LP 4 i åk4, vilket gör att den kan läsas direkt efter Avancerad modellering (som går i LP3) och vi slipper krocken med Avancerad produktdesign(D7006A), fördelen är också att de har med sig erfarenheterna från denna kurs in i huvudkursen istället för att läsa dem parallellt.

• Små förändringar i Avancerad modellering där Anders och Lars kommer att fokusera lite extra på olika typer av kurvkontinuitet (Anders och Lars)

• Förtydligande om hur man argumenterar för sin design, visa på bra exempel och låta studenterna bedöma tidigare inlämningar.

• Ta med kursutvärderingen på sista passet så vi får bättre resultat 25% svarsfrekvens är för dåligt! 11 nov 2020 Luleå, Peter Törlind

Kursutvärderingsrapport M7016T VT21 1

KURSUTVECKLINGSRAPPORT M7016T VT21

Kursnamn och kurskod: Kreativ konceptutveckling M7016T Program eller fristående kurs: Fristående/valfri 50% TCTDA år 4 30% åk 3, 20%

utbytesstudenter Läsperiod: LP3 Kursansvarig: Peter Törlind Examinator: Peter Törlind Antal studenter i kursen: 20 Antal svar på kursvärderingen: 4

Beskriv de förändringar som genomförts i kursen sedan föregående kurstillfälle Sedan förra genomförandet har det stora arbetet varit att anpassa kursen som är en kurs med mycket interaktion så att den faktiskt fungerar på distans. En lektion har tidigare varit på distans (Global Collaboration). Kursen har tidigare varit uppbyggd på aktivt lärande där det är mycket interaktion mellan elever och elever och lärare och många övningar som utförs under lektionerna. Något som är mycket svårare på distans. Hur genomför en föreläsning där studenterna bygger prototyper i sina team på distans?1

Summering av studenternas synpunkter på kursen, både styrkor och svagheter Dålig respons på kursutvärderingen endast 4/20 dvs 20% av deltagarna i kursen, och det är en av dessa fyra som har avstått att svara på flera frågor. Det är tydligt att en av studenterna är mycket missnöjd och har svarat lågt på många av frågorna vilket gör att spridningen på svaren är mycket hög, därmed känns inte de kvantitativa svaren speciellt relevanta.

• Helhetsintryck 4,5 • Arbetsbelastning 4 • Examinationen har motsvarat kurens mål: 4

En av responserna ang Corona anpassningen ” Jag gillar föreläsningarna och speciellt ’danky’2. Det märks att du försöker göra det så bra som möjligt för oss fast vi är på distans och det gör mig glad. :) fortsätt så!” En av kommentarerna ang hur de skulle förbättra kursen var: ” Att ha en föreläsning om man faktist gör en workshop. Man fick gissa sig lite fram nu och det blev då inte det bästa resultatet! ” Något som var underligt eftersom ett pass fokuserar på att just planera och facilitera workshops. Kanske studenten missade just det passet? I kursen genomförs även feedback kontinuerligt efter nästan varje pass, något som används för att förbättra passet nästa år. Nedan är några exempel på feedback från studenterna!

1 Detta pass gick förvånansvärt bra, då jag skickade ut prototyppåsar till studenterna, se även https://peter-onl.blogspot.com/2021/03/prototyping-lecture-on-distance.html 2 Danky är Dan the donkey en virtuell sidekick som dyker upp på en föreläsning, se mer här: https://peter-onl.blogspot.com/2021/03/dan-your-virtual-sidekick.html

Kursutvärderingsrapport M7016T VT21 2

Figur 1 I wish I like från Bootcamp.

Figur 2 I like I wish från Prototyppasset..

Då vi vet att den formella kursutvärderingen ofta får väldigt få svaranden så utfördes en informell kursutvärdering på sista presentationspasset, i den informella kursutvärderingen har alla studenter svarat!

Figur 3 Studenterna beskriver kursen med tre ord!

Kursutvärderingsrapport M7016T VT21 3

Studenterna fick även bedöma hur kursen uppfyllde några av kursmålen

Figur 4 Uppfyllande av några av kursmålen.

Eftersom det kändes som en svår kurs att anpassa till distansundervisning, så frågade jag hur det hade gått?

• This was/is the best corse i have taken during covid • I really think you did your best with the circumstances. The information about some of the projects

could be a bit more specified • It was harder to concentrate. But I find myself study more. • Corona💔 ! It did work but it's so sad that we were not able to do it irl because it would have been even

more fulfilling • Worked well but would be more fun to actually meet your team • It went well • I think it went well. but i would like to have more breaks. you get alot more tierd by sitting by the

computer. • It actually worked pretty well except that my motivation died a couple of months ago • I feel it was really good! One of the more fun courses I have had, even irl. But it felt like some lectures

lost the interaction a bit • It worked out just fine! Given the circumstances you could have done much worse! I am very satisfied

with how this course was on distance • I think this course is one of the best courses I've had on distance since corona • Compared to other courses, the engagement was very good and that effects the whole feeling • Not too bad, I had time to have numbers of activities • challenging • the only course on distance which was interesting • I felt so unlucky since I'm an exchange student :/ • I appreciated that you trots to come up with new ways to do things • It works as well as every other course, it works but it drains your energy much more and you're not as

stoked I den avslutande frågan vad det gillar och vad de önskar skrev de följande feedback

I like I wish • That the classes was so interactive • I like that you really get to challenge yourself

creatively and learn how to structure creativity • It is my favorite design course so far. • It was the fun. Haha. • Every lecture was unique • Despite the distance it was very interactive • I like that you really get to challenge your creativity. It

is really good, I liked the theory seminar to because i got a really good paper to read.

• Peters beard

• I wish we could have been in school • More breaks when on distance • I wished that we got a little better information about

the assignments. The assignments were fun and fulfilling to do tho

• It wasn't on distance :( • I wished the corona was gone, but that is nothing we

can do. However, i wish we had more breaks of 10-15 mins. You get really tired fast when you sit by the computer

• I wish the assignments were more clear on Canvas, what was individual and what was a team thing. What

Kursutvärderingsrapport M7016T VT21 4

• I like that it has so many different ways to use the knowledge - to implement it it fun ways!

• I liked the variety. And the engagement! It really was a creative course and I really liked that!

• It is very interactive with many activities • All the interaction (even though it was on zoom)

between all the students, it is very worthwhile • the group work in every lecture • just express the most creative and fun part of myself • I liked that it was many breakoutrooms during the

lessons so you don’t always just listen to the teacher • I liked my team :) • I liked that the course was somehow adapted to

distance education • We learnt how to better structure both our own

creative thinking but also how to facilitate other people's creativity. Learning how to facilitate makes you think a bit differently when being creative yourself

the purpose was, the deadlines and how to present or hand in. When on distance, we are completely reliant on the instructions on Canvas.

• Zoom is very energy consuming and lectures need something more that keeps energy up in the end. It is really hard to focus after 3 hours

• A bit clearer explanation of the assignments • more games • I wish for better information. Assignments and some

quizzes just appeared from nowhere. • The lectures feel really long and they're not always

that enjoyable even if you like the subject

Komplettering från programråd Har inte genomförts innan denna kursinlämning är inlämnad.

Summering av lärarnas kommentarer på kursen och kursvärderingen Kursutvärderingen (främst den informella) visar att studenterna är nöjda med kursen. Studenterna levererade också ett mycket bra resultat (85% av studenterna fick slutbetyget VG). Feedbacken från studenterna visar på att det faktiskt går att genomföra en sådan här kurs på distans, men själv känner jag att den trots allt inte når upp till en vanlig kurs som vi gör på plats. Som vanligt är några kommentarer på ”jag önskar” att instruktionerna inte är tydliga, detta är något som återkommer varje år trots att det tydligt står deadlines, vad som förväntas när det skall lämnas in, hur inlämningar bedöms osv. Alla inlämningar, datum fanns på Canvas i början på kursen (men tex en diskussion syns inte lika tydligt som en inlämning pga Canvas).

Summering av kursansvarigs och examinators syn på kursen, dess examination, kurslitteratur/kursmaterial och undervisningsformer Kursen får positiv feedback på kursutvärderingen och det är en mycket uppskattad kurs. Årets utmaning var att genomföra den på distans, vilket har lyckats förvånansvärt bra.

Summering av planerade åtgärder/beslut • Att faktiskt genomföra kanske två pass på distans eftersom det troligen kommer att bli ett

arbetssätt framöver. • Att återgå till normal klassrumsundervisning och mer fysisk interaktion våren 22.

Antnäs 30 april 2020, Peter Törlind

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX G

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

G PEDAGOGICAL APPROACH

APPENDIX

G1 Example of course material in the Learning management system for the Course Creative Concept Development (M7016T)

G2 Course evaluation from M7016T 2020

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 1

Dr. Peter Törlind

Creative Concept Development (M7016T)Response rate = 93.3 %

Survey ResultsSurvey Results

LegendQuestion text Right poleLeft pole n=No. of responses

av.=Meandev.=Std. Dev.ab.=Abstention

25%

1

0%

2

50%

3

0%

4

25%

5

Relative Frequencies of answers Std. Dev. Mean

Scale Histogram

1. Självbedömning Self-assessment1. Självbedömning Self-assessment

Hur många studietimmar per vecka har du i genomsnitt lagt på denna kurs? (inkludera både schemalagd och ickeschemalagd tid)How many hours of study have you in average dedicated to this course per week, including both scheduled and non-scheduledtime?

1.1)

n=27< 5h 0%

6h-15h 51.9%

16-25h 37%

26-35h 7.4%

36-45h 0%

>46h 3.7%

Jag är nöjd med mina insatser under kursen.I am satisfied with my efforts during the course.

1.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=26av.=5,2dev.=0,7

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

11,5%

4

53,8%

5

34,6%

6

Jag har deltagit i kursens allaundervisningsmoment. I have participated in all the teaching and learningactivities in the course.

1.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=5,4dev.=1,1

3,7%

1

0%

2

3,7%

3

3,7%

4

25,9%

5

63%

6

Jag har förberett mig inför allaundervisningsmoment. I have prepared myself prior to all teaching andlearning activities.

1.4)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=4,3dev.=1,5

7,4%

1

7,4%

2

7,4%

3

22,2%

4

37%

5

18,5%

6

2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content

Kursens mål har varit tydliga. The intended learning outcomes of the coursehave been clear.

2.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=4,9dev.=1,3

0%

1

11,1%

2

3,7%

3

14,8%

4

25,9%

5

44,4%

6

Kursens innehåll har bidragit till att uppnåkursplanens mål. The contents of the course have helped me toachieve the intended learning outcomes of thecourse.

2.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=5,6dev.=0,9

0%

1

3,7%

2

0%

3

3,7%

4

18,5%

5

74,1%

6

Kursplaneringen/studiehandledningen har gettgod vägledning. The course planning and the study guide haveprovided good guidance.

2.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=4,7dev.=1,2

0%

1

3,7%

2

14,8%

3

18,5%

4

29,6%

5

33,3%

6

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 2

3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching

Lärarnas insatser har varit ett stöd i mittlärande. The teacher’s input has supported my learning.

3.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=26av.=5,5dev.=0,9

0%

1

0%

2

3,8%

3

15,4%

4

11,5%

5

69,2%

6

Kursens undervisningstillfällen med teoretiskkaraktär har varit givande. The teaching and learning activitiesof theoretical nature have been rewarding.

3.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=25av.=5,4dev.=0,8

0%

1

0%

2

4%

3

8%

4

36%

5

52%

6

Kursens undervisningstillfällen av laborativ,skapande eller verksamhetsförankrad karaktär(t ex laborationer, exkursioner, VFU, projekteller konstnärliga produktioner) har varitgivande. The practical/creative teaching and learningactivities of the course e.g. labs, field trips,teaching practice, placements/internships, projectwork, artwork, music, theater productions havebeen rewarding.

3.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=25av.=5,7dev.=0,5ab.=1

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

4%

4

20%

5

76%

6

Det tekniska stödet för kommunikation (t exlärplattform, e-mötesverktyg) har fungerat bra. The technical support for communication, e.g.learning platform, e-learning resources, has beensatisfactory.

3.4)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=25av.=5,4dev.=0,8ab.=1

0%

1

0%

2

4%

3

4%

4

36%

5

56%

6

4. Kursmaterial Course materials4. Kursmaterial Course materials

Det anvisade kursmaterialet har varit ett stöd imitt lärande (t ex litteratur, laborations-anvisningar, presentationsunderlag). The materials assigned for the course, e.g. books,lab instructions, presentation frameworks, hassupported my learning.

4.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=26av.=5,3dev.=1

0%

1

0%

2

11,5%

3

3,8%

4

23,1%

5

61,5%

6

5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)

Examinationen har motsvarat kursens mål. The examination was in accordance with theintended learning outcomes of the course.

5.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=18av.=5,5dev.=0,6ab.=6

0%

1

0%

2

0%

3

5,6%

4

38,9%

5

55,6%

6

6. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment6. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment

Arbetsbelastningen i kursen motsvarar kursenspoäng. The workload of the course is appropriate for thenumber of credits given.

6.1)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=4,9dev.=1,1

0%

1

3,7%

2

3,7%

3

25,9%

4

29,6%

5

37%

6

Utifrån kursens mål har kravnivån varittillräckligt hög. Given the aims of the course the level of workrequired has been appropriate.

6.2)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=27av.=5,3dev.=1

0%

1

3,7%

2

0%

3

11,1%

4

33,3%

5

51,9%

6

Mitt helhetsintryck är att kursen varit bra. My overall impression is that this has been a goodcourse.

6.3)Instämmer helt/ Strongly agree

Instämmer ej/ Strongly disagree

n=26av.=5,3dev.=1,3

3,8%

1

0%

2

7,7%

3

3,8%

4

19,2%

5

65,4%

6

Tack för ditt bidrag till att göra denna kurs och din utbildning bättre! / Thank you for helping to improve this course.

Resultatet och ev åtgärder presenteras via Studentportalen. / The results of this questionnaire and any changes made will be available via the Student Portal.

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 3

ProfileSubunit: ETS -Ekonomi, teknik och samhälleName of the instructor: Dr. Peter TörlindName of the course:(Name of the survey)

Creative Concept Development

Values used in the profile line: Mean

1. Självbedömning Self-assessment1. Självbedömning Self-assessment

1.2) Jag är nöjd med mina insatser under kursen.I am satisfied with my efforts during the course.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=26 av.=5,2 md=5,0 dev.=0,7

1.3) Jag har deltagit i kursens allaundervisningsmoment. I have participated in all the teaching and

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=5,4 md=6,0 dev.=1,1

1.4) Jag har förberett mig inför allaundervisningsmoment. I have prepared myself prior to all teaching and

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=4,3 md=5,0 dev.=1,5

2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content2. Kursens mål & innehåll Course aims and content

2.1) Kursens mål har varit tydliga. The intended learning outcomes of the coursehave been clear.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=4,9 md=5,0 dev.=1,3

2.2) Kursens innehåll har bidragit till att uppnåkursplanens mål. The contents of the course have helped me to

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=5,6 md=6,0 dev.=0,9

2.3) Kursplaneringen/studiehandledningen hargett god vägledning. The course planning and the study guide have

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=4,7 md=5,0 dev.=1,2

3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching3. Undervisningskvalitet Quality of teaching

3.1) Lärarnas insatser har varit ett stöd i mittlärande. The teacher’s input has supported my learning.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=26 av.=5,5 md=6,0 dev.=0,9

3.2) Kursens undervisningstillfällen med teoretiskkaraktär har varit givande. The teaching and learning activities

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=25 av.=5,4 md=6,0 dev.=0,8

3.3) Kursens undervisningstillfällen av laborativ,skapande eller verksamhetsförankradkaraktär (t ex laborationer, exkursioner, VFU,

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=25 av.=5,7 md=6,0 dev.=0,5

3.4) Det tekniska stödet för kommunikation (t exlärplattform, e-mötesverktyg) har fungeratbra.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=25 av.=5,4 md=6,0 dev.=0,8

4. Kursmaterial Course materials4. Kursmaterial Course materials

4.1) Det anvisade kursmaterialet har varit ett stödi mitt lärande (t ex litteratur, laborations-anvisningar, presentationsunderlag).

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=26 av.=5,3 md=6,0 dev.=1,0

5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)5. Examination (om examination är gjord) Exam (only answer this question if you have done the exam for thecourse)

5.1) Examinationen har motsvarat kursens mål. The examination was in accordance with theintended learning outcomes of the course.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=18 av.=5,5 md=6,0 dev.=0,6

6. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment6. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment

6.1) Arbetsbelastningen i kursen motsvararkursens poäng. The workload of the course is appropriate for

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=4,9 md=5,0 dev.=1,1

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 4

6.2) Utifrån kursens mål har kravnivån varittillräckligt hög. Given the aims of the course the level of work

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=27 av.=5,3 md=6,0 dev.=1,0

6.3) Mitt helhetsintryck är att kursen varit bra. My overall impression is that this has been agood course.

Instämmer ej/ Stronglydisagree

Instämmerhelt/ Stronglyagree

n=26 av.=5,3 md=6,0 dev.=1,3

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 5

Comments ReportComments Report

6. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment6. Helhetsbedömning Overall assessment

Vad har varit bra i kursen? Exemplifiera! What was good about the course? Please give examples.

6.4)

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 6

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 7

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 8

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 9

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 10

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 11

Om du skulle vara lärare nästa gång kursen går, vilka förbättringar skulle du genomföra? If you were to teach the course next time, what improvements would you make?

6.5)

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 12

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 13

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 14

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 15

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 16

Dr. Peter Törlind, Creative Concept Development -LP3/VT20

20.03.2020 EvaSys Evaluation Page 17

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX H

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

H PEDAGOGICAL COLLABORATION

H1 Graduate schools

• 2016- Graduate school of Space technology I am currently involved in two PhD projects at Product Innovation. Also, teach the graduate course Product innovation for space applications.

• 2015- Production 2030 graduate school Teach graduate courses in a Product innovation course

• 2007-2016: PIEp graduate school PIEp was a Swedish national program (Lund University; Jönköping University, Umeå Institute of Design; Royal Institute of Technology and Luleå University of Technology) to strengthen the ability in innovative product- and business development. In the graduate school, we run a series of graduate courses focused on innovation. The network also arranged several workshops together with Stanford University and d.school and ran some courses together. I was responsible for the graduate course Creativity and Innovation and also running Academic writing workshops.

• 2002-2013 ProViking graduate school Collaboration with other research groups to create a set of national courses in product development. Within the ProViking graduate school, I was working with the graduate course in integrated product development.

• 1997-2003 Endrea graduate school In Endrea (Swedish ENgineering Design Research and Education Agenda), I had the opportunity to be a PhD student during 1997-2002 and view a graduate research school from the inside, an experience I have brought with me when creating and working with graduate research schools.

H2 Pedagogical development projects at the university Here is a list of pedagogical development projects with strategic funding from the university.

H2.1 Projects with several departments at the university

• 2019 Interdisciplinary education Funding: 200kSEK, LTU strategic pedagogical development grants. Focus: developing Interdisciplinary courses between health science, computer science and industrial design engineering. See also Appendix H6. Role: Co-writer of the proposal and responsible for implementation.

• 2019 FOINFRA Funding: 200kSEK, LTU strategic pedagogical development grants. Focus: Internal project to develop LTUs strategic research infrastructure Role: Responsible for one of the three strategic areas

• 2018 The Atelier Funding: 200kSEK, LTU strategic infrastructure grants for education. Focus: Enhancing the prototype studio for design education (Graphical design and Industrial Design engineering)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX H

Role: Writer of the proposal and responsible for the implementation

• 2017 Using strategic infrastructure in education Funding: 200kSEK, LTU strategic pedagogical development grants. Focus: Development of resources on how to enable the use of strategic infrastructure in education. Collaboration with several programs at the university that uses the DEPICT lab in education. Role: Writer of the proposal and responsible for the implementation

H2.2 Projects within Industrial Design Engineering program

• 2016 CDIO implementation in Industrial Design Engineering Funding: 200kSEK, LTU strategic pedagogical development grants. Focus: developing Interdisciplinary courses between health science, computer science and industrial design engineering. Role: Writer of the proposal and responsible for the implementation

• 2015 TD-Challenge Funding: 140kSEK, LTU strategic pedagogical development grants. Focus: Development of a recurrent innovation day for the Industrial Design Engineering programme. Role: Writer of the proposal and responsible for the implementation

H3 Collaboration on a course basis

• IDE & Health science Courses: Product and production development (A0013A) and Occupational Therapy: A social perspective (A0040H) We created two teams with students from both occupational therapy and Industrial Design Engineering. The occupational therapy student acted as experts and brought with them two problems observed during the clinical placement period. This year they focused on persons with hemiplegia (severe or complete loss of motor function on one side of the body). Even though the implementation was done during Covid, the student liked the challenge and the opportunity to work with other disciplines.

• Mechanical Engineering & IDE Courses: Sirius course (M7017T) and Advanced product design (D7006A) For several years we have had multidisciplinary teams both from Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Design engineering working together.

• Sirius/ Stanford Courses: Sirius course (M7017T) and ME310 (Stanford University) Collaborative student projects between LTU and Stanford.

H4 International exchange I have done teaching exchange with Stanford University, Grenoble University, Aalto University, and Zagreb University during these years.

• 2018 Erasmus+ Staff Mobility (1 week) I have collaborated with Zagreb university through Erasmus+ Staff Mobility exchange in 2018 (1 week), and we have had three visits from Zagreb within the Erasmus program.

• 2012-2016 Linnaeus Palme exchange program (6 weeks)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX H

I was responsible for the Luleå side of the exchange program between Zagreb University and LTU.

• 2009-2010 Design Factory, Aalto University (3 weeks) Within the PIEp, we started a collaboration with Design Factory at Aalto University. Part of the graduate course Creativity and product innovation was done in partnership with Aalto University.

• 2009-2011 Grenoble University (3 weeks) Together we created a shared graduate course in design observation.

• 2001-2010 Stanford University (10 weeks) We have done several research projects and collaborated within the ME310/Sirius project. I have also attended a one-week course at Stanford Graduate School of Business (Appendix B6).

H5 Other

• 2012-2014: PIEp: Innovation pilots Innovation Pilots was a collaboration between Luleå University of Technology, Lund University of Technology, University of Jönköping, Linköping University, Design University of Umeå and KTH. 68 students were hired as innovation pilots by 42 external organisations. The goal was to increase the innovation capacity of companies and organisations, implement research results from the PIEp project in business Reduce the gap between research and education by train change agents (students that went into industry to facilitate change). The students were employed by the companies and trained the academic consortia in PIEp’s latest tools developed in close cooperation with some of Sweden’s most innovative companies.

Appendix

H6 Feedback from Introduction to design thinking workshop made in the collaboration between Occupational Therapy and IDE (200221)

Workshop HCD 200221Workshop HCD 20022121 Feb 202021 Feb 2020 77 notes77 notesLuleå Tekniska Universitet, LuleåLuleå Tekniska Universitet, Luleå

3M and Post-it® are registered trademarks of 3M3M and Post-it® are registered trademarks of 3M

Jag önskar...Jag gillar...

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX I

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

I PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT

I1 Publications

I1.1 Papers with educational and pedagogic focus

Törlind, P & Eklöf, L. (2021) Strategic Development of Personal and Interpersonal Skills, International conference on engineering and product design education, 9-10 September 2021, Via University College, Herning, Denmark.

Törlind, P. (2019b). Implementation of integrated learning experiences and active learning in a creative concept development course. In 7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar. Luleå

Törlind, P. (2019a). Improving written Communication – Implementation at Industrial Design Engineering, Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2019). Implementation of workbooks as an active learning tool for Industrial Design Engineering. In 7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar. Luleå.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å. Jörgen Normark, C., Törlind P., & Öhrling, T. (2017) Experiences of educational reform - Implementation of CDIO at Industrial Design Engineering. Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference.

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2016). Student Competence Profiles: a complementary or competitive approach to CDIO. Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference.

Håkansson, A., & Törlind, P. (2014). Enhancing Student motivation: “raise the bar”. In proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands 4th - 5th September 2014. (pp. 414-419). Chapter 9. Glasgow: Design Society.

Törlind, P., & Wikberg-Nilsson, Å. (2014). TD-Challenge: erfarenheter från temadag för Teknisk design. In NU 2014: Umeå 8-10 oktober: abstracts. (pp. 191). Umeå: Umeå universitet. Pedagogiska institutionen.

Ericson, Å., Bergström, M., Larsson, A., Törlind, P. (2009) Design thinking challenges in education, In proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’09): Design Society, August 24-27, 2009, Stanford, CA, USA.

Larsson, A., Törlind, P., Karlsson, L., Mabogunje, A., Leifer, L., Larsson, T. & Elfström, B. (2003), Distributed team innovation: a framework for distributed product development, In proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED’03).

I1.2 Textbooks

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2021). Design: process och metod. Lund: Studentlitteratur. (2:nd edition will be available autumn 21)

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2015). Design: process och metod. Lund: Studentlitteratur. 237 p. ISBN: 978-91-4410-885-8

Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å. & Törlind, P. (2013) Snowflake: en bred bok om design- och utvecklingsprocesser, Luleå: Luleå University of Technology. 79 p. ISBN: 978-91-7439-700-0

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX I

Bergström, M., Ericson, Å., Törlind, P., Larsson, A., 2011, 4I4I - Four I:s for Innovation, Second edition. Division of Functional Products, Luleå. ISBN: 978-91-7439-148-0

APPENDIX

Five of the pedagogical papers above is appended.

I2 Student Competence Profiles: a complementary or competitive approach to CDIO, CDIO 16 I3 Implementation of CDIO at Industrial Design Engineering, CDIO 17 I4 Improving written Communication, CDIO 2019 I5 Implementation of integrated learning experiences and active learning in a creative concept

development course, USIU 2019 I6 Strategic Development of Personal and Interpersonal Skills, EPDE21

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

STUDENT COMPETENCE PROFILES – A COMPLEMENTARY OR COMPETITIVE APPROACH TO CDIO?

Åsa Wikberg Nilsson & Peter Törlind

Division of Innovation and Design, Luleå University of Technology, Sweden

ABSTRACT

For students to develop independent learning strategies, it is essential to have an understanding of what it is they are aiming for. For this reason, every educational programme in Sweden has learning outcomes as stated by the Swedish Higher Education Authority. However, these are rather formal and sometimes described in a way that is not easy, either for teachers or for students, to implement in teaching and learning activities. A challenge is to both apply CDIO-standards and comply with the Swedish Higher Education Authority’s stated learning objectives. At the same time, we should uphold students’ motivation to develop their competences and teachers’ understanding of which teaching and learning activities are relevant, and how and what to assess in students’ learning to contribute to all of these approaches. The aim of this paper is to describe the development of a competence profile. The idea is primarily based on the Vitae Research Development Framework, but with inspiration from several other frameworks and approaches. The competence profile is designed to support students´ individual professional industrial design engineering competences. It allows the students themselves to map their knowledge, skills, experiences and qualities, and also provide support for teachers’ feedback and assessment. In other words, the student competence profile is used to describe what students are supposed to be able to do (prior to courses), what the learning activities are supposed to contribute to (during courses) and for formative and summative feedback of how well it has been done (during and after courses). It also allows a visualisation on how different courses contribute to the overall programme objectives.

KEYWORDS

Competence Profile, skill development, self-regulated learning, learning objectives, learning outcomes, Standards: 2, 3, 11

INTRODUCTION

What exactly are the goals of higher education? A summary of the objectives of the CDIO initiative could result in a general goal of independent engineering students who are capable of learning and developing their knowledge and skills in a self-regulated manner. The overall objective of this paper is to discuss learning objectives and outcomes for Industrial Design Engineering students at Luleå university of Technology (LTU) and how to support them in meeting those criteria. If students are to develop independent learning strategies, it is important that they have an understanding of what they are striving for (Tinto, 2003). In Sweden, the Higher Education Regulation (1993:100) stipulates learning outcomes, which specify the knowledge, skills and judgment capability MSc in engineering students should

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

demonstrate in order to achieve their final degree. One challenge with these outcomes is that they describe the competences engineering students should have at the end of their education, but does not clarify what competences we as teachers should include in learning activities, provide feedback on or assess in a clear and straightforward manner. The learning objectives refer to the the final level at graduation. Several of our students are finding it difficult to know their level of accomplishment during their studies. To meet the Swedish Higher Education Regulation is a requirement, it is something every higher education body in Sweden has to do. Meanwhile, there are several other frameworks that support skills development and independent learning strategies.

The MSc programme in Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) joined the CDIO initiative in 2015, as one of four test pilots at LTU. The aim was to reform the educational programme with support of the framework offered by CDIO. A challenge with this is however to both exercise and fulfil the CDIO standards, whilst we at the same time are required to meet the Swedish Higher Education Regulation. In parallel, teachers and faculty who work with educational reform want to know what learning activities best accomplish both regulations and CDIO standards and what competences they should assess in courses. At the same time, we also need to maintain students' understanding of, and motivation for, developing their competences as Industrial Design Engineers, i.e. to strive for their particular professional engineering practice capabilities. For that reason, we developed a competence profile, with the purpose of serving as a framework for both students and teachers to discuss, plan, and receive feedback on specific IDE competences and criteria for those. Using the competence profile as an illustration, we in this paper address the following questions:

How can an independent learning strategy be supported, and what would be gained, through implementing a framework for competence progression?

How can the three approaches: Swedish Higher Education Regulation, CDIO syllabus, and the IDE competence profile, co-exist, and contribute to students’ self-regulated learning?

INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ENGINEERING

Students who apply for Industrial Design Engineering at LTU sometimes have a vague understanding of the professional practice that their education leads to, or what responsibilities they are expected to participate in, in their future professional practice. In our experience, many students are attracted by the artistic design elements, and at the same time consider it reassuring to have an engineering degree. The challenge is to get those different practices, disciplines, and topics that the education and its courses consist of, to actually work together in a constructive and supportive learning path for the students. IDE students can for example take a course in Form studies while they at the same time take a course in Solid Mechanics.

Industrial design engineering is an area that can be broadly described as consisting of industrial design and engineering design, i.e. an area that is on the border between a more design-oriented and a more engineering-oriented practice. An industrial design engineer in professional practice is often involved in facilitating various disciplines in a development process. One way to describe the competences and qualities needed for this is ‘T-shaped people’, who have deep analytical skills (the vertical bar of the T), while they at the same time have a broad understanding of other skills and disciplines (horizontal line of the T) (Amber, 2000).

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

As a professional practice, Industrial design engineers, have according to Eder (2008) the purpose of creating future solutions (processes and artefacts), through the development of understanding of use and users, i.e. the interaction between human and the solution. In this perspective, accomplishing this involves identifying the best solution to satisfy the needs of potential stakeholders, users and clients, through thinking which solution best assists human actions,. Eder further describes that this requires competences in understanding form, aesthetics, usability and ergonomics as well as skills in implementing technical functions, manufacturing, safety and reliability and several other factors.

Smets and Overbeeke (1994) describe that practitioners in the field of industrial design engineering need technical knowledge, knowledge of user experience and product expression. It renders an industrial design engineer student needs to develop engineering skills, i.e. competence to develop the product's function and purpose, and industrial design skills, which, according to Ulrich and Eppinger (2012), cover form and user interaction. Ulrich and Eppinger also believe that the design of products that meet customer needs should include expertise in both engineering and industrial design. This can be said to be the essence of Simon's (1969) proposal of the development of a 'science of the artificial', i.e. to achieve a fundamental foundation between the various practitioners who are involved in the creative process of developing future solutions that satisfy human needs. According to Simon, it has not before been possible for these various practices to cooperate, because they have such different languages.

In Brännberg, Gulliksson and Holmgren’s (2013) view, engineers should be defined on the basis of their education. Their argument is that there are so many different types of engineering education that it is difficult to identify unifying elements. The origin of the concept ‘engineer’ is the Latin word ‘ingenerare’: meaning creating, which can be compared to the origin of design in the Latin word 'designo': i.e. to designate, to create. Although the concepts are very similar, and in some professional practices are used synonymously, some engineering fields do not use the term ‘design’, but describe it as various forms of 'engineering'. In our experience, the concept of design, particularly in Sweden, is often misused to describe only the aesthetic expression of the final product, while we emphasise it as both constructing and designing (Wikberg Nilsson, Ericson Törlind, 2015). Cross (2006) describes this dilemma as the major challenge for the field, that is, to find means of communication within and between practitioners involved in the creative professional solution development. The basic idea, as Cross sees it, is that there are specific skills that a design engineer should have, regardless of which professional practice they work in. For that reason he suggests focusing on what he describes as designerly ways of knowing, thinking and acting. Brown formulates this as the concept of 'design thinking', which can be described as an approach for using the designer's method of matching human needs with what is technically feasible, and has a viable business strategy (Brown, 2008).

SUPPORT IN HIGHER EDUCATION

The next sections include identified students’ needs in higher education, identified both by students themselves and through research on student support.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

Student’s views of support

The Student Mirror is a survey carried out by the Swedish Higher Education Authority1, focusing on quality in higher education. The 2007 Student Mirror includes a survey of 11,119 students at Swedish universities. According to this study, students’ experiences of support for professional development are disapointing. The categories deal with the relationship between students and teachers, and the results show a rather negative image:

"To discuss and converse with teachers and tutors provides you with a perspective on your education. It is often only in the discussion that the student gets the opportunity to expose their knowledge and thoughts to others." (Student Mirror, 2007 Authors’ translation)

The survey includes the question of whether the students have discussed with the teachers or supervisors outside scheduled course activities, discussed future plans with teachers or other persons connected with the university, discussed course requirements or responsibilities or otherwise interacted with the teacher or tutor in contexts other than courses. The results show that 90% of those students perceive that they rarely or very rarely discuss with teachers or supervisors outside scheduled course activities. Likewise, they state that they rarely discuss future plans. It is further revealed that 70% of students report that they rarely or have never discussed the course requirements or responsibilities with a teacher or tutor. Only 12% state that they have discussed future plans with teachers or the equivalent at the university.

The questions included in the survey also deal with the extent to which teachers and supervisors provide the neccecary support for the student to grow and to develop competences, whether teachers have helped students to manage non study-related commitments, have encouraged contacts between students, or motivated students outside the course.

"The teacher's support can be of different types, both intellectually and socially, and can contribute to a good learning experience. The support can also be an important prerequisite for the students to develop and grow as people. " (Student Mirror, 2007 Authors’ translation)

According to this survey, it is only on rare occasions that teachers have supported students to deal with non-course-related commitments or have provided support for students to develop their own competences.

RESEARCH ON SUPPORT

Research covering aspects needed for students to pursue their education with good quality identifies five conditions: clear expectations, support, feedback, engagement and learning, which are described in more detail in the coming sections.

Tinto (2003) believes that students are more likely to pursue their studies if teachers and faculty have high expectations of their success. Students are greatly affected by what faculty expect of them individually. According to Tinto, students also need study environments that provide academic, social and individual support. Most students need support at some time during their education, Tinto stresses that this is particularly important during the first year. Support should be offered in a structured form, but it is equally important to have daily support from teachers

1 http://www.hsv.se (2007-09-04)

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

and faculty. Astin (1984) similarly argues that support should be given in the form of advice, guidance and support. Astin believes that this support should be individual.

McHugh, Engstrom and Tinto (1997) believe that students are more likely to continue and develop their competences in a learning environment that provides frequent feedback on their individual performance. Different forms of on-going assessment and evaluations should offer the student the necessary information on how their performance can be improved to better meet the requirements. Rendon (1994) also points at the importance of formative feedback to students concerning their competences Biggs and Tang (2011) discuss that formative feedback, i.e. feedback that occurs during the learning process when the student has the opportunity to improve their performance, better supports students’ motivation and their will to work more constructively towards certain goals. Ramsden (1993) points out that the feedback situation needs clear criteria and objectives to stimulate students' intellectual challenge, and their dedication and efforts to achieve the goals.

Students’ competences grow best in a learning environment that welcomes them as appreciated members of the institution (e.g. Tinto, 2003; Astin, 1984; Rendon, 1994). Commitment, in this perspective, involves both teachers and others being involved in the individual student’s education, and also for both teachers and the institution to have a clear objective to motivate students to develop their competences in the field. Rendon (1994) argues that committed students are those who put consistent effort into studying, meaning spending time on campus, actively participating in student organisations, and interacting with teachers and other students outside of course activities. Students with low comittment often neglect their studies, spend little time on campus, do not take part in outside-of-curriculum activities, and have little contact with teachers and other students. The latter, according to Rendon, risk failing their studies, i.e. not achieving the required quality of the learning outcomes. In anticipation of this, students need to be confirmed and to feel that they are capable of learning. With such confirmation, they gain confidence and feel that they are accepted and seen as valuable. When students are not confirmed, they feel frustrated, subordinated, despairing and are become silent. Confirmation outside the classroom, but within the educational framework, can be in the form of conversations with other students, teachers, counselling, coaching or other guidance (Rendon, 1994).

The main condition for students to succeed in their higher education is a learning environment that fosters learning, says Rendon (1994). The more time and energy students devote to their own development and learning, and the more intensely they engage in their own education, the better they perform, and the more satisfied they will be with their education (Rendon, 1994). Commitment seems therefore to be a key to learning: students who are actively committed in their education learn more. To create commitment and persistence in learning, the entire institution needs to actively support students' understanding of learning objectives and how to achive learning outcomes (Wikberg Nilsson & Gedda, 2013).

For this reason, Boekaerts (1999) argue that self-regulated learning has emerged as an important part of education. This involves research on learning styles, metacognition and regulation styles, and theories of the self, including goal-directed behavior. It can be summarized into processing modes, learning processes, and regulation of the self. In this perspective, teachers and researchers would benefit from integrating these three layers into a comprehensive model of self-regulated learning. In support of this is Schoenfeld’s (2011) argument that what people choose to do is a result of their resources (knowledge and available materials and other resources), their goals (conscious or unconscious goals they are trying to accomplish), and their attitude (their assumptions, values and abilities). Clear guidelines and

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

support could for that reason contribute to student skill development and probably thereby also to student success.

EXISTING FRAMEWORKS

There are a variety of legislative and non-legislative frameworks for supporting students in their competence development. Some of these are described in upcoming sections.

Swedish Higher Education Regulation

The Higher Education Regulation is developed by the Swedish Government, and is in turn subordinate to the Swedish Higher Education Law. This stipulates the conditions for managing higher education, for universities governed by the state. The Higher Education Regulation describes the learning objectives for each higher education degree. These objectives are in other words not negotiable, but are goals of the education that must be met in order to attain a certain university degree. It is divided into three sections with different criteria of 1) student’s knowledge and understanding, 2) skills and abilities, and 3) judgment and attitude.

The CDIO framework

The CDIO framework is described as an innovative framework for developing future engineers2. In summary, it covers development of engineering students' skills, in order to become professional and independent so that they can participate in an engineering practice directly after their education (Crawley, Malmqvist, Lucas & Brodeur, 2011). CDIO’s 12 standards serve as a guideline for educational reform and evaluation and provide a framework for continuous improvement. They also provide evidence for each standard, illustrating how the standard can be met.

There is a broad consensus in engineering education that is in accordance with the objectives of the CDIO initiative (Cloutier, Hugo & Sellens, 2010), i.e. that there is a need to develop engineering education and future engineers who have the expertise to apply conceive-design-implement-operate skills in developing future products, processes and systems. Crawley et al. (2011) emphasises that the 12 standards include developing consistency between objectives, learning activities and evaluations, in accordance with Biggs and Tang’s (2011) description of 'constructive alignment'.

The 12 standards address major aspects of higher engineering education; aspects which are essential for teachers and faculty to mutually and continually discuss and develop. Crawley et al. (2011) argue that there are different needs that today's engineering courses should contribute to: they must help to develop students' technical skills, while at the same time contribute to a variety of individual and social skills, such as having the skills to work in teams and the skills to meet ethical, corporate and societal needs. An important aspect of this framework is the description of the need for skills in the form of 1) disciplinary knowledge and reasoning (learning to learn), 2) individual and professional competences (learning to be), and 3) social skills: teamwork and communication (learning to be together).

2 http://www.cdio.org

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

Alverno’s ability-based curriculum

Alverno College in the US has over 30 years’ experience of working with ability-based curriculum strategy. Their focus on eight core abilities represent what is described as “the very building blocks needed to create an effective and relevant learning experience.”3

Riordan and Sharkey (2010) describe the implementation of the ability–based learning strategy as involving the entire college in the question of what is most important that the students learn: what is it that students must not miss in your area? The result is that the whole institution agreed on eight abilities, which were seen as common and fundamental to all disciplines and areas. Each skill is described by a number of criteria. To get a degree from Alverno require all students to have achieved at least level 4, then it is up to each educational programme to identify abilities that are vital, and thus determine the level students must achieve. Hakel (1997) believes that this is due to the focused performance: "You get what you measure. If you want performance, then you have to measure performance”.

An important ingredient in Alverno’s ability-based framework is their focus, primarily, on learning and, secondly, on education. According Hakel (1997), it covers a different mindset from 'how should I teach this' to 'how should students learn this'. Far too often from Hakel’s perspective, what students learn is something else than what was actually intended, which is also different from what was actually taught. To detail the abilities that are central for students, and to start a discussion about how students can learn that, and how students can demonstrate that they have learned, is in this perspective central. An important aspect, according to Hakel, is to provide constant, inevitable and formative feedback. At Alverno, this includes self-evaluation, peer-review, teacher assessment, and external evaluation. The framework consists of students documenting evidence of their performance, which is then assessed through self-assessment, peers, faculty and external assessment. The point of this, says Hakel, is to compete against oneself, not against others.

Vitae - Research Development framework

Vitae Research Development Framework RDF) (Vitae 2011) is a framework and career development tool for researchers at all levels, from graduate student to highly qualified research leaders. The RDF was introduced in the UK in 2010 (Bray & Boon, 2011) and was developed to plan, promote and support personal and professional career development of researchers. The idea was that the tool would enable researchers to assess their knowledge, skills, behaviours and personal characteristics against clear criteria.

The RDF comprises a matrix of different attributes with up to five different quality levels. A total of 63 areas (RDF uses the term descriptor) are organised in four main areas and 12 sub-domains. For example, within the sub-domain D3 Commitment and Impact, the area of education is outlined with four different skill levels. To achieve level 1, the researchers are supposed to contribute in teaching and supervision of projects at the basic level. To achieve the highest level of competence, the researcher is required to lead educational programmes and their evaluation and quality assurance, as well as actively promote a culture that links research and education, and act as a mentor for others.

3 www.alverno.edu/academics/ourability-basedcurriculum/ (2016-04-27)

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

The framework is implemented in an on-line tool that helps the researcher to self-evaluate the level of competence he or she is at the moment, as well as a desired level to strive for. The choices are recorded and the researcher must provide evidence they have achieved a certain competence level. The process can be described as an iterative deliberative process (Bray & Boon, 2011), where the researcher can return, adjust and change their previous choices. In the tool, the researcher can also set objectives (areas and skill levels) that he or she should achieve, how it should be measured and when it should be implemented.

COMPETENCE PROFILE

In early 2015, during the process of the current CDIO framework implementation and educational reform of Industrial Design Engineering LTU, we identified a need to better govern teaching and learning activities toward learning objectives and outcomes. The reason for this was for both students and teachers to recognise competences that are particulary relevant in this MSc engineering education, without having to search in both the Swedish Higher Education Regulations and CDIO Syllabus. In short, we saw a need for a common framework that could suppport teachers to e.g. plan learning activities, provide formative feedback during courses, and assess learning outcomes, and support for students’ self-regulated learning by assessing their knowledge, skills, behaviours and personal characteristics against clear criteria.

A challenge for Industrial Design Engineering is that one department does not give all courses within the programme: instead three institutions provide some of the courses, without insight into specific graduate coucome for IDE. Luleå University of Technology, for example gives the same general basic courses in mathematics, physics, economics and chemistry for all disparate engineering degrees: space engineering, mechanical engineering, architecture, civil engineering, computer engineering, industrial design engineering etc. This represents a difficulty for the students to realise how the course contributes to their individual skills development, and also makes it difficult for teachers to provide examples and learning activities for the individual programmes.

This is the background to the work with developing a framework that supports both teachers’ and students' understanding of what competences they need to develop to be able to work in the field of industrial design engineering. In 2015 the implementation of CDIO began. It meant that work with the Competence Profile included both discussions about the Swedish Higher Education Regulations and how they could be filtered down to more straight-forward descriptions of the competences that are specific for industrial design engineering, as well as CDIO’s syllabus. To exemplify, we describe one of the Swedish Higher Education Regulation objectives:

"Demonstrate the ability to in both national and international contexts, orally and in writing, and in dialogue with different groups, clearly present and discuss their conclusions and the knowledge and arguments that form the basis for these”

This objective clarifies what the student should be able to demonstrate at the end of their education, but does not illustrate what qualities the student needs to have in order to progress toward the final examination. An interpretation of the competences this objective requires could include oral and written communication, dialogue with different groups, and the ability to express themselves in both Swedish and English. This can be compared with CDIO’s Objective 3.2, Communication, which is defined in Table 1.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

Table 1. CDIO objective 3.1 Communication (Cloutier, Hugo & Sellens, 2010)

The CDIO syllabus covers the Swedish Higher Education Regulation and more. It thus provides a good overview of the communication skills that are valuable for an engineer, while providing education leaders and teachers further indication of important competences to practice in teaching and learning activities. However, it does not provide support for discussing quality or progression. On the other hand, Alverno’s ability-based curriculum provides several criteria for self-evaluation for each learning objective, see Table 2. This illustrates the criteria for self-evaluation of oral presentation.

Table 2. Self-evaluation of learning objective for communication (Hellertz, 2004)

Our idea was to develop a framework that could support students’ understandings of important qualities for an industrial design engineer, and a self-regulated learning strategy of progression towards certain objectives. The framework should support both teachers and students in understanding how and with what quality, a certain competence should be developed. The framework consists of eight different competence areas, visualised in Figure 1.

3.1 COMMUNICATION 3.1.1 Communication strategy 3.1.2 Communication structure 3.1.3 Written communication 3.1.4 Electronic/Multimedia communication 3.1.5 Graphical communication 3.1.6 Oral presentation 3.1.7 Inquiry, listening and dialogue 3.1.8 Negotiation, compromise and conflict resolution 3.1.9 Advocacy 3.1.10 Establishing diverse connections: networking

COMMUNICATION 1 Talks without reading from, but with assistance of, notes 2 Seizes attention and clarifies content, in a, for this particular audience, relevant manner,

making clear demarcations, and refers to relevant sources 3 Uses verbal expressions that demonstrate clear focus, an understandable terminology etc. 4 Effectively convey information, e.g. through adequate voice strength, varied tone, use of body

language, eye contact etc. 5 Uses conventional rules for formulation, pronunciation, sentence structure etc. 6 Uses a meaningful and effective structure and disposition 7 Supports and develops theme, using quotes, examples, personal comparisons etc. 8 Uses relevant media (OH, PowerPoint, video etc.) 9 Conveys an appropriate content

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

Figure 1. The IDE Competence Profile

The eight areas were developed in discussions with students, teachers, and alumni of what competences that was most important that the student had developed during the education. The Competence profile development has been an iterative process, where the framework was first discussed, introduced and implemented in an introductory course during autumn 2013, and then further developed in several steps and implemented in later courses. Each competence area is in this model divided into several criteriaompetences where student starts as a novice and can progress to an expert. For the competence area Communication skills, the sub areas and the criteria’s areis listed in Table 3.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

Table 3. Competence Communication for Industrial Design Engineering at LTU.

Table 4. Competence Design and develop for Industrial design engineering at LTU.

DESIGN AND DEVELOP

Think and act innovatively

NOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Explain and use basic creative methods

Challenge current solutions, apply creative methods

Apply creative methods and approaches to create novel solutions

Select and customize creative methods and approaches to fit context and problem situation

Facilitate and create creative processes and workshops tailored both to the team and the problem

Prototype and test

NOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Understand and use simple prototypes to evaluate features and characteristics

Apply and use different types of prototypes to evaluate the features and characteristics.

Explore the solution space by creating and evaluating prototypes with a user centered approach.

Create prototypes in an iterative process to explore, test, analyze and evaluate the functions and features

Carry out design projects in which prototypes are used throughout the entire process to ensure user experience and usability

COMMUNICATION

Oral communications

NOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Execute a presentation in a structured and factual way, keeping track of time, and through the use of appropriate aids.

Motivate and defend basis of ideas and arguments in a confident and convincing manner

Select and apply a range of presentation techniques for different audiences and situations

Conviningly formulate answer to questions and discuss the basis of arguments with different people

Present, defend and argue in English in a credible manner

Written communications

NOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Understand use and format a basic template

Apply a variety of reporting methods (lab reports, project reports, workbook, pm etc.)

Evaluate, assemble and convincingly formulate work, results and arguments in a credible manner

Select and develop structure, content and format of written communication for different audiences

Ccommunicate in writing in English

Visual communication

NOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Understand basic tools and techniques for visual communication

Apply a broad range of visual communication techniques (sketch, rendering, physical model, simulations, animations, 2D and 3D models)

Analyze and argue for visual communication technique, create a visual communication also of the work process and its results in a convincing manner

Select, argue for and design visual communication for different target groups

Professionally and convincingly, combine different visualisation techniques to communicate process and results

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

The purpose of the matrix is to support students' independent learning strategy, i.e. that they have the opportunity to self-evaluate their competences both with and without teacher intervention. It also provides support for teacher’s planning of teaching and learning activities, and in feedback situations. The idea is also to eventually use it to set standards for graduate outcomes, i.e. to get a degree require all students to have achieved at least level 3. The goal is to implement the competence profile throughout industrial design engineering curriculum.

During 2015-16 the Competence profile has been tested in three courses, where the students have used it as a self-assessment guide. Students’ comment have been e.g. “it supported to identify my weaknesses”; “it was a pedagogical tool for my own development”; and “it helped me understand what to develop and learn in the education”. Future work is to further discuss with both students and teachers which courses should have learning activities that can contribute in developing a specific competence, i.e. teaching and learning activities that contain elements who ensures practice of a particular competence at a certain level. For this to be possible requires learning activities of self-evaluation, peer-review and teacher assessment of competences, sessions in which the student receives formative feedback on their performance, and what they need to do to develop their competences.This should ideally also be reflected in curricula and study guides, so that students themselves can adjust their own competence profile, and visually see how their competences develops in and through teaching and learning activities. At the moment, we are implementing this in a visual representation of the curricula, in which the students can see what the courses’ teaching and learning activities can contribute to their individual competence development, see Figure 2.

Figure 2. An example of how the Competence profile is aligned in one of the courses in a visual representation of the curriculum. In addition, the idea is to use existing workbooks, learning portfolios, and implement a self-evaluating scale of what the students themselves think that they achieved during the teaching and learning activities. Afterwards, this can be used in feedback sessions where teachers and students discuss how they can develop their competences before summative assessment. This would provide a framework for a self-regulated learning strategy, in which the students focus on these competences, which are required for their professional practice, and that also makes it easier to understand how learning activities constructively are aligned toward their final degree.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

DISCUSSION

A comparison between the Swedish Higher Education Regulation objective 9, CDIO learning Objective 3.1 and the competence profile Communication Skills illustrates that the competence profile contributes both in fulfilling the Swedish Higher Education Regulation and the CDIO syllabus. An interesting aspect is that visualisation competences are left out in the Swedish Higher Education Regulation degree outcomes, while CDIO expresses the need for graphical communication as an aspect of communication. For industrial design engineering students, visualisation competence is essential for their future professional practice, consequently it is an important skill to develop during education. Otherwise, we believe that the comparison illustrates that both students and faculty are supported by the Competence Profile, both in meeting the Higher Education Ordinance requirements, as well as the CDIO initiative engineering expertise, and that it also provides support for student developing a self-regulated learning strategy of competence in a clear and straight-forward way.

We believe that self-regulated learning strategies can be one important complement in higher education that have potential of contributing to higher quality and student success. It is a framework that supports students’ independent learning strategies towards outcomes based on clear criteria. For the various functions and roles involved in implementing higher education, student's independent learning strategies is often an implicit demand that in our experience is rarely discussed with the students. The Competence profile is designed to support an independent learning strategy, and to create a professional framework for developing and planning teaching and learning activities,, as well as promoting students’ personal and professional development. An independent learning strategy is supported as it allows the students themselves to map their knowledge, skills, experiences, and qualities, and take action for change. It is also valuable as basis for formative and summative assessment. In other words, the Competence profile is employed to describe what students are supposed to be able to do (prior courses), what the learning activities are supposed to contribute to (during courses) as well as for formative and summative assessment of how well it has been done (during and after courses). Finally, to conclude the question of what can be gained by introducing a new framework. We believe that the competence profile provides a framework that is easy to understand and implement for both students and teachers. It supports actual implementation through the easy-to-use design. The Competence Profile states the individual characteristics that are required for achieving an MSc degree in Industrial Design Engineering at LTU. It covers the Swedish Higher Education Authority’s requirements, but in a more straightforward, way. It also allows an visualisation on how different courses contribute to the overall programme objectives. The second question of issue for this paper was how these different approaches to learning objectives can co-exist. In our experience, overall the student competence profile is a valuable framework that supports both educational development in a CDIO implementation, and students in developing necessary competences for their professional practice. The student competence profile therefore in our view completes, not competes with, the CDIO syllabus.

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

REFERENCES

Amber, D. (2000) Researchers Seek Basics Of Nano Scale. The Scientist, August 21.

Astin, A. (1984) Student Involvement: A Development Theory for Higher Education Graduate School of Education. Los Angeles, Calif. : University of Californa

Biggs, J. B. & Tang, C. S. (2011) Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does. Maidenhead: Open University Press

Bray, R., & Boon, S. (2011). Towards a framework for research career development: An evaluation of the UK's vitae researcher development framework. International Journal for Researcher Development, 2(2), 99-116.

Boekaerts, M. (1999) Self-regulated learning: where we are today. International Journal of Educational research. Vol. 31, iss. 6, pp. 445-457) Brännberg, A., Gulliksson, H. & Holmgren, U. (2013) Didaktik för ingenjörslärare. Konsten och glädjen med att utbilda ingenjörer. Lund: Studentlitteratur

Brown, T. (2008) Design Thinking, Harvard Business Review.

Clothier, G., Hugo, R. & Sellens, R. (2010) Mapping the relationship between the CDIO syllabus and the CEAB graduate attributes: an update. In Proceedings of the 7th International CDIO Conference, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, June 20 - 23, 2011

Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Lucas, W. A. & Brodeur, D. R. (2011) The CDIO Syllabus 2.0 – an updated statement of goals for engineering education. In proceedings of the 7th CDIO Conference, Technical University of Denmark, Copenhagen, June 20-23, 2011

Cross, N. (2006) Designerly ways of knowing. New York: Springer Verlag

Dale, E .(1996) The cone of experience, I Ely och Plomp (ed.) Classic writings on Instructional Technology. Libraries Unlimited

Eder, W. E. (2008) Theory of technical systems and engineering design science- legacy of Vladimir Hubka. International Design Conference- Design 2008, Dubrovnik, Croatia, May 19-22, 2008

Hakel, M. D. (1997) What we must learn from Alverno. In M. P. King. & C. C. Schroeder’s (eds) About campus. San Fransisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass Inc Publishers

Hellertz, P. (2004) Färdighetsbaserat lärande enligt Alvernomodellen. Örebro: Veje International AB

Högskoleförordningen (1993:100) Stockholm: Sveriges Riksdag

McHugh Engström, C. & Tinto, V. (1997) Working togehter for service learning. In M. P. King. & C. C. Schroeder’s (eds) About campus. San Fransisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass Inc Publishers

Ramsden, P. (2003) Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed). London: Routledge- Falmer

Rendon, L. (1994) Validating Culturally Diverse Students Toward a New Model of Learning and Student Development. Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 19, No.1, Fall 1994

Riordan, T. & Sharkey, S. (2010) Hand in hand- the role of culture, faculty identity, and mission in sustaining general education reform. In S. Gano-Philips & R. W. Barnetts (eds) A process approach to general education reform: transforming institutional culture in higher education, pp. 199-219. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing

Simon, H. A. (1969) The Science of the Artificial. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

Smets, G., & Overbeeke, K. (1994). Industrial design engineering and the theory of direct perception. Design Studies, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 175-182.

Studentspegeln (2007) Högskoleverkets rapportserie 2007:20R Högskoleverket

Tinto, V. (2003) Promoting Student Retention Through Classroom Practice. In proceeding of Enhancing Student Retention: Using International Policy and Practice, an international conference sponsored by

Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, Finland, June 12-16, 2016.

the european access network and the institute for access studies at Staffordshire University, Amsterdam, Netherlands, November 5-7, 2003

Ulrich, K.T. & Eppinger, S.D. (2012). Product design and development. (5. ed.) Boston, Mass.: McGraw-Hill/Irwin

Vitae (2011-01-13) https://www.vitae.ac.uk/vitae-publications/rdf-related/researcher-development-framework-rdf-vitae.pdf/

Wikberg Nilsson, Å. & Gedda, O. (2013) Guide 2013 för programutveckling enligt Pedagogisk idé LTU. Luleå: Luleå University of Technology

Wikberg Nilsson, Å., Ericson, Å. & Törlind, P. (2015) Design: process och metod. Lund: Studentlitteratur

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

Åsa Wikberg Nilsson, Ph.D. is a lecturer in industrial design and studies for Engineering Design at Luleå Technical University. Åsa has taught design methodology and design processes for 15 years and has been practicing design work in various forms for more than 20 years. Åsa's main interest is centric standardised creative and participatory design processes, and learning and visual communication in the design process.

Peter Törlind, Ph.D. is Head of Innovation and Design, Luleå University of Technology, He is also responsible for the Industrial Design Engineering Programme. His current research interest is Product Innovation with a focus on early phases, collaboration and creativity.

Corresponding author

Åsa Wikberg Nilsson Innovation and Design Luleå University of Technology 971 87 Luleå Sweden +46 920 491342 Asa.Wikberg-Nilsson@ltu.se

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

EXPERIENCES OF EDUCATIONAL REFORM – IMPLEMENTATION OF CDIO AT INDUSTRIAL

DESIGN ENGINEERING

Åsa Wikberg-­Nilsson, Carl Jörgen Normark, Peter Törlind &Therese Öhrling Innovation and Design, Luleå University of Technology

ABSTRACT Luleå University of Technology (LTU) joined the CDIO initiative in 2015. The development of the MSc program Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) was one of LTU’s four test pilots of educational reform with support of the CDIO framework. The current educational reform comprises all CDIO standards, however some have been easier to implement than others. The results from the current CDIO-­implementation are so far positive experiences from both faculty and students. While the program curriculum has been developed at a macro level, changes also impact the program objectives, teachers’ skills development, and students’ learning outcomes at a micro level where, for example, courses have been redesigned regarding teaching and learning activities, and assessments have been developed to include both formative and summative feedback to promote a deep learning approach. Great efforts have also been put into development of new learning environments, finalized in 2016. However, implementation of CDIO also deals with changing the educational culture, a work that takes more efforts and time than this current two-­year reform. A success factor in the present implementation is the involvement of experienced CDIO-­implementers that have inspired, motivated and coached the IDE faculty in re-­designing the program. KEYWORDS Educational reform, CDIO implementation, Active learning, Standards: 2-­10 INTRODUCTION The focus of this paper is educational reform with support of the CDIO approach, implemented at the MSc in Industrial design engineering program (IDE) at Luleå University of Technology (LTU), Sweden. The IDE program integrates industrial design with engineering design, and with human needs and requirements as main incentives for development of students’ products, processes, and systems building skills. By tradition, various subjects such as usability, aesthetics, design methods, ergonomics, human work environment and design theory has been interspersed with more traditional engineering subjects such as math’s, physics, solid mechanics, material science etc. Simon once stated “the engineer, and more generally the designer, is concerned with how things ought to be -­ how they ought to be in order to attain goals and to function” (1996 p. 4-­5). A design engineer should hence also in our view not be concerned with “what is”, other than identifying human product, process or system needs, but with creatively applying a “what if”-­ mindset, supporting future innovations. The program outcome is a design engineer, a person who over the 33 years the program has existed has been highly attractive in the labor market for e.g. great visual communication

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

skills, creative and innovation capability, as well as great ability to coordinate and collaborate in projects. However, a program evaluation performed by the Swedish Higher Education Authority in 2013 considered IDE to have poor scientific base. Additional reviews among IDE student, faculty, and external stakeholders identified that the curricula was not considered to be constructively aligned. External IDE stakeholders considered the main program parts relevant, but with possibilities of improvement in terms of more focus on progressing students’ skills in e.g. entrepreneurship, sustainability, and interaction design. Before the Swedish Higher Authority evaluation, teachers were relatively autonomous in choosing teaching and learning approach, as well as in setting their own course objectives and examination forms. This was also identified as a challenge in order to reform the education towards student-­centered constructively aligned learning experiences, rather than the previous teacher-­centered learning approach. A core of the IDE faculty initiated the reforms inspired by what Crawley, Malmqvist, Östlund, Brodeur and Edström (2014) describe as a good approach: 1) we arranged workshops in which first faculty and later students worked with the CDIO standards in order to better understand what they covered and how they could be implemented in our context;; 2) we arranged meetings with students and external IDE stakeholders, in order to identify both students’ and the professional IDE practice’s needs;; 3) we visited other universities that had implemented CDIO;; and 4) we invited CDIO knowledgeable persons to help us coordinate and coach the implementation process. In upcoming sections we outline some of the CDIO standards and describe what has been done in order to change the IDE educational culture. Integrated curriculum (Std 3), Introduction to Engineering (Std 4), and Integrated Learning Experiences (Std 7) Standard 3, 4 and 7 incorporate a curriculum designed with supporting disciplinary courses, integration of learning experiences, as well as integration of both personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills, as well as providing an introductory course accommodating a framework in industrial design engineering practice (Crawley et al., 2016). At IDE, the first two years in the previous curriculum contained a lot of diverse courses, e.g. maths, physics, economics, as well as ergonomics, design methods, aesthetics, sketching and prototyping. In the current CDIO implementation we for this reason developed a 15 ECTS Introduction to IDE course, with the idea of integrating disciplinary knowledge with practical skills-­development, and of providing a framework for industrial design engineering practice. This course includes several design-­build experiences, implemented in small-­scaled projects, for students to practice both personal and interpersonal skills. The teaching and learning approach includes flipped classroom, which in this course is implemented through reading instructions as well as watching video-­clips before class, and practical exercises, labs and group assignments during teacher-­student interaction. It also includes formative feedback (Biggs & Tang, 2011) as students hand in a first draft of each assignment, receive feedback from both peers and teachers, and then have the opportunity to act on the comments before summative assessment. The learning

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

objectives have been revised to better align with the CDIO syllabus, and to form a rational, consistent and detailed statement of competences for an industrial design engineer (see Wikberg Nilsson & Törlind, 2016). This has been part of a strive to develop an educational culture that supports development of self-­regulated learning strategies through a focus on professional qualifications and intended learning outcomes as the object of learning (see Wikberg Nilsson & Gedda, submitted 2017). The students showed approval of the new course design with practical classes and workshops:

“The project-­based learning approach vas very helpful in connecting all industrial design engineering competences”

(IDE student Year 1 -­ autumn 2016-­ author's’ translation) A self-­evaluation of the involved standards is that we have developed and implemented an integrated curriculum concerning personal, interpersonal, product, process, and system building skills development. There is evidence of the impact of the implementation of integrated learning experiences, even though we need to continue in developing the teaching and learning activities, and there is documented evidence of students having achieved the intended learning outcomes of the introductory IDE course. Design-­implement experiences (Std 5) Standard 5 deals with development of a curriculum that includes design-­implement learning experiences (Crawley et al., 2014). Where the previous curriculum offered a clear distinction between theoretical and practice-­based content, the redesigned curricula integrate these to progress students’ design-­build learning experience early in the education. The introductory course year one now integrates theories of design methods and project management, with both sketching and prototyping learning experiences. The idea was that theories of design methods and project management are best learned through implementing a project, thereby also developing both personal and interpersonal skills. The second year 15 ECTS course also offer an integrated course design with design theories such as semiotics, aesthetics, usability, and user experience integrated with practice-­based skills-­development in prototyping and model making in the workshops. These two courses have so far been implemented only one time, and there are, of course, room for improvement. However, the course evaluations show that the idea of integrating more theoretical knowledge development with more practice-­based ditto is approved by the students. “The design-­implement experiences of creating and developing several concepts have been implemented in the whole course through all the tasks and assignments. It has consisted of creating ideas, sketching them, or

prototyping them. An idea or concept is always good to develop to see if it can become something even better. A prototype should be evaluated and re-­developed to obtain such a good end result as possible.”

(IDE student Year 2 -­ January 2017 -­ Authors’ translation) Given the nature of the competences that IDE students should develop, we believe that the design-­implement skills development progress that starts day one in the program lay the ground for a good progression of skills throughout the rest of the program. For these

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

reasons, we consider that there is documented evidence that students have achieved the intended learning outcomes of the design-­implement experiences. Engineering workspaces (Std 6) Standard 6 address engineering workspaces and stipulate the objective of the learning environment as “engineering workspaces and laboratories that support and encourage hands-­on learning of product, process and system building, disciplinary knowledge, and social learning” (Crawley et al., 2014 p. 131). In 2016, LTU declared the vision of becoming Sweden's best learning environment. Rebuilding of workspaces is conducted in order to attract students and also to challenge what Fischer (2005) describes as a university tradition of focusing on learning spaces’ technical performance rather than pedagogical effectiveness. Fischer emphasizes that a learning environment should promote independence and self-­motivation, that students’ needs should be reflected in the learning program, and that students should be challenged and supported to develop deep levels of thinking and application. A re-­design of formal learning spaces for disciplinary knowledge and practical skills-­development such as classrooms, design labs, workshops, project rooms, meeting rooms, as well as informal learning environments for practical skills-­development such as study areas and cafeteria was initiated in 2014, and finalized in its current state in March 2016. The new IDE learning environment has taken much faculty effort during the past years, to ensure best possible teaching and learning practice. The new learning spaces encourage hands-­on learning, support both disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge, and facilitate group activities and social interaction. All students have full access between 6AM and 11 PM. One example is one of the IDE design studios that is designed as a very flexible space, that rapidly can be transformed from a classical presentation hall for 90 students to interactive group work by using stackable tables stored in the ‘garage’ (see figure 3, a large storage area with tables, whiteboards, workshop material, easels etc.). This enables teachers in design courses to go from presentation mode (see figure 1) to group work (see figure 2) in a couple of minutes, thereby allowing the students the opportunity to test and implement the previously presented theory. The new learning environment has received very positive feedback from both students and faculty, and LTU also arrange study visits to the IDE learning environment from other universities, in short: we have evolved the IDE learning spaces into an environment LTU is proud of, and want to show to others, see figure 1-­6. Some of our IDE students’ state:

“We consider it to be much more student-­oriented now, compared to before. It is more flexible;; the different workshops, the 3D prototyping spaces, the usability lab, the design studio in which we can build full-­scale prototypes, and we have access to all facilities all-­day so you can use them. We also have much more student-­spaces compared to the

previous facilities, is so much nicer now!” (IDE students Year 5 -­ January 2017 -­ Author's’ translation)

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

Figure 1. IDE design studio in ‘presentation’ mode.

Figure 2. IDE design studio being used for practice-­based projects

Figure 3. The ’garage’: a large storage area that stores a full-­scale driving simulator along with lots of other materials.

Figure 4. IDE student working with a clay prototype in one of the workshops.

Figure 5. IDE using the wall to present project progress in one of the project areas.

Figure 6. Mockup of a truck cabin in the IDE design studio.

Figure 7. Informal learning environments at IDE: cafeteria and study-­spaces.

Figure 8. One of the workshops in use-­ illustrating practical design-­implement experiences

Figure 9. IDE student working at the laser cutter in the prototype lab.

In summary, we consider that our industrial design engineering workspaces fully support all components of hands-­on, knowledge, and skills learning. Active Learning (Std 8) CDIO standard 8 prescribe that teaching and learning should be based on active and experiential learning methods (Crawley et al., 2014). Crawley et al. further state that “inherent in any active learning method is the fact that students actually do something” (p.154). The aim of the new integrated courses and the reformed curriculum is to deepen the student learning experience through integration of disciplinary theoretical and practice-­based

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

contents. The students are now given an increased number of assignments based on active learning in which they need to identify and conceive theoretical knowledge, but also have to proceed to design and implement in order to complete the task. The assignments are now performed both individually and as team assignments (3-­5 students) and require the students to develop both personal and interpersonal skills, such as to coordinate and collaborate, in order to succeed. We believe this to be a realistic approach to develop their professional practice skills, as they are exploring new concepts, identifying problems, and/or exploring new ways of working. Formative feedback (Biggs & Tang, 2011) has in all IDE specific courses been implemented in order to progress students learning. In several of the courses we have also implemented different forms of blended learning in which teachers record their lectures, require students to watch the recordings before class, and spend class interactions on feedback and discussions instead, as shown in the following quote:

“It was a good thing to first get a short instruction [by the teacher] and then perform a task

right away, instead of listening to a teachers for hours and hours. /.../ For me this has contributed to a good learning experience, as the principal of "learning-­by-­

doing" works for me. (IDE student Year 1 -­ jan 2016-­ Authors’ translation)

The design projects given to the students vary between 2-­hour speed tasks, and 20 weeks half-­time pre-­professional independent skills-­development with external clients in the final year 5. External client companies are now also part of the first introductory course, in order for student to realize the IDE context and framework provided by the education. Several of the courses now have workbook assignments, which require students to reflect on their learning experiences in the TLAs. In conclusion, active learning methods are now being implemented across the IDE curriculum. Enhancement of faculty competence (Std 9) and Enhancement of faculty teaching competence (Std 10) Standard 9, according to Crawley et al. (2014) deals with enhancement of faculty competence in personal and interpersonal skills, as well as product, process and system building skills. The overall objective of standard 10 is to take actions that enhance faculty competence in providing integrated learning experiences, in using experiential learning methods and in assessing student learning. The review of IDE performed by the Swedish Higher Education Authority in 2013 identified a lack of scientific base in the program. Contrary to statements of incentives for the CDIO initiative (Crawley et al., 2014), many of the courses in the previous curricula were practice-­based with little or non connection to theories. This can be seen as in line with the CDIO approach, in the sense of developing engineers who actually can engineer, but we identified the conditions to be more of teachers taking over courses from previous teachers, without reflecting on the need for educational development. As a result, a professor was employed in 2015, to handle the overall strategic development of faculty competences. This has resulted in a series of IDE faculty seminars, with discussions of the research basis of what we do in our courses. The outcome of this is so far a pleased faculty, who now spend time on discussing what we do (disciplinary

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

knowledge), why we do it like that (pedagogical theory), and alternative approaches based on current research and/or best practices. In the reform, we identified a need to facilitate both faculty understanding of IDE specific conceiving-­ designing-­ implementing-­ operating skills, as well as an understanding of the overall CDIO intentions. For this reason, a faculty course in program-­driven course development was developed by LTU’s Educational Development Unit, in which eleven IDE teachers participated. During the course the teachers worked with course development projects inspired by the CDIO initiative, supervised by experienced CDIO-­implementers. The teachers’ course development-­projects now has been implemented in IDE courses. Also, faculty members responsible for the IDE CDIO implementation completed courses in Pedagogical Leadership and Strategic Pedagogical Development. In addition, a highly-­appreciated workshop with professional IDE practitioners was implemented in March 2016, an activity in which both teachers and students participated on even terms. This led to further discussions about skills-­development and faculty competences and planning of more IDE workshops. Some of the faculty also visited Industrial design engineering at TU Delft and Chalmers, similar educational programs that have various solutions to learning integration for example. The outcome of this is a range of re-­designed courses, however, the ideal outcome of increased student skills-­development needs more time. The IDE faculty prior to the CDIO implementation had little pedagogical training, with a few exceptions. There was an unspoken understanding of delivering courses as the faculty had been taught themselves, meaning based on an expert teacher who transform his or her knowledge to the students. The CDIO implementation really turned this around, as highly CDIO knowledgeable Kristina Edström contested the IDE faculty teaching and learning practice, and supported the faculty in understanding how TLAs could be implemented differently, without having to spend more teacher resources. In summary, actions to enhance faculty competence in teaching and in personal and interpersonal skills, as well as product, process, and system building skills have resulted in increased understanding of the CDIO incentives through activities such as discussion seminars, benchmarking IDE educations, concrete course development of integrated learning experiences, and skills development i workshops with active practitioners. Faculty members now also continuously participate in development of teaching, learning and assessment methods. Learning Outcomes (Std 2) and Learning Assessment (Std 11) In this paper, we coordinate our work with implementing Standards 2 and 11. On a macro level, this has resulted in the development of a competence profile for IDE-­students, consisting of 8 critical competences for developing both personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process and system building skills, as well as disciplinary knowledge (see Wikberg Nilsson & Törlind, 2016) which should be consistent with program goals and learning assessments. The idea with this is to convert CDIO intentions, into a practical everyday tool that both teachers and students can implement in teaching and learning activities. In one IDE course, students implement the competence profile to self-­evaluate

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

their own competence and skills, and review other’s self-­evaluation and give feedback. From the course evaluation the students say they appreciate the self-­evaluation, and especially the possibility to peer-­review others assignments.

“[This was] a difficult but good way to reflect on my own and other team members

contribution to the project!”/ “[This was] a good opportunity to remind yourself about your own contribution to the team”/

“[It was] fun to evaluate my own and others' performance in the course (IDE students Year 3 -­ Jan 2016-­ Authors’ translation)

The competence profile provides a focus on the particular objects of learning for IDE students (see Wikberg Nilsson & Gedda, submitted 2017). The development of the competence profile included prototyping the artefact in learning activities, and exploring how it contributed in strengthening students’ self-­awareness of the professional identity as industrial design engineers. On a micro level, the competence profile assembled teachers and students’ understanding and contributed to informed actions in TLAs. In summary, the competence profile not only supports students’ self-­awareness and guides their actions, but also helps teachers in creating learning experiences that subsidize students’ understanding of the professional engineering role and thereby back in taking steps for change of the educational culture. In addition, the learning assessment in several of the IDE courses have been developed to better progress students learning (formative feedback described in Std 8), and to self-­evaluate their IDE competences. This is the result of much discussion of what to actually assess, the process or the results, and how high IDE-­quality can present itself in students’ hand-­ins and assignments. The curricula have been scrutinized in order for students to meet various types of assignments and assessments, and for the assessments to contribute to a progress of learning in a constructively aligned learning experience throughout the program (e.g. Biggs & Tang, 2011). Now, one year into the current CDIO implementation, our learning assessment methods are much better aligned with the learning goals across the curriculum. DISCUSSION In a continuous educational improvement process, as described by Crawley et al. (2014), we have now completed a full circle of 1) input: better understanding program purposes, resources and activities, 2) implementation in form of actual teaching and learning activities, as well as identified program outcomes in form of 3) impact, and used the results of course evaluations and student program committees to plan for new 4) improvements. Having completing a full circle have made us realize what we have achieved so far, but also how much work that is left to be done. Within the CDIO implementation project, it has been highlighted that general engineering courses should be more integrated and adapted to the specific programs. The general engineering-­, and specific IDE, courses in the current curricula run in parallel, and we have now started to investigate how the general engineering course content can be better integrated to the IDE program.

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

On a macro-­level, there is a need for a reform of the educational framework to reward teacher excellence, and other pedagogical development, and to upgrade pedagogical educational development in promotion and recruitment. During the CDIO implementation we have continually addressed teachers that consider educational development neither as important, nor as rewarding. Today there is a lack of incentives for educational change, and other aspects of faculty work [read research] are considered more important. An important aspect in this is that a CDIO implementation deals with a change of the educational culture. The previous IDE educational culture was that of autonomous teaching and learning cultures, often realized as one teacher -­ one course, lacking a constructive alignment in curricula. With a CDIO approach, such previously quite autonomous teachers now need to adapt to overall program objectives and implement changes. Mintzberg (1978) describes this as one of the main challenges in educational reform and that is something we agree upon. Also, universities are by tradition resistant to change (Crawley et al. 2014), but through an understanding of the need for change, and by forming a group with enough power to lead the change effort (Kotter, 1995), change can be accomplished. At IDE we initiated the change in the courses that we have access to, with the intention of gradually changing the educational culture through both faculty and students that have developed an understanding of the CDIO approach and its prospect of improving the quality and nature of the IDE education. Another learning is that participating several faculty members in the CDIO implementation seminars and course, had several advantages: it allowed for discussions of CDIO skills and how they can be demonstrated, of how an integrated learning approach could be implemented at IDE, and how a consequent constructive alignment of learning experiences could be implemented in the curriculum. Table 1 illustrates a self-­evaluation of the IDE education in 2015 and one year later in 2016. There is still work to do in order to actually change the educational culture at IDE. So far we have taken the first steps towards a full implementation of CDIO. Table 1. Illustrates a self-­evaluation of the CDIO initiative at IDE Standard 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2015 1 2 2 4 4 3 4 3 3 1 3 2

2016 2 4 3 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2

The educational reform is expected to result in program outcomes that meet national standards of engineering education, and that provide learning experiences that motivates students to approach self-­regulated deep learning strategies and thereby also retain students in the engineering practice. A conclusion so far is that educational reform deals with development of an educational culture. It takes much more effort than anyone of us previously had understood, but at the same time is much more rewarding in terms of students being motivated and committed to the program. All CDIO standards needs to be continuously addressed in faculty and among students in order to actually be implemented in the everyday teaching and learning practice. The current work has resulted in Swedish

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

Higher Education Authority approving IDE as a high-­quality education. We do however not want to stop at this approval: we want to be one of the best IDE programs in the world, educating creative individuals who contribute in solving both current and future challenges. In this paper we have presented our first steps towards educational reform, what Crawley et al. (2014) describe as the development of a framework that provides a sequence of learning experience that meet students’ learning needs, and that promotes deep learning of [industrial design] engineering fundamentals, through pedagogical approaches and innovative teaching methods, in new learning environments that provide concrete learning experiences. REFERENCES Biggs, J.B. & Tang, C.S. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does. (4.,

[rev.] ed.) Maidenhead: Open University Press Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D. R., & Edström, K. (2014). Rethinking

Engineering Education. Dordrecht, Switzerland: Springer. Fisher, K. (2005) Research into identifying effective learning environments. Evaluating Quality in

Educational Facilities. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/edu/innovation-­education/37905387.pdf (Downloaded 2017-­01-­29)

Kotter, J. P. (1995) Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, March-­April 1995

Mintzberg (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management science, Vol 24, No. 9, pp.934-­948 Simon, H. A. (1996) The Science of the Artificial. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: MIT Press Wikberg Nilsson, Å. & Gedda, O. (2017 submitted) Design of objects for learning -­ prototyping

artefacts for change of educational culture. Submitted to International CDIO Conference 2017 Wikberg-­Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2016). Student Competence Profiles: a complementary or

competitive approach to CDIO?. In International CDIO Conference: 12/06/2016-­16/06/2016 (pp. 844-­858).

BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION Åsa Wikberg Nilsson, Ph.D. is Director of Study in Industrial Design Engineering at the Division of Innovation and Design, Luleå University of Technology (LTU). She is one of the CDIO implementation managers at LTU, and responsible for educational reform within the IDE program. Her main research interests are design methods, collaboration, and design didactics. Peter Törlind, Ph.D. is Head of Innovation and Design, Luleå University of Technology, He is also responsible for the Industrial Design Engineering program. His current research interest is Product Innovation with a focus on early phases, collaboration and creativity. Carl Jörgen Normark, Ph.D. is a senior lecturer in Industrial design at Luleå University of Technology and teaches in a wide variety of design courses focused on design theory and interaction design. He is also responsible for the BSc. program in Industrial Design Engineering.

Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-­22, 2017.

Therese Öhrling, Ph.D. is a senior lecturer in Industrial design at Luleå University of Technology. Öhrling has a Ph.D in Human work science and her research and teaching focus on ergonomics, and user-­centered design. Corresponding author Dr. Åsa Wikberg Nilsson Innovation and Design Luleå University of Technology 971 87 Luleå Sweden +46 920 491342 asawi@ltu.se

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-­NonCommercial-­NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

IMPROVING WRITTEN COMMUNICATION – IMPLEMENTATION AT INDUSTRIAL DESIGN ENGINEERING

Peter Törlind

Product Innovation, Luleå University of Technology, Sweden ABSTRACT The purpose of the paper is to present how we have improved the quality of technical writing for students in Industrial Design Engineering at Luleå University of Technology. To achieve this, we have identified a number of courses focusing on verbal and written communication, one course – Product and production design focus on documenting and reporting a technical development work to a client. During the last seven years, the course has continuously been improved, and this paper contains an in-depth review of the course performed during spring 2018. The review was done by discussions in the teaching team, interviews, workshops, analysis of course documentation (course-reviews, course-pm, assessment-scheme etc.). The evolution of the course and how different support systems have been implemented such as peer-reviews, templates, formative feedback and self-assessment has been developed is described in detail. The current course is designed as a stage gate process with four design reviews, in which the student present and receive critique. At each design review, each team produces a short process memo (PM) that is peer-reviewed. Each student conducted three individual peer reviews, as well as group review. With 56 students in the class (spring 2018) over 180 completed peer reviews are performed by the students themselves before they receive formative feedback from the teachers. Self-assessment is also used, first by the team on their own final documentation. Finally, all student perform a personal self-assessment with feedback from their team members. The final assessment of the student is performed by the teachers and the result is similar to the students’ self-assessment.

KEYWORDS

Technical writing, design-implement experiences, peer-review, assessment, continuous improvement, Standards: 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 11.

BACKGROUND

This paper describes an implementation of CDIO at Industrial Design Engineering (IDE) at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden. The focus is on improving written communication. In Sweden the Higher Education Ordinance (Appendix 2, Chapter 4.) describes the learning objectives for each higher education degree and written communication is described in the learning outcome 5 “…the student must demonstrate the ability, in both national and

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

international contexts, to explain and discuss in a written and written manner in dialogue with different groups their conclusions and the knowledge and arguments that underlie them.” The learning objectives are both general (are applied to all engineering master programs) and quite formal and described in a way that they are difficult to interpret and implement in teaching. To simplify the assessment of learning objectives of IDE students, a specific competence profile has been developed (Wikberg Nilsson & Törlind, 2016) that will support the students' understanding of overall goals and what they aim for. The competence profile is inspired, among other things, by the Vitae Research Development Framework (Bray & Boon, 2011) and other similar frameworks. The competence profile is designed to support the students' individual development and supports that students themselves can map their knowledge, skills, experiences and qualities. The competence profile should at the same time provide support for teacher feedback and assessment. In the course, the competence profile is used for goal formulations and also by the students for self-evaluation.

Course placement in the program

The course Product and production design was created in 2012 in connection with an audit of the education program in technical design, when there was a need for an integration course between product design and production technology (the two specialisations in the program. The course is today the third design-implement experiences (Crawley et al. 2007), see Figure 1) located in spring term the third year. A more detailed overview of the program is described in Wikström-Nilsson et al. (2017).

Figure 1 Course placement (D3) in the IDE programme. Shaded areas are design courses.

Students have already been introduced to design-implement experiences in the introduction course D1 (first course year one), and D2 (first course second year) these courses contain a mix of theory, methodology and more practical design-implement experiences. The Product and Production design course is the first Design-Implement Experiences where no new theory is presented, and the aim is to integrate knowledge and skills acquired previously in the program and also focus on improving their teamwork and interpersonal skills in a product design project. The course was inspired primarily by courses at Stanford University such as d.school (Brown 2008) and ME310 course (Carleton, & Leifer 2009), that teaches a way of working based on design thinking that combines creative and analytical methods and

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

requires collaboration across disciplines. A more advanced design-implement experience (D5) is also performed in the fifth year. Course aims:

• Acquire theoretical and practical knowledge of the interaction between product and production design.

• Under real-life forms, gain an understanding of how design and choice of materials affect production.

• Apply theory, knowledge and methods from previous courses. In the course students work in small teams, each team consist of 4 students, that go through a traditional design process with five phases (see Figure 2). Students know when and what they should deliver at each stage gate, then it’s up to the students to decide which methods are suitable for performing the design.

Figure 2 Phases in the course (red), design reviews and the final presentation (blue).

After each phase, students present their progress and receive critique at four design reviews (DR), they also produce a 4-page written Process Memo (PM). The course ends with a presentation and documentation of the final concept. The written communication implemented in the program IDE follows a progression path over the years, where the students learn to create different types of written communication in different courses. For an overview see Table 1.

Table 1 Progression in written communication in IDE. YEAR Design ID ECTS NAME TYPE OF WRITING

1 D1 D0030A 15 Design: process and method

Presentation-Poster-Posters-Presentation (group) Workbook v,1, v.2 (individual)

1 A0014A 7,5 Ergonomics 1 Theory presentation (individual), Project report (group)

1 A0011A 7,5 Industrial production environment

Investigation report (group)

2 D2 D0037A 15 Design: theory and practice

Workbook x 2 (individual)

3 D3 A0013A 7,5 Product and production design

PM x 4 (individual) + technical documentation (group)

4 D4 D7007A 7,5 Form giving Workbook (individual)

3-4 D7011A 7,5 Product visualization Process poster (individual) Workbook (individual)

4 D7015A 7,5 Interaction design Workbook (individual)

4* A7004A 7,5 Research project Academic paper in English

5* D7017A 7,5 Advanced prototyping Storybook (group)

5 D5 D7006A 15 Advanced product design Project plan, presentation x 4 (group) Workbook v.1, v.2 (individual)

5 D7018A 7,5 Design science Academic report in English

5 D7014A 30 Master thesis Thesis in English

* Elective course

Pre-study DR1 Ideation DR2 Concepts DR3 Production DR4 Detail PR

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

METHOD

The course product and production have continuously been improved since the course started, through review by the teaching team, course evaluations (one more informal performed after 5 weeks into the course and a formal at the end of the course each year). The latest improvement cycle was performed in the spring of 2018 where a more systematic analysis, evaluation and improvement was performed. The analysis was performed in nine steps, see Figure 3 for an overview and the details below.

Figure 3 The systematic analysis and improvement performed during spring 2018.

1. Change analysis first, a review was performed of the changes that have been implemented since 2012-2017 by going through the course memo and introduction lecture material.

2. Analysis of course evaluations 2012-2017, mainly focusing on issues regarding the written report and peer-review. Open comments were compiled in an Excel document and coded according to ‘final documentation’, ‘PM’, ‘peer-review’, ‘DR’.

3. Evaluation with the teacher team, written documentation has been evaluated with some of the teachers who have been involved in recent years and weak areas identified.

4. Interviews with students, short informal interviews have been conducted with three students who attended the course in 2016. The focus was on what was good with the written moments and how they could be improved.

5. Analysis of submissions has been reviewed by selecting final documentation from the years 2012-2017. Documentation from 2016-2017 was mainly used because all teachers' comments are still available in Canvas, the Learning Management System (LMS) used at LTU. It was not possible to see the previous comments from 2012-2015 (because they were made in Fronter, an older LMS system).

6. Development of checklist and a self-assessment, to support the final phase, developed a checklist and template for self-assessment. This was done by searching for ‘checklist’ and ‘self-assessment / self-evaluation’ on Google Scholar.

7. Development of the documentation workshop, in order to support the students' writing of the final documentation, an interactive documentation workshop was performed where 98% of the students participated. During the workshop, Mentimeter (mentimeter.com) was used to receive feedback.

8. Course evaluation, since we wanted to get the self-evaluation and their experiences of the report writing, the course evaluation was done after they submitted the report and self-evaluation (usually this is done after the final presentation), unfortunately using this approach we only got 16 answers (28% response rate).

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

9. Analysis of the final documentation, when the final documentation was submitted, the results of the self-evaluation and self-assessment was compared with the final assessment of the teachers. Figure 4 shows an example of the compilation of the self-evaluation and the report for all students. We also see an example (right sheet) of the students’ self-assessment of the final documentation and the teacher's assessment.

Figure 4 Part of the evaluation sheets used.

RESULTS – THE EVOLUTION OF THE COURSE

One of the crucial parts of CDIO is the evaluation of the programme and individual courses to enable continuous improvement. Since the start of the course, it has constantly changed and improved based on the students' feedback. Each introductory lecture has gone through important feedback from the previous year and the changes that have been implemented. Below, the main changes are briefly presented, see also the summarised in Table 2.

• HT2012, the course is implemented for the first time • HT2013, removed a submission on production technology after feedback from students.

Scheduled coaching meetings were introduced (previously, the students had to book coaching meetings with the teachers, but many did not use this). Clearer expectations for the various DRs and PMs with assessment templates. Document templates were introduced for both PM and final documentation.

• HT2014, clarified study guide, introduced feedback templates for written PM (used only by teachers).

• Spring2015, the course moved to the spring term and a facilitated peer review was introduced for each PM (4 times) and a lecture and coach session was performed before the final presentation.

• VT2016, introduced Canvas LMS system and then moved the course Memo to Canvas (instead of a pdf document) to get a more uniform structure and to make it easier to find and hyperlink to different types of information. Self-evaluation with student feedback with the help of competence profile was introduced (Wikberg Nilsson & Törlind, 2016).

• VT2017 introduced an agile template and SCRUM methods to facilitate the planning of the project. Facilitated peer review was performed two times, then the peer-review was done by a team, and the last peer-review was done individually by each student.

!""#""$#%&'!(()*!'+,)-

,#./0#1 234 532 534 6#78 ,#./0#1 9:88#1#%/# 9:88;'<# #$%& '(%) #%) '*%) +, +&%& ')%& '+%)-+ ()%& +%( &%( #%& +, +&%& ')%& '+%)-( +. '.%) .%& '&%& +, +&%& ')%& '+%)-. +( #%) (%& '#%& +, +&%& ')%& '+%)-& +& )%( .%+ '#%& ++ +( # .%(-, +.%& .%) +%& )%& ++ +( # .%(-/ +. )%+ &%( ')%& ++ +( # .%(-* +. ')%* &%( '#%& ++ +( # .%(-#. ++ +%) )%) '.%) +/ +&%& '#%& '&%$-#& +(%& )%& (%& '+%) +/ +&%& '#%& '&%$-#, +,%& ')%/ ,%/ )%) +/ +&%& '#%& '&%$-#/ +.%& '#%/ .%/ '(%) +/ +&%& '#%& '&%$-++ #$%& #%+ #%* '(%) +, #$%& ',%& '((%(-+( +#%& ')%& ')%& '/%) +, #$%& ',%& '((%(-+. +,%& '(%& .%& '&%) +, #$%& ',%& '((%(-+& +* '.%) ,%) '.%) +, #$%& ',%& '((%(-+, ++ #%/ &%( #%) +. +) '. '+)%)-

=>?!5'9@ABC4?,!,>@?645='!66466C4?, !"# $%&' (%)*+%,! ! !" " "# # ## # !$%! ! !! ! !! ! !& ' '% % %% ' '# ! !! ! !"( #& #%$%

-./"012345!6/("(.3/

$5!

-7,8)99:;<.&&=>9,)9:7;>?%'%,%;*:;<"@%;A:B$9,=*9=,%$=88),C.;9,7A=*9:7;D,7*%>>6;A1,%>=&9.;;7E)9:7;0%>>7;>1&%),;90);<=)<%

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

Table 2 Summary of improvements in the course

Cou

rse

mem

o

[nr w

ords

]

Num

ber o

f stu

dent

s

Cou

rse

eval

uatio

n (1

-6) Templates Assessment, ECTS Points

PM

Asse

ssm

ent

Feed

back

on

PM (l

ärar

e)

Peer

revi

ew

Self

asse

ssm

ent

com

pete

nce

prof

ile

Self-

asse

smen

t of f

inal

do

cum

enta

tion

Slut

doku

men

tatio

n

PM

Fina

l pre

sent

atio

n

Fina

l doc

umen

tatio

n

Proc

ess

Self-

ases

smen

t

Oth

er

HT2012 2551 48 4,6 2 1 3 1,5 HT2013 4513 56 4,3 x x 4 1,5 2 HT2014 4599 50 4,9 x x x 4 1,5 2 VT2015 4535 15* 5,1 x x x x 1,5 2,25 2,25 1,5 VT2016 canvas 68 4,9 x x x x x 1 3 3,5 VT2017 canvas 61 5,0 x x x x x 1 3 3,5 VT2018 canvas 56 ? x x x x x x 1 3 3,5 *Only bachelor students

From 2015 (after the CDIO implementation started at LTU) the assessment change quite a bit. In 2012-2014, PM1-4 were also assessed. From 2015, PM1-4 was used only to provide formative feedback, and the examination was done only on the final documentation. From 2016, a self-assessment was also used where students assess their contribution in the course towards the course objectives.

CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION

McHugh, Engström and Tinto (1997) showed that students are more likely to continue and develop their skills in a learning environment that provides frequent feedback on their abilities. Formative feedback also offers students an opportunity to improve their performance and supports better students' motivation and their willingness to work more constructively towards specific goals (Biggs and Tang, 2011). To implement this type of continuous feedback an iterative approach is used with four design reviews where students presented current status results and receive critique. At each occasion, the students also write a short 4-page PM and at the end of the course, they submit a project report, see Figure 5.

Figure 5 Submissions of four PM and a final report.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

PM1 PM2 PM3 PM4Final documentation!Including PM1-4

WEEK

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

Peer review After each submission, students receive feedback through a peer review process, as well as formative feedback from the teacher, see Figure 6.

Figure 6 Feedback via peer review and formative feedback from the teacher team.

In order for students to learn to give feedback, feedback templates are used and in the first two peer reviews, the teacher facilitates the feedback process (what the students should think about, how to give critique, etc). The students also have the opportunity to discuss their feedback and how they individually have assessed the PM in smaller groups. Using this peer review the students receive feedback from four different people on three occasions and one group feedback, they also receive formative feedback four times from teachers. They also have to update and improve each PM two times. Overall, in the course 2018, each student conducted three individual peer reviews, as well as a peer review group, with 56 students this represents over 180 completed peer reviews where the teachers are not involved. This means that the students will be well acquainted with what is expected, and they become accustomed giving feedback and that they actually spend time reading and assessing others' work, learning how to judge what is good and bad (Gibbs 1999) this type of active learning and time on task are two principles for learning (Chickering and Gamson, 1987). The peer-review is supplemented with the teachers' written formative feedback four times per team. The final assessment is seen as quality control (Gibbs 1999) and is only done on the final documentation. From the course evaluations, we can see that most students appreciate the peer review sessions, and they believe that it has improved the quality of the written documentation. Also, students think that by reading others documentation they have improved their documentation. The formative feedback given throughout the course is supplemented by a self-evaluation that the students perform at the end of the course.

Final documentation

When performing the analysis of the final documentation from 2012-17 it was obvious that the final documentation more or less was a compilation of the four PM, and from the student feedback, they thought it was unnecessary work to rewrite the four PM into a new document, and that they did not really improve the documentation. From 2018 the final documentation is

PM1 v.1!DR

Peer review x4!DR + 4h

Facilitated peer !review session

PM1 v.2!DR +1d

PM1 v.2!DR +1d

Feedback from coach

PM2

Weakness from PM1 adressed in PM2

PM1-4 v.3!Appended to !

final documentation

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

similar to a compilation thesis and consists of the main part that presents the overall process and the final product, the four previous PMs are attached as appendices to provide the understanding of the process of the early stages and argumentations for the design rationale. From 2018 also a checklist /self-assessment was also appended, see Figure 7.

Figure 7 Final documentation.

From the interviews, it was clear that the student felt that they did not understand the difference between the final documentation and the four PM that they had delivered during the course, and they also explained that they did not know what was important to present in the final documentation. So to improve this for the 2018 course, a documentation workshop was introduced. In the workshop, all teams prepare by reading through the template for the final documentation and bring their four PMs. The goal of the workshop is to understand why documentation is vital in design projects and why we make technical documentation. During the workshop all teams discuss specific questions regarding the documentation e.g.:

• Why is this part of the report important? • How can you describe customer needs? • How do you describe your final product and its features? • What are the most essential features, and why? • Can a reader understand your design rational? • Does the product fulfil all needs and requirements? Also, how to visualise this?

After the team discussion, teams present their views in an open discussion in the classroom. To receive direct feedback Mentimeter was used (a web-based service where students can answer questions with the help of their mobile phones). Almost all student appreciated the workshop and liked the interactive discussions, after the workshop they felt much more confident on what should be in their final report. To remove small errors and force the team to read and evaluate their documentation a checklist was also introduced. The checklist is inspired by Hörte (1999; 2010) and Hartley (2008). Since the focus of the final documentation in this course is not an academic report but technical documentation, also literature focusing on technical documentation was used (IBM, 1983), (Hargis ,2004).

Self-evaluation of documentation

The team also had to provide a self-assessment of their own documentation, using the same assessment rubric that was later on used by the teachers. In this assessment, they had to argue why they fulfil the criteria for the documentation. When comparing the self-assessment

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

with the final assessment of the teachers, students assessed their work a slightly better than the teachers (Maximum points 30, Student average assessment 25,9 points; Teachers average assessment 23,6 points).

Self-assessment of competences

At the end of the course, students perform a self-assessment of (Wikberg Nilsson & Törlind, 2016), see an example in Table 3.

Table 3 Self-assessment of written communication

1. The student assesses their own competences and abilities and must describe how they meet the learning objectives (with examples from the course).

2. The student’s self-assessment is then reviewed by their team members that give feedback on the student’s individual assessments.

3. Teachers review the assessment and have the possibility to adjust the assessment. 4. The teacher also assesses the quality of the feedback given to their team members.

In the feedback team members often highlights personal competencies that students themselves may not be aware of, and also performs a ‘sanity -filter’ so the students cannot take credit for something they did not perform. By performing this assessment, students are given the opportunity to assess their abilities and compare them to the requirements and also the formal assessment by the teachers. This type of self-assessment is in agreement with Rendon (1994), which points to the importance of formative feedback on student competence. The difference between the self-assessment and teachers’ final assessment was about 5%.

CONCLUSION

This paper shows the importance of continuous improvement and that an examiner can learn quite a lot from reviving the improvements that have been performed in a course. By comparing the feedback from course evaluation, quality of the written documentation and the amount of feedback given to the students the current implementation of the course is much better than when it was introduced 2012. The basic ideas and the structure are still the same, but by introducing formative feedback, peer-reviews, workshops, and self-assessment the quality of the written communication has improved. However, the most important part is that the student learns to give feedback, assess their capabilities and reflect over their performance. We can also see that the students’ self-assessment is a little higher than the teachers (about 10% on the final documentation and 5% on the individual assessment) but the students have a quite accurate assessment of their own work. Also, the changes in the course are mostly based on active learning activities where students are activated instead of being passive. By introducing several peer reviews, and self-assessments most of the improvement does not need any extra work from the teachers.

Written communications

NOVICE ADVANCED BEGINNER COMPETENT SKILLED EXPERT

Understand use and format a basic template

Apply a variety of reporting methods (lab reports, project reports, workbook, pm etc.)

Evaluate, assemble and convincingly formulate work, results and arguments in a credible manner

Select and develop the structure, content and format of written communication for different audiences

Communicate in writing in English

Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.

REFERENCES Bray, R., & Boon, S. (2011). Towards a framework for research career development: An evaluation of the UK's vitae researcher development framework. International Journal for Researcher Development, 2(2), 99-116. Biggs, J. B. & Tang, C. S. (2011) Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student does. Maidenhead: Open University Press Chickering, A.W. and Gamson, Z.F. (1987) Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education. Wingspread Journal 9(2), Carleton, T., & Leifer, L. (2009, March). Stanford’s ME310 course as an evolution of engineering design. In Proceedings of the 19th CIRP Design Conference–Competitive Design. Cranfield University Press. Crawley, E., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., & Brodeur, D. (2007). Rethinking engineering education. The CDIO Approach, 302, 60-62. Gibbs, G. (1999). Using Assessment Strategically to Change the Way Students Learn. Assessment Matters in Higher Education: Choosing and Using Diverse Approaches, 41. Hargis, G., Carey, M., Hernandez, A. K., Hughes, P., Longo, D., Rouiller, S., & Wilde, E. (2004). Developing quality technical information: A handbook for writers and editors. Pearson Education. Hörte, S.-Å. (1999). Granskning av manus till uppsatser, artiklar och avhandlingar : En checklista. Luleå. Hörte, S.-Å. (2010). Att ge struktur åt rapporter och uppsatser. Halmstad: Högskolan i Halmstad IBM Corporation (1983). Producing Quality Technical Information. Santa Teresa, CA. Larsson, A., Törlind, P., Karlsson, L., Mabogunje, A., Leifer, L., Larsson, T., & Elfström, B. O. (2003). Distributed team innovation-A framework for distributed product development. In DS 31: Proceedings of ICED 03, the 14th International Conference on Engineering Design, Stockholm. McHugh Engström, C. & Tinto, V. (1997) Working together for service learning. In M. P. King. & C. C. Schroeder’s (eds) About campus. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass Inc Publishers Rendon, L. (1994) Validating Culturally Diverse Students Toward a New Model of Learning and Student Development. Innovative Higher Education, Vol. 19, No.1, Fall 1994 Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2016). Student Competence Profiles: a complementary or competitive approach to CDIO?. In International CDIO Conference: 12/06/2016-16/06/2016 (pp. 844-858). Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., Normark, C. J., Öhrling, T & Törlind, P. (2017). Experiences of Educational Reform–Implementation of CDIO at Industrial Design Engineering. In 13th International CDIO Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada, June 18-22, 2017, University of Calgary Press, 2017. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION Peter Törlind, PhD, work as a senior lecturer in Product Innovation, Luleå University of Technology. He is also responsible for the Industrial Design Engineering program. Current research interest is innovation with a focus on early phases, collaboration and creativity. Corresponding author Peter Törlind Luleå University of Technology Product innovation SE-97187 LULEÅ, SWEDEN +46-920 49 2412 Peter.Torlind@ltu.se

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License.

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

Abstract— A designer needs to possess capabilities and

knowledge outside the traditional engineering domains – these capabilities and experiences are difficult to obtain in a traditional classroom setting; therefore, the integrated learning experiences can provide the experience and training of these capabilities. A crucial part of design education is to teach students the ability to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity – traits of a successful designer.

The paper presents the design of a course in creative concept development that implements several educational ideas from active learning, which is an improvement over traditional learning. Active learning focuses on engaging students in and outside the classroom, an essential part of active learning includes mixing between theory and practical exercises and here it is crucial that the physical environment quickly adapts to different types of learning activities.

The paper shows three concrete examples of how to integrate active learning – learning outside the classroom, guided design and role-play and games. The course has reflection and feedback throughout, both as an integral part of the lectures and assessment. To complement active learning, we must have effective evaluation processes to measure them. Different categories of learning outcomes require different assessment methods.

Through continuous improvement, much based on the students' feedback and reflections, the course is very popular with students. Students appreciate the mix of exercises, unconventional presentations, challenges and games. Students also appreciate the breadth of assessment that s assess an in-depth understanding.

Index Terms— creativity, ambiguity, active reflection, active

examination.

I. INTRODUCTION OST teachers are aware that the classical lectures, where the students passively listen to the lecturer and are ‘filled with knowledge’ are not particularly

useful; this type of teaching is still quite common. Sousa [1] states that the retention time after 24 hours is 5% for lectures, 50% for group discussion, 75% exercise and 90% by teaching others. In order to understand and remember what is said in a lecture, it is essential that the students are activated to use the new knowledge during the lecture – a learning-by-doing approach, where students continuously reflect on and relate to issues that have come up and have a sense of being active.

This paper describes the implementation of active and integrated learning at Industrial Design Engineering (IDE)

Manuscript received September 30, 2019.

[2] at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden. The focus of IDE is a mix of engineering and industrial design [3]. The implementation has been done in the course Creative Concept Development (M7016T), at Luleå University of Technology.

Within the CDIO initiative [4] 12 standards are described, two of these standards Active learning (Standard 8) and Integrated learning experiences (Standard 7) will be used to frame and discuss the implementation.

Active learning focus to engage students in and outside of the classroom, lectures are not only based on the passive transmission of information. Instead, learning activities focus on activating students with problem-solving activities, experience the design process and also to evaluate and reflect over what they have done.

Integrated learning experiences are activities that lead to the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge, as well as personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills. In this course, the focus is to challenge the students how on to embrace ambiguity in the early phases of design.

In this paper, specific capabilities and knowledge for industrial design engineering are presented, then the theoretical background for active learning and integrated learning is presented and finally how these concepts are implemented in a creative concept development course.

II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND The basic idea that a designer needs to possess capabilities

and knowledge outside the traditional engineering domains [5] is described both in research [3, 6] and in product development literature [7]. As Brown [8] describes designers need empathy, integrated thinking, optimism, experimentalism and experience of interdisciplinary collaboration – these capabilities and experiences is difficult to obtain in a traditional classroom setting. Therefore, integrated learning experiences can provide the experience and training of these capabilities.

A crucial part of design education is the ability to cope with uncertainty and ambiguity. Whilst the established approach for product development focuses on decreasing all uncertainty as soon as possible [9], for more open-ended or wicked problems [10, 11] (i.e. problems without a single answer, but several possible solutions [12] [13]), that are common in design it is essential to preserve ambiguity [9]. ” This can balance the engineering tradition that builds on decreasing the amount of information gathered and thus also ambiguity. In contrast, radical innovation needs ambiguity,

P. Törlind, Product Innovation, Luleå University of technology, 97187 Luleå, SWEDEN (phone: +46 920 492412; e-mail: Peter.Torlind@ltu.se).

Implementation of integrated learning experiences and active learning in a creative

concept development course Peter Törlind

M

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

because it enables the development of a range of alternative solutions.” [11].

Designing is underpinned by the individuals’ ability for design thinking, and being able to tolerate the ambiguity and handle the uncertainty are seen as traits of a successful designer [14, 15] [16]. Gelb [17] describes “A designer must have a willingness to embrace ambiguity, paradox and uncertainty.”. Leifer & Steinert [18] writes that Ambiguity and fuzziness should be considered enablers and not barriers. Also, as Tom Kelley and David Kelley [19, p. 1] states “It’s to help them rediscover their creative confidence”.

A. Active learning Active learning is a well-documented improvement over

the traditional lecture approach in science, engineering, and mathematics [20] it includes different approaches to activate students, as Chickering and Gamson write [21] “Students do not learn much by sitting in classes listening to teachers, memorizing pre-packaged assignments and spitting out answers,. They must talk about what they are learning, write about it, relate it to past experiences, apply it to their daily lives. They must make what they learn part of themselves.”. Bonwell and Eison further highlight that the students ”need to engage in such higher-order thinking tasks as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation” [16, p. iii].

Discussions in class is one of the most common strategies for promoting active learning. Students find that small-group discussions are particularly likely to stimulate student interest and engage them with the material [22]. To achieve the goal that students can apply the information in new settings or to develop students' thinking skills, faculty must be used to facilitate and lead the discussion.

Other active learning concepts [16] (included in the course): • Visual based instruction e.g. by using short videos that are

introduced with a few questions and followed up by group analysis and discussion.

• Guided design, where the instructor facilitates a team through an open-ended design problem.

• Role-playing, simulation and games let the student experience and train certain situations in a safe environment.

Flipped learning [23] is often combined with active learning where (video) lectures are viewed before class and instructor-facilitated face-to-face time in class is used to interact with students. However, Jensen et al. highlighted in a study “that the flipped approach offers no additional benefits to student learning over a nonflipped, active-learning approach.” [24, p. 11].

B. Active learning spaces The classroom is a physical manifestation designed to be a

space for learning, something that influences what people do, and therefore the patterns of teaching and learning that occur within them. Several alternative classroom designs that support active and collaborative learning have emerged [25, 26, 27] that focus on focus on teamwork and communication where students quickly can share information.

Both the physical space and furniture plays a vital role in active learning, the physical environment should be able to adapt quickly to different types of learning activities. Cornell [28, p. 6] states that the furniture in Learning environments in the 21st century must be ”... comfortable, adjustable, intuitive, reconfigurable, technology-capable, compressible,

and attractive.”. Active learning spaces typically feature tables and chairs with wheels, whiteboards and sometimes technical equipment such as projection screens and displays. After several years of study at the University of Minnesota [29, 30, 31] researchers concluded that ‘space matters’. In the study, active learning classrooms outperformed traditional classrooms. Students also perceived that active learning space is superior to traditional classrooms thou they facilitate engagement, enrichment, effective use, and flexibility.

III. METHOD The paper describes the implementation in a course that

developed during the last ten years. The qualitative data (cites, photos, etc.) comes from reflections and feedback collected from the last four years. The course uses written feedback and reflection in most of the lectures (this feedback is normally anonymous), combined with oral exams, and a reflection exercise at the end of the course there is a massive amount of data collected in the course. Also, formal course evaluation is used to evaluate the course.

IV. CREATING A STRUCTURE OF ACTIVE LEARNING

Implementation of these pedagogical concepts has been done in a creative concept development course that was started in 2008. The course is based from research performed in the national research program PIEp ( Product Innovation Engineering programme, that identified challenges in education, one of the challenges was how to improve student’s innovative ability and how to manage open-ended problems early in the product development process. The course was inspired by ideas pioneered by Rolf Faste at Stanford University with concepts as Ambidextrous Thinking [32], Design Thinking [8] and Needfinding [33]. From the beginning, the course focused on the student’s personal development and how to facilitate creative phases in design. One of the ideas was to bring students out of their comfort zone and challenge them on to be as creative as possible. This approach needed a change both how teaching was performed and where it was performed. In order to facilitate active learning, the physical environment should be able to adapt quickly to different types of learning activities. Therefore, lectures are carried out in flexible classrooms where it is possible to reorganize the furniture (sofas, tables, whiteboards are on wheels and can easily be moved around in the classroom). Large wall-mounted whiteboards and boxes with workshop material (post-its, pens, and prototyping material) is easy to access. The design of the room enables quick transitions between different modes of work (i.e. presentation, group discussion and teamwork), see Fig. 1 (a-c)

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

Fig. 1 (a, b) Flexible classroom with sofas and whiteboards with wheels, (c) large wall-mounted whiteboards.

To create some familiarity and structure in the course an active learning approach was used that switched between different modes, a typical lecture in the course is divided into six phases: introduction, theory lecture, break, exercise, presentation and wrap up and reflection. 1. Introduction, in this phase, students adapt the classroom

(move out chairs, tables etc.) sometimes with special instructions from the lecturer. The introduction starts with a quick recap of what we have done – giving the big picture, why and where are we in the design process. Then all teams present a quick status report on their team assignment.

2. Theory lecture, then a presentation is done by the teachers to introduce new concepts and theory. In this course, theory is presented in many different ways, such as traditional lecture (with lecture slides on projector), Prezi presentation, presentation with only hand drawn sketches, presentation without computer on the whiteboard, presentation with a ‘virtual side kick’, and interactive presentation using Mentimeter [34]. Lectures includes traditional pedagogical activities to activate the students such as think-pair-share (where students take a

minute to think about the question , later to discuss it with one or more of their peers, finally to share it with the class as part of a formal discussion), small group discussions, reaction to video etc.

3. Break, between the lecture and the exercise; often a small game was played in class to raise the energy in the room. Games were often coupled to the principles of the lecture.

4. Exercise. During this phase students divided into smaller teams and have to implement things they have learnt from the first part of the lecture. In this phase students relocate into team-spaces where they adapt the furniture to match their needs (see Fig. 1a, b). The exercise is usually 45-60 min.

5. Presentation. In this phase, students have to present the results from the exercise, here the teacher’s role is to ask questions and try to find the rationale over the students’ choice of methods and how they decided to perform the task. Presentation is done by moving around to each team-area, and one is randomly selected to present.

6. Reflection is done after the presentation, all students gathered together, and they have to reflect on the exercise, this reflection typically includes personal reflection.

The course also tries to activate students between lectures to create blended learning, in this case, facilitated by personal quizzes and teamwork. After each lecture, students perform a short quiz that often is the second iteration or a reflection of what they have done during the lecture. Also, students reiterate the activities learnt during the lecture in their team, so after each lecture, students perform a similar phase in small teams (4-6 persons). For an overview of the course structure see Fig. 2.

Fig. 2 The structure of the course

V. EXAMPLES OF ACTIVE LEARNING To further explain the implementation in more detail, four

examples are presented below.

A. Walkabout and learning to observe In design, observation is a standard method that originates

in scientific fields such as ethnography and anthropology and has been increasingly popular in human-centred design approaches. The lecture focusing on observation is started by a short theoretical introduction about observation, needfinding [33] and applicable methods. This part includes several videos with discussions and introduction of the concept thoughtless acts [35] (the intuitive ways that people adapt, exploit or react to things in the environment). After the introduction, the class go for a walkabout at the University.

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

First, the class walk together, and students have to observe how other students or faculty interact with the physical environment. The class stop and discuss if they saw something interesting (e.g. if people had adapted or used the environment in a way that it was not designed for). After 20 min of walk around campus, students are divided into groups that will focus on different areas of the campus, after additional 45 min they should come back with a photograph of a thoughtless act. Back in the lecture space all students have to use the photograph as a base for a sketch trying to explain the thoughtless act. See Fig. 3 for example of sketches presented.

Fig. 3 Thoughtless acts sketches from the observation exercises 2019.

See also Fig. 7 for some of the feedback from the lecture 2019.

B. Bootcamp, A large part of the course focuses on choosing the right

creative method to use at certain phases, and also to design and facilitate creative workshops. Therefore, serval lectures use the Guided design approach [16]. Early in the course, a bootcamp is performed where students go through a creative workshop facilitated by the teaching team. The exercise is done to familiarise students with some of the creative methods and the concept that many short iterations with high energy are better than long discussions where no one dares to take decisions.

Fig. 4 An overview of the Design bootcamp.

Some of the feedback from the bootcamp was “I liked the bootcamp, it was fun and extremely efficient. A very good way to get an overview of how an idea-generating process is affected by different approaches.” (I like/I wish reflection, 2017)

Another student focused on the excitement of going through a creative process, ”I really enjoyed all of the steps,

and they even made me happy and excited to be in a classroom but what I found most enjoyable was seeing how we could start with a problem and being able to work through that problem to create and market a solution.”

C. Role-playing, and games Games was often used as a break between theory and

exercise or to get some energy into class. “First time we played a game, I thought it was a bit silly and I did not want to stand out in class, so I kept myself quite passive. But after a while I just participated and it felt like the class was much more relaxed after the break, and it also felt that we got so much more energy into the group” (Reflection video 2017)

The games and exercises are linked to the theme of the lecture: • Idea generation techniques – Brain ball game, (see below

for details), a warmup before performing a brainstorm. • Physical prototyping – Engineering charades by using

charades the students are introduced in how roleplay and embodiment brainstorm can be used for ideation.

• Visualisation – Engineering Pictionary is used to show how much information an illustration can convey.

Fig. 5 Engineering Pictionary – trying to convey ‘boarding a jumbo jet’.

One of the students gave the following reflection in their final reflection “… the creative part of the lectures often started with some warm-up exercise to get the students out of their comfort zone and get more creative. For example, we did an exercise where we throw an invisible ball to each other, and when we show the ball to another person in the ring, we supposed to make a sound. When the person received the ball, they repeat the same sound and then send it to a new person with a new sound.

Fig. 6 An illustration from the reflection video describing brain-ball game.

At first, I thought, god this is so ridiculous. But after a while I realized how important this really is because when you start a creative process it can take a long time before it’s gets

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

started and it’s difficult to get the creative mind up and running. Also, when you leave your comfort zone you can start to learn and be creative. A warm-up method is extremely powerful to start the creative thinking”, (Reflection video 2019), see also Fig. 6.

D. Reflection and feedback Through the course, reflections is done, both in exercises,

quizzes and in the final course reflection. At the end of each class, there is always an active reflection exercise such as “I like…, I wish”, where each participant write down what they liked (i.e. what was good) and what they wish (i.e. what could be improved) on different coloured post-its [9], see Fig. 7.

Fig. 7 Some of the feedback from an I like/I wish reflection exercise from the Needfinding lecture 2019.

Sometimes the reflection was collected using mobile phones trough a questionnaire software such as Mentimeter [34] or by using a roundtable approach where all student has to present their reflections. This type of reflection in the class and exercise gives the student time and to think over what they just have done “I like that you got feedback after each phase and got to hear the feedback to other groups. Something that was also good was that it was the process that was important and not the final concept itself” (I like/I wish reflection, Bootcamp 2017).

By using reflection and feedback at the end of each class, the teacher get valuable feedback to improve the lecture for next time, and also to highlight different views. When performing an I like/I wish exercise it is easy to see that some topics are in both categories. In the reflection phase from the bootcamp, the following statements were told: “I wish for more time at each phase, this would have created a better end result” versus “I liked the fact that it was tightly scheduled. The time constraints led to a more focused work environment. When brainstorming it can be easy to shut down your own ideas, but a pressing time limit can help alleviate that mental barrier”. In this case, we can bring this issue up and discuss it further “do you think that the time constraints were tight by purpose?”

VI. EMBRACING AMBIGUITY Within the course, one goal was to enhance the disciplinary

knowledge of concept development and at the same time hone the personal and interpersonal skills needed in the early phases of design. Many of the exercises performed in the course is designed to create a learning experience that mimics the chaotic early phases of design. By this approach students has the opportunity to experience stressful, unfamiliar, complex, or controversial situations [36] ”by creating circumstances that are momentarily real, thereby letting students develop and practice those skills [16].

This was quite true with our students; one student wrote in the reflection after the second lecture “I wish that I could open my mind more, as I feel that I’m still not able to fully open my mind. I feel that I restrict myself because I’m scared of judgement. I hope that by continuing this course, I am able to reduce my fear and use it to benefit my creative development.”.

In order to improve the student’s ability to handle this chaotic phase, exercises are deliberately designed with vague descriptions, unclear goals and performed with tight time constraints. At the beginning of the course, most students felt uncomfortable performing exercises with vague goals and presenting half-finished results with short preparation times. Feedback from the first lessons was that they wanted more explicit instructions and more time “I wish we had more clear descriptions over the goal of the exercise”, “I wish better instructions”, “I wish that we had more time to perform the exercise”, “clearer goal” etc. Later in the course one student reflected “it feels like we are pushed to decide what to do, and that we take more responsibility over the goal of the exercise” another student reflected “I have always found presentations really daunting and so I really liked the constant presentation updates we had to give throughout the course. Having to go up in front of the class and present with little preparation meant I was able to develop these skills and grow in confidence.”

Another student had a similar reflection ” one big thing that I thought was really good learning experience, […] was the time pressure, that was put on us during the lectures, like when you get a really tight time schedule and should come up with an idea and present it. This really puts things in perspectives and really forces you to make quick decisions.” (Reflection video 2019).

Another student reflected on how to adapt to new situations, “The course has been a good training in quickly adapting to new situations and new environments where you may sometimes feel a little uncomfortable. I feel that I have developed a lot during the course, and it is actually sad that it is already over.” (Final reflection, 2015)

In the end, students appreciated the challenge and experience to work under these conditions. At the final lecture, the teaching team described the rationale for the design of the exercises. “We are also well aware of that we, by our demands of rapid exercises, have put you into situations where you have to struggle with wicked problems, unspecific tasks and sparse information. Then why have we done this? Our purpose was to bring you out of your comfort zone, embrace ambiguity and to spur your creativity.” (Wrap up from the teaching team, 2019).

In the final reflection this approach was acknowledged”When I was thinking and thinking, I think I understood a bit of the core of the course. All teaching moments and approaches were different, and laughter was more important than seriousness, transparency more important than criticism and chaos was encouraged instead of structure.” (Reflection video 2017). Another student stated “I went to the first class and expecting something completely different to be honest. I was kind of surprised by how much I had to put myself out there. What I thought was just another product development course, turned out to be the best thing that could happened to me. I had to work on my own weakness, more than ever, being forced to use ways of thinking in creative methods that I have never used or tried before.” (Reflection video 2019).

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

VII. ACTIVE ASSESSMENT In the end the teaching team has to assess if the students

actually has learnt something in the course. As it is written in the CDIO Standard 11 “If we value personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills, and incorporate them into curriculum and learning experiences, then we must have effective assessment processes for measuring them. Different categories of learning outcomes require different assessment methods.”. In this course, several examination activities have been developed instead large written exam at the end of the course. The following assessments is integrated throughout the course.

TABLE I ASSIGNMENTS IN COURSE

ID ASSESSMENT TYPE FORMAT ECTS 1 Quiz after each lecture Individual Written 1 2 Creative workshop design Individual Written + oral 1 3 Team assignment Group Presentation + written 2 4 Video reflection Individual Video 1,5 5 Creative method Individual Method Card 1,5 6 Theory presentation Individual Presentation 0,5

1. Quiz, the quiz acts as a recap and reflection of each

lecture. It normally contains an open-ended question that the students have to reflect on a topic presented in the lecture.

2. Creative workshop, the students plan and document a three-day creative workshop for a specific team (based on different scenarios). The plan is presented in a short memo (maximum four pages), that is sent in before the oral examination. The oral exam consists of a 15 min informal discussion where the students explain the rationale for the design of the workshop and show that they can reason about and reflect over the choice of methods and their use. During the oral exam, students use a ‘Smiley scale’ (see Fig. 8) where the student has to assess their fulfilment of the assignment criteria.

Fig. 8 Smiley scale used at the oral examination; the red smileys are the student assessment. The green arrows are the assessment of the teacher.

3. Team assignment, students go through a development process that starts from a specific theme. The idea is that the theory in each lecture is directly used in the team process. The team result is presented in a creative presentation, and the process is presented in a creative written presentation (it is stated that “it should not be a traditional project report”.

4. Video reflection is the students’ reflection of the learning process. The student first presents a general

reflection of the course and then select two learning experiences from the course and present them in a video.

5. Creative card, the goal of this assignment is to design a novel method that can be used in creative phases in the product development process. The method is tested during the team process and feedback is used to improve the method. All methods cards from the course is compiled into a deck of method cards, an example is shown in Fig. 9.

Fig. 9 An example of the creative cards 2018.

6. Theory presentation. Here the students read a research paper and present the findings in a short research pitch at a research seminar.

VIII. DISCUSSION The course has always received good feedback in the

course evaluation, average over all course satisfaction 5,3 (out of 6). In the end, how do the students appreciate the active learning approach? The feedback for this approach has been very positive “I really liked the practical and theoretical mix in the lectures… That we always use the theoretical parts in an exercise directly after the presentation” (Student reflection, spring19). Another student stated in the reflection video: ”I really liked was that we had at least one practical exercise in each lecture, in most courses you just sit down and listen for 1-3 hours, and when you are on your way home and you don’t really remember what it was about. But in this course, you really remember what it was about, and you could apply the things you learnt in the team exercise” (Student reflection, spring 17).

Also, one student was surprised that this approach could be used to learn theory “… more active than other courses, in my education. Others take influence form this knowing that you can teach heavy theory without asking them to read it” (Student reflection, Spring 18).

One of the underlying ideas is that active learning gives a deeper understanding and better retention rate [1, 20], this is hard to measure. By going through master thesis (from students that has participated in the course), concepts, methods and tools regarding facilitation of workshops is almost always used by all students. Also, from the meetings with alumni, they often recall that the creative concept development course as one of the most essential courses they participated in and that they often use what they learnt in the course in their professional work.

IX. CONCLUSION Ten years ago, the creative concept development course

started and has iteratively been evaluated and developed since that, mostly based on the continuous feedback from students during the course. By introducing feedback after each lecture,

7:e Utvecklingskonferensen för Sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar, Luleå tekniska universitet, 27 november – 28 november 2019

reflection assignments and the formal course evaluation the teaching team has a lot of material to use to improve the course. The goal from the beginning was to create something unusual, using active learning, challenge and support the students to experience things that they usually do not do (and learn in class). Most students appreciate this approach and the course’s learning with the unconventional way of presenting, conducting different types of exercises, division of groups and the usage of games create an excitement in the student group “I think everybody has been looking forward to the lectures, there has always being an excitement around them, people have been wondering but what activities we should do, what kind of funny games we will do” (Reflection video 2018). Many students describe the course as one of their favourites "When I think of this course with actually is my LTU favourites, it effectively balances fun and games without compromising on its educational punching powers!” (Student reflection video, 2019)

Also, one important part is not only to use active learning but also include that approach in the assessment. The mix of different exams can test a more in-depth understanding and regarding the oral examination they know that ‘there is nowhere to hide’ when they present their arguments and rational for the design.

While we challenge students to work outside their comfort zone, it is at the same time vital to create an open environment where students can work without fear of judgment, one of the students reflected “adding a safe environment to make everyone comfortable and in the right state of mind was one of my eyeopeners.”. References

[1] D. A. Sousa, How the brain learns, Corwin Press, 2016. [2] Å. Wikberg-Nilsson, C. J. Normark, T. Öhrling and P. Törlind,

“Experiences of Educational Reform–Implementation of CDIO at Industrial Design Engineering,” in 13th International CDIO Conference, Calgary, Canada, 2017.

[3] W. E. Eder, “Engineering Design - Art, Science and Relationships,” Design Studies, vol. 16, pp. 117-127, 1995.

[4] CDIO, “CDIO,” [Online]. Available: www.cdio.org. [Accessed 30 09 2019].

[5] Å. Ericson, M. Bergström, A. Larsson and P. Törlind, “Design thinking challenges in education,” in International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED09), 2009.

[6] V. Hubka and W. E. Eder, Design science: introduction to the needs, scope and organization of engineering design knowledge, Springer Science & Business Media., 2012.

[7] K. T. Ulrich, Product design and development, Tata McGraw-Hill Education., 2003.

[8] T. Brown, “Design thinking,” Harvard business review, vol. 86 (6), pp. 84-92, 2008.

[9] Å. Ericson and P. Törlind, “A deep dive into creative thinking: the now-wow-how framework,” in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED13), Seoul, 2013.

[10] H. Rittel and M. Webber, “Dilemmas in a general theory of planning,” Policy Sciences, vol. 4, p. 155–169, 1973.

[11] J. Wenngren, Å. Ericson and V. Parida, “Improving Team Activities in the Concept Development Stages: Addressing Radical Development and Open-Ended Problems,” Journal of Promotion Management, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 496-510, 2016.

[12] R. Coyne, “Wicked problems revisited,” Design Studies, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 5-17, 2005.

[13] R. J. Volkema, “Problem formulation in planning and design,” Management Science, vol. 29, no. 6, p. 639–652, 1983.

[14] C. Dym, A. Agogino, O. Eris, D. Frey and L. Leifer, “Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning,” Journal of Engineering Education,, vol. 94, no. 1, p. 103–120, 2005.

[15] C. Meinel and L. & Leifer, “Design thinking research,” in Design thinking research: Studying co-creation in practice, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, Springer-Verlag, 2012.

[16] C. C. Bonwell and J. A. Eison, Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom, Washington, DC: George Washington University, 1991.

[17] M. J. Gelb, How to think like Leonardo da Vinci: Seven steps to genius every day, Dell, 2009.

[18] L. Leifer and M. Steinert, “Dancing with ambiguity: Causality behavior, design thinking and triple-loop-learning,” Information, Knowledge, Systems Management, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 151–173, 2011.

[19] T. Kelley and D. Kelley, “Reclaim your creative confidence,” Harvard business review, vol. 90, no. 12, 2012.

[20] S. Freeman, S. Eddy, M. McDonough, S. K. Smith, N. Okprafor, H. Jordt and M. P. Wenderoth, “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 111, no. 23, p. 8410–8415, 2014.

[21] A. W. Chickering and Z. Gamson, “Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education,” AAHE Bulletin, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 3-7.

[22] K. Hamann, P. H. Pollock and B. M. Wilson, “Assessing student perceptions of the benefits of discussions in small-group, large-class, and online learning contexts,” College Teaching, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 65-75., 2012.

[23] J. Bergmann and A. Sams, Flipped learning: Gateway to student engagement, International Society for Technology in Education, 2014.

[24] J. L. Jensen, T. A. Kummer and P. Godoy, “Improvements from a flipped classroom may simply be the fruits of active learning,” CBE—Life Sciences Education, vol. 14, no. 1, 2015.

[25] D. Gierdowski, “Studying learning spaces: A review of selected empirical studies,” in Cases on Higher Education Spaces: Innovation, Collaboration, and Technology, Hershey, PA, IGI Global, 2013, 2013, pp. 14-39.

[26] D. Oblinger and J. K. Lippincott, Learning spaces, Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE, 2006.

[27] K. Fisher, “Linking pedagogy and space,” Rubida Research, Melbourne, 2006.

[28] P. Cornell, “The impact of changes in teaching and learning on furniture and the learning environment,” New directions for teaching and learning, vol. 2002, no. 92, pp. 33-42, 2002.

[29] D. C. Brooks, “Space matters: the impact of formal learning environments on student learning,” British Journal of Educational Technology, 2011.

[30] J. D. Walker, D. C. Brooks and P. Baepler, “Pedagogy and space: empirical research on new learning environments,” EDUCAUSE Quarterly, no. 34, 2011.

[31] A. L. Whiteside, D. C. Brooks and J. D. Walker, “Making the case for space: three years of empirical research on learning environments,” EDUCAUSE Quarterly, vol. 33, 2010.

[32] R. A. Faste, “'Ambidextrous Thinking', Innovations in Mechanical Engineering Curricula for the 1990s,” American Society of Mechanical Engineers, vol. November, 1994.

[33] R. Faste, “Perceiving needs,” SAE Journal, no. 871534, 1987. [34] Mentimeter, “www.mentimeter.com,” [Online]. [Accessed 1 9 2019]. [35] J. Fulton Suri, Thoughtless acts?: Observations on intuitive design,

IDEO, 2005. [36] J. G. Davison, “Real Tears: Using Role Plays and Simulation,”

Curriculum review 23.2, pp. 91-94, 1984.

Peter Törlind, PhD, Senior lecturer in Product Innovation. Program coordinator for Industrial design engineering program. Peter's research and teaching is focused on team collaboration and creativity in early phases of design. He is also managing the DEPICT Laboratory, a resource for measuring psychometric responses. Peter is a co-author of a textbook in Design methods and processes that is used by 10 universities in Sweden.

1.

EPDE2021/168 1

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ENGINEERING AND PRODUCT DESIGN EDUCATION 9-10 SEPTEMBER 2021, VIA DESIGN, VIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, HERNING, DENMARK

STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT OF PERSONAL AND INTERPERSONAL SKILLS Peter TÖRLIND1, Lars EKLÖF2 1 Product Innovation, Luleå University of Technology, Sweden 2 Industrial Design, Luleå University of Technology, Sweden

ABSTRACT Personal and interpersonal skills are an essential part of design engineers’ knowledge and skills, which students rarely feel they work with in a structured way during their education. To improve soft skills, the ideas on developing students’ personal and interpersonal skills were implemented in design-implement experience, a 15 ECTS third-year capstone project for bachelor students. Parallel to the design project, students had to identify personal or interpersonal skills that they wanted to develop during the course. Personal development was done in several stages: Identification of personal challenges, discussion of individual challenges in group meetings, creating a development plan, personal coach meetings, and a final reflection The results of this paper are based on teachers notes, written documentation and course evaluations. In the analysis, development areas were categorised using the CDIO Syllabus 2.0, where 59% was classified as Personal skills and 40% related to Interpersonal skills. The perseverance subset was the most common one identified. Other areas included lack of self-confidence, conflict mediation, creating a constructive dialogue between team members and time and resource management. Using this approach for three years and analysing the implementation, we can conclude that it has improved students’ personal and interpersonal skills. The results also highlight that students like to be challenged to change their professional conduct. Keywords: CDIO, Soft skills, Integrated learning, personal development

1 INTRODUCTION Industrial design engineering (IDE) is a Bachelor/Master program at the Luleå University of Technology. The IDE-program integrates industrial design with engineering design, using human needs and requirements as main incentives for developing students’ products, processes, and systems building skills. By tradition, various subjects such as usability, aesthetics, design methods, ergonomics, human work environment and design theory have been interspersed with more traditional engineering subjects such as math’s, physics, solid mechanics, material science. Since 2015 we have been a part of the CDIO-initiative and adapted the programs to that framework [1]. One of the fundamental ideas of CDIO is integrated learning experiences, i.e., activities that lead to the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge, combined with activities that focus on enhancing personal and interpersonal skills and product, process, and system building skills [2]. Integrated learning experiences are often implemented in real design challenges, something that CDIO calls design-implement experiences. When developing a programme, it is crucial to have a holistic view and break down the program’s overall goals and create courses that build on each other, complement each other, and a system that supports students to develop their knowledge and skills in a self-regulated way. To support this, a competence profile [3] has been created for the IDE program to function as a framework supporting both students and teachers understanding of what competencies they need to build to work as an Industrial Design Engineer. In many of our design-implement experiences, personal and interpersonal skills are visualised and assessed trough a workbook approach [4] in which students describe their progress in the projects through cycles of reflection. A typical workbook consists of written text, i.e., literature reviews and methods employed, and sketches and photos illustrating the process and its results. The most important part of the workbook is reflections and learning that deals with learning outcomes in terms of lessons learned, experiences and challenges to address in upcoming projects.

1.

EPDE2021/168 2

When analysing the program’s courses, it was clear that courses focus on developing disciplinary knowledge and lack systematic development of personal and interpersonal skills. We found that few courses explicitly included personal qualities and professional conduct; feedback was often done on their project skill of being part of a team but not really on the personal level. In evaluations of the program, students have expressed a lack of developing interpersonal skills, which is unfortunately common in many programs in Sweden. In a survey of 11119 students at Swedish universities in 2007, students’ experiences of support for professional development are disappointing and that 90% of students perceive that they rarely discuss their individual development with teachers [5]. So, we took this as an opportunity to integrate this into one of our capstone courses. This paper aims to describe the implementation of a structure to support the individualised development of personal and interpersonal skills.

2 METHOD The ideas on developing students’ personal and interpersonal skills were implemented in design-implement experiences, a 15 ECTS (20 weeks) third-year capstone project for bachelor students. The first implementation of the development of interpersonal and personal skills was implemented in the autumn of 2018 (9 students) and has since then been performed in 2019 (16 students) and 2020 (6 students). One of the learning objectives is to improve interpersonal skills for project work. In the course, the students work with a design challenge from an external company or organisation. The challenges are quite diverse. For example, in 2019, projects ranged from an innovative user interface for truss calculation, how to improve the city centre, designing the user interface for satellite control, and designing an enclosure for wideband positioning systems. This paper’s analysis is based on teachers notes from discussions with students, written documentation of their development areas, documentation of meetings, and course evaluations. In the course evaluation, specific questions were designed to focus on the structured work on personal development. For the student’s development areas, all individual development areas (n=75) were gathered in Excel and then categorised according to the CDIO Syllabus 2.0 (CS2.0) [6], this categorisation was first done by one author and then reviewed by the other author to reach an agreement of the best categorisation. All student quotes have been translated from Swedish and anonymised by the authors.

3 IMPLEMENTATION During the project, the student groups were divided into small teams that worked with their Personal Development Areas (PDA) for 20 weeks. Parallel with the design project, students had to identify personal or interpersonal skills that they wanted to develop during the course. Personal development is done in several phases. See Figure 1 and the section below for details.

Figure 1 Graphical representation of this process

• Identification of PDA (week 1). To help identify personal challenges, each person in their teams had to write something positive, “I like…” and a development area, “I wish…” about the other team members. Then, the students had to select areas they wanted to improve during the course. To help them identify the issues, they should prepare at least two areas and describe What is the issue?, Where is it happening?, When is it happening?, Why is it happening?, How can you overcome this problem? Who do you need to get involved?

• Discussion of PDA (week 2). This was arranged in small meetings with members from other teams. In the discussion, each student got about 20 min each where they presented their

1.

EPDE2021/168 3

development area. Other students commented to clarify the issue and came with feedback on how they could work with the development area.

• Creating a development plan (week. 2), Each student then described their selected development areas, the feedback they got in the discussion meeting and explained how to work with the issue during the course (including prioritisation, goals, means to achieve the goals). The personal development plan was sent to the teachers.

• Personal meeting with the coach (week 10) during this meeting, the development plan’s status was discussed with one of the teachers.

• Status update with the PDA team (week 15), update current status, how the student has worked with the different areas, and receive feedback from both students and teachers.

• Final reflection on personal development (week 20), reflection on the development process, what has been achieved and how to proceed in the future.

• Assessment of the development plan includes the identification and analysis of the PDA, how active the student has been in the discussions, and how they reflect on the progress of their challenges in the course.

4 RESULTS The overall feedback from students was very positive. From the course evaluation Overall impression of the course (1-5) 4,6(2018); 4,8 (2019); 4,8 (2020). One student summarises the course as “I like the challenge of developing something new with my team, and at the same time, have the opportunity to identify and work with some of my weak areas. I needed the input and support from you and other students to dare to deal with my fear of asserting my opinion.”.

4.1 Personal Development Areas When categorising the student’s PDA according to the CDIO Syllabus, 59% was classified as Personal and professional skills and attributes and 40% related to Interpersonal skills.

Table 1. The categorisation of development areas using the CDIO Syllabus 2.0 CDIO Syllabus 2.0 categorisation n 2.3.3 Prioritisation and Focus 5 2.4.1 Initiative and Willingness to Make Decisions in the Face of Uncertainty 1 2.4.5 Self-Awareness, Metacognition and Knowledge Integration 2 2.4.7 Time and resource management 6 3.1.1 Forming Effective Teams 2 3.2.7 Inquiry, Listening and Dialog 6 3.2.8 Negotiation, Compromise and Conflict Resolution 2 4.3.4 Development Project Management - Configuration management and documentation 1 2.4.2 Perseverance, Urgency and Will to Deliver, Resourcefulness and Flexibility 23 3.1.4 Team Leadership 2 3.1.2 Team Operation 12 3.2.2 Communications Structure 3 2.3.1 Thinking Holistically 2 2.5.2 Professional Behaviour 1 2.5.7 Time and Resource Management 4 3.1.3 Team Growth and Evolution 1 Other 2 Sum 75

4.1.1 Perseverance, Urgency and Will to Deliver, Resourcefulness and Flexibility This is part of the second building block of the syllabus, which describes the personal and professional skills and attributes. In the analysis, the Perseverance, Urgency and Will to Deliver, Resourcefulness and Flexibility subset was the most common ones identified. A common reflection among the students was that they find it challenging to stay focused on their task for an extended period: “I have also watched scientific TV shows about the brain and what disadvantages social media and digital products have. The knowledge I have gained from these sections is that it is good not to have the phone on the table in front of yourself, because you lose attention to what you are doing when it rings/vibrates or lights up. It thus receives more attention than the project receives.”. Another common type of comment in this area was the lack of self-confidence expressed in their self-assessments, which harms their work. “All of these are things I have known about before but which I have not really taken to heart. I have always been a person who enjoys giving. If I do not give anything of value, then why should I give?”.

1.

EPDE2021/168 4

“I have long had a bad self-confidence regarding myself and what I stand for. Maybe that’s why I’ve been afraid of conflict and afraid to call strangers. But when I have taken the time to work on the above points, my self-confidence has also increased.”. The third area of interest in this category was the lack of perseverance, described in different ways: “The bottom line is that it does not have much to do with the lack of commitment, but to do something that evokes my interest and is in line with what I find interesting.”. “I have a hard time getting things done if I do not have pressure on me. So, in the future, I will try to put that pressure on myself to do things on time. It is often the case that I am not satisfied with things that I had done before the time ran out, and by putting pressure on myself, I can have more time to be satisfied.”.

4.1.2 Team Operation The CS2.0 [6] 3.1.2 Team operation contains more operative elements of teamwork and includes goals and agenda, planning and facilitation of meetings, effective communication, feedback and empowering team members. In our analysis, this was the second most common area, and within this area, conflict mediation was the most common one. Previously many students tried to avoid conflicts and now challenged themselves to change this behaviour “I will not wait to act but to take the lead role and act immediately the first time it happens so that you immediately show that it is not accepted and that you do not end up in a vicious spiral by letting it go ‘this time’”. A remedy for this was described by another student “I have forced myself to start jumping into discussions in a better way, instead of just slipping along, I have chosen to share my opinions if I do not agree with anything. The more I have done it, the easier it has actually become.”. Another student described the balance of creating a shared goal between the team members “Regardless of what makes the goals among the group members different, the differences will need to be managed for a successful collaboration. To cope with this, compromises and agreements between the group members are required.”. Several students got feedback that they were ‘slacking’ when they often were terrible at communicating what they had done; “I also realised that I needed to pull me together and start communicating for NN when I did ‘extra’ things.”. Empowering the team and giving positive and valuable feedback was also acknowledged. One of the project leaders encouraged others with positive feedback, which created a positive atmosphere in the group that created an excellent group dynamic. Another project leader reflected on team members’ motivation that “I just touched the surface but missed to understand the root cause. […] I was limited to motivate the person while the problem may have been solved through, for example, a change in work style.”

4.1.3 Inquiry, Listening and Dialog In the CS2.0 [6] 3.2.7 Inquiry, Listening and Dialog focus on creating a constructive dialogue between team members, listening and understanding others, asking questions, processing diverse points of view and recognising other ideas. Several students described that they sometimes had a problem to explain their point of view, their solutions, or that they started an argument because they misunderstood something. One student described the solution by empowering the team to ask questions if they did not understand “Instead, I need to involve my group members by asking questions or getting them to formulate themselves in some other way.”. Two other students also described that they often become passive if they were not confident about the area that they were discussing. Their remedy was to ask clarifying questions to really understand the problem, which was a positive experience for the whole team.

4.1.4 Time and resource management In the analysis, another common reflection was the difficulty to be on time for meetings. In Swedish, there is the concept called Tidsoptimist, literally time optimist, a person who (regularly) underestimates how long something takes and therefore gets busy or delayed. In the CDIO Syllabus, there is no clear set of skills that fits this PDA, but we have categorised it as Personal and Professional Skills and Attributes category. Some quotes from the self-assessment were: “I probably do not prioritise meetings and the like high enough in the morning. I also have such an irregular schedule which makes it difficult to get up early the few days I actually have to do it.” “I come in late” “I am often late.”

1.

EPDE2021/168 5

4.2 Feedback from students Feedback from the students (formal and informal course evaluations and reflections) indicated that they appreciated the discussion meetings, often similar problems are identified, and they can together work to strengthen their weak areas. Students also appreciate that they spend time and effort on personal development and not just formal knowledge and skills “also contributed to me having the opportunity to work with my shortcomings but also strengths in ‘sharp’ mode” as one of the students described the process “Good with much more focus on reflection and improvement. It has given room for self-insight, rather than someone else telling you how you are as a person”.

Figure 2 Evaluation of the personal development areas, 2020.

Also, it was appreciated was the focus on personal challenges within the project, “I like that there is an aspect that is more about me as a person and not just my role in the work. Compared to a written workbook, students experienced that this approach was more valuable for their personal development. “It has been very rewarding. In a regular workbook, a lot of time is spent getting the content together. and it is more rewarding to focus on one’s own reflections” another student described the personal development work as the “Most educational assignment throughout the education.”. Several students also felt that the openness and the discussions opened up for much more personal discussions within the teams. Everyone was aware that they all worked with various personal challenges during the course. One student described it as “I feel that some of what I shared with me changed both myself and my team.”

5 DISCUSSION Lack of self-confidence was a common PDA that surfaced during the discussion sessions. One of the students was not aware of the fact that she avoided contacting unknown people. Once she was aware of this, she challenged herself to actively work with this PDA and an insightful improvement was expressed in her final self-assessment. Discussing PDAs in groups is an opportunity to address development areas and identify areas that the student may not have been aware of without others’ help. Team conflicts are quite common in design-implement experiences and was also a common topic for our students. In this course, the openness and the students’ willingness to change the team behaviour and their own behaviour were higher than in a regular course. It was also clear that actions and behaviours that are usually perceived as irritating and in the end lead to conflicts (coming late, personal focus, misunderstandings) was identified and discussed during group exercises, and thereby highlighting actions that could lead to a conflict and been able to act before it becomes a conflict. Another area that improved the teamwork was the focus on creating a constructive dialogue between team members, to focus on actually understanding different opinions and making all voices heard. All students were aware of it, but they realised that they could do it much better, especially when several students had that common development area. After the group discussions where ‘tidsoptimism’ arose, it became clear that those who were not time optimists pointed out that it was disrespectful not to show up on time. After this insight, a general improvement in the project groups was quickly noticed. Some of the students highlighted that it was difficult (at the PDA discussion meetings) to give all people the same amount of focus. In some cases, it was one-way communication, and it was much more rewarding for the students that opened up. The structure of the discussion meeting is something that can be improved in future sessions. Several students highlighted that they liked the group discussions, presenting their development areas, and discussed how they should work with them. They described that they could solve their problems by

1.

EPDE2021/168 6

taking part in others’ experience. It also felt good to confirm that others may have the same ‘problems’ as myself “In my case, it has felt positive that others in the class have had similar reflections on their personality, way of thinking or acting.” or that “One forgets that others may also have difficulties that they work with, very important to pay attention to”. The students also described that the discussions highlighted the importance to support and empower other students in their teamwork. Working with discussion groups with one member from each project teams also felt like the right approach. The students were more comfortable to discuss problems that arose in their teams. We also decided to put all project leaders in one discussion group, and the focus for those individuals was more on leadership, supporting the team and the individual team members. We also introduced bi-weekly coach meetings with the project leaders focusing on team-related issues and leadership, which project managers much appreciated. As a teacher and leader of the discussion sessions, it felt that we were sometimes scratching on the surface and then revealed something that was a significant personal challenge that students had hidden from others (and even from themselves) for a long time. One of the students described it in the evaluation “Sometimes it got a little too personal […], I’m ok with that, but others may not be”. This is something that the teachers have to be prepared for and have an action plan to get extra support from student health organisations if needed. The implementation was done in small classes with more than two years of experience working together and can be a challenge to implement in courses with more students. Most of the work is performed in small teams, so it should be possible to achieve width enough teachers to handle the discussion meetings. Parallel to this implementation in this course, we have also introduced the Habits of Minds concept [7] in a similar course to enable students to reflect on their own behaviours. The 16 attributes are used as a starting point to identify strengths and weak areas in the course. In the master course, reflection was only performed in a written workbook at the end of the course, and we see that the ongoing discussion throughout the course used in the bachelor course was a better approach. For the following semester, we will use the experiences to improve both courses.

6 CONCLUSION The background to this paper was that students feel that they were rarely allowed to work with the personal development of both personal and interpersonal skills. The paper describes how we have developed a structure to explicitly work with the students’ individual development areas for personal and interpersonal skills. Using this approach for three years and analysing the implementation, we can conclude that it has improved students’ personal and interpersonal skills. The results also highlight that students like to be challenged to change their professional conduct. They get support from both teachers and other students and have to force themselves to work with something that negatively impacts their usual way. We will continue to use this approach and compare it with the result from another course using the Habits of Mind framework.

REFERENCES [1] Wikberg Nilsson, Å., Normark, J., Törlind, P., & Öhrling, T. (2017). Experiences of educational

reform: Implementation of CDIO at Industrial design engineering. Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference.

[2] Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., & Brodeur, D. R. (2007). Rethinking Engineering Education: The CDIO Approach.

[3] Wikberg-Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2016). Student Competence Profiles: a complementary or competitive approach to CDIO. Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference.

[4] Wikberg Nilsson, Å., & Törlind, P. (2020). Implementation of workbooks as an active learning tool for Industrial Design Engineering. 7:th Development conference for Swedish Engineering Education, 161–163.

[5] Studentspegeln (2007) Högskoleverkets rapportserie 2007:20R Högskoleverket. [6] CDIO Syllabus 2.0, Worldwide CDIO Initiative. http://www.cdio.org/benefits-cdio/cdio-

syllabus/cdio-syllabus-topical-form [7] Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (Eds.). (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential

characteristics for success. ASCD.

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX J

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

J PEDAGOGIC LEADERSHIP

J1 Educational Planning and Administration • 2013-2017-present Education leader for the Master programme (5 years) in Industrial Design

Engineering. • 2013-2016, Education leader for the Bachelor programme in Industrial Design Engineering. • 2008-2010 coordinator for Arena Innovative Technology and Entrepreneurship (AITF), a

multidisciplinary programme that focuses on innovation, product development and entrepreneurship.

J2 Teaching in pedagogical courses at LTU Because of my interest in pedagogics, I often participate in pedagogic development at LTU and nationally.

J2.1 Recent pedagogical presentations at LTU

• 210329: Implementing feedback in courses Guest lecture in the course Qualifying course for university teachers

• 201209: Competence chains for academic writing for IDE. Workshop for the CDIO implementation group

• 200911: How to create interaction in your distance lectures, ETS Experience seminar.

• 200817: Experiences from Open Networked Learning LTU CDIO day 2020.

• 200407: Implementing feedback in courses Guest lecture in the course Qualifying course for university teachers

• 200331: CDIO Implementation of Industrial Design Engineering at LTU Guest lecture in the course Program-driven course development

• 180614: CDIO Implementation of Industrial Design Engineering at LTU Keynote and workshop pedagogical conference LTU

• 180411: CDIO Implementation of Industrial Design Engineering at LTU Guest lecture in the course Qualifying course for university teachers

• 150608: PIEp: Innovationspiloterna Keynote at LTU work-life connection day

J2.2 Pedagogical presentations outside LTU

• 1711204: CDIO Implementation of Industrial Design Engineering at LTU Keynote at CDIO day at Blekinge institute of technology.

• 150921: How to create future physical, educational environments Keynote at Workshop for future physical environments, Stockholm

• 151125: PIEp: Innovationspiloterna Keynote inspiration day successful projects at VINNOVA

• 110412: How to enable collaboration and learning on distance Keynote at Sunet e-meeting national conference

PETER TÖRLIND

APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX K

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

K OTHER PEDAGOGICAL MERITS

K1 Engineering workspaces Below are some of the physical workspaces where I have had a strong influence on the design.

K1.1 Workspace and lab environments with external funding

• 1997-1999 The Studio Funding: 10 MSEK, Kempe Foundation. Focus: Physical environment for distributed engineering Role: Co-writer of the proposal and project leader for the design of the studio

• 2005-2011 LTU Design Observatory Funding:12 MSEK, Kempe Foundation and Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation Focus: Laboratory for design research Role: Project leader for the design phase and co-writer of the proposal. Research manager.

• 2012 Prototype lab Funding: 1 MSEK, LTU Labfond Focus: Prototype lab for industrial design Role: Writer of the proposal.

• 2015-2020 DEPICT LAB Funding: 2,9 MSEK, LTU Labfond, Kempe Foundation, Norrbottens forskningsråd Focus: Laboratory for design research Role: Technical lead and co-writer of the proposal, currently manager.

K1.2 iMeet

In 2006 LTU improved distance education and invested about €1M to develop new facilities for hybrid lecture halls – iMeet. I was invited as a technical expert in this project, and we developed a flexible concept with eight new distance education studios (investment about €1M). Some of the innovations were that it was designed to enable different types of conferencing tools simultaneously, Codec videoconferencing (to other video conferencing studios), high-end video conferencing, and web-based conferencing at the same time. The lecture halls were also designed with scenarios and remote sensors so the teacher could walk around in the lecture hall and the camera would follow. Something

Figure K1 A teachers view in a hybrid classroom.

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX K

Figure K2 Different types of studios for classes with 60 students or 20 students. The last studio is designed for teamwork six students.

K1.3 IDE environments in the A-house

Excerpts from Wikberg-Nilsson, Å. Jörgen Normark, C., Törlind P., & Öhrling, T. (2017) describing the new engineering workspaces in the A-house house at LTU.

“The new learning spaces encourage hands-on learning, support both disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge, and facilitates group activities and social interaction. All students have full access between 6 AM and 11 PM. One example is the IDE design studio that is designed as a very flexible space, that rapidly can be transformed from a classical presentation hall for 90 students to interactive group work by using stackable tables stored in the ‘garage’ (see figure 3, a large storage area with tables, whiteboards, workshop material, easels etc). This enables teachers in design courses to go from presentation mode (see figure 1) to group work (see figure 2) in a couple of minutes, thereby allowing the students the opportunity to test and implement the previously presented theory. The new learning environment has received very positive feedback from both students and faculty, and LTU also arrange study visits to the IDE learning environment from other universities, in short: we have evolved the IDE learning spaces into an environment LTU is proud of, and want to show to others, see figure 1-6. Some of our IDE students state:”

“We consider it to be much more student-oriented now, compared to before. It is more flexible; the different workshops, the 3D prototyping spaces, the usability lab, the design studio in which we can build full-scale prototypes, and we have access to all facilities all-day so you can actually use them. We also have much more student-spaces compared to

the previous facilities, it is so much nicer now!”

(IDE students Year 5 - Jan 2017 - author's translation)

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX K

K1.4 Deltakvarteret

Since 2020 I have worked part-time in the project Deltakvarteret, responsible for interacting with student environments and soft (human cantered labs) in the new facilities. The role includes synchronisation of needs and requirements from students and teacher to create a design specification for the facilities.

K2 Popular science communication of research results I really like to present my research and is often active in the region, doing presentations etc.

• Articles in popular science magazines I occasionally write in popular science magazines. An example of this can be found in Verkstadsforum 6, 2006 (see Appendix K4).

• Funktioneering Magazine In 2009 the research group created a magazine that we used for dissemination. I wrote several of the articles. See Appendix K5 for an example. https://issuu.com/daisan/docs/funktioneering

• Innovation race/ Innovation factory. This started as a 24h innovation competition in 2009, where we invited students to solve an innovation challenge from an external company or organisation. To facilitate the innovation process, we developed the 4I4I process (see below). For several years Product Innovation hosted the Innovation race that evolved to an 8-hour innovation hosted by LTU Business. See Appendix K6. https://www.ltu.se/research/subjects/product-innovation/Nyheter-och-Aktuellt/Treehotels-upplevelser-i-forsta-rummet-1.100996?l=en

PETER TÖRLIND – APPENDIX PEDAGOGIC PORTFOLIO

APPENDIX K

• PechaKucha I have been presenting my research in several PechaKucha events, as an example is the presentation “My view of creativity and innovation” held 2011 at Bistro Norrland is available on Youtube: https://youtu.be/gcouc1qfUjU (in Swedish)

• Pepp and Female Engineer Network For me, inclusion and diversity are essential. Therefore, I support female students such as the Pepp mentorship program and Female Engineer Network and have arranged events together with these organisations at LTU where I have presented my research.

APPENDIX

K3 LTU Design Observatory, from a workshop at ICED 09- K4 Verkstadsforum, 2006 K5 Functioneering Magazine, K2 K6 Innovation factory, 2012

1

3

64

7

2

58

BackgroundIn design research interesting research issues includes:

How to measure design performance?•How to realize, evaluate physical and vir-•tual environments?How can we evaluate new technology in •‘real’ engineering projects?

To explore these research issues the Luleå Design Observatory has been realized with the support from a large donation from the Kempe Foundations and the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation.

DesignThe Luleå Design Observatory is designed to provide researchers with a flexible environ-ment for design research. The ‘Greenroom’ has been designed for informal communica-tion, and here ambient technology is used, which is integrated in the building itself. Two design spaces are designed similar to a the-atre, with “stage sets” (i.e. movable walls, flexible bus controlled lightning and a variety of interaction devices and displays) that can quickly be configured to the specific needs of the researcher.

The design observatory is also designed to replicate distributed work by dividing a local group into two groups located in two studios, forcing the group to use collaboration tech-nologies to communicate and thus create an environment for complex distributed in-situ observation of design teams as it unfolds.

TechnologyBoth spaces are also equipped with lighting trusses to enable flexible lighting design and a raised floor is used to encase all wiring.

The technology in the studio is based on digi-tal audio and high definition video distribution (HDSDI), which can be routed internally for real time presentation or combined with RGB streams from computers and recorded with a HD video recorder.

Interaction in the design observatory can be fol-lowed either from the observation bridge.

“The goal for the Design observatory was to create an innovative experimental en-vironment where visions can be realized, tested and evaluated in product develop-ment projects in collaboration with industry”

LTU DESIGN

OBSERVATORY

Peter TörlindPeter.Torlind@ltu.se

How we use itThe methodological argument proposed was based on an iterative process based on scop-ing ethnography (in industry) on engineering work that, to identify issues that appear to be relevant for the research.

These Identified issues are further studied in detail in the design observatory through a it-erative process of implementation and evalu-ation.

Green Room1. Technology duct2. Design Space #13. Stage sets4. Design Space divider5. Design Space # 26. Observation Bridge7. Projectable glass wall8.

Tech stuffAudia Flex mixer (30x30) with echo canceling •6 wireless microphones and up to 18 wired mics•RGBHV mixer 24x24 for computers•HDSDI matrix for video (24x24), Sony HD cameras•AJA Video recording•Three 7 channel systems for program audio•Five 65” Plasmas, 2 projectors, Wacom Cintiq tablets, •touch screens.Addressable lightning systems 30 RGB lights and 30 •normal luminaries AMX control system•

Experiment in one of the Design spaces Or be presented for a larger audience on a large screen in an adjacent studio.

https://www.ltu.se/research/subjects/product-innovation/Nyheter-och-Aktuellt/Treehotels-upplevelser-i-forsta-rummet-1.100996?l=en