The topic of this paper is the CDIO Standards, specifically the formulation of CDIO Standards version 3.0. The paper first reviews the potential change drivers that motivate a revision of the Standards. Such change drivers are identified both externally (i.e., from outside of the CDIO community) and internally. It is found that external change drivers have affected the perceptions of what problems engineers should address, what knowledge future engineers should possess and what are the most effective teaching practices in engineering education. Internally, the paper identifies criticism of the Standards, as well as ideas for development, that have been codified as proposed additional CDIO Standards. With references to these change drivers, five areas are identified for the revision: sustainability, digitalization of teaching and learning; service; and faculty competence. A revised version of the Standards is presented. In addition, it is proposed that a new category of Standards is established, “optional standards”. Optional Standards are a complement to the twelve “basic” Standards, Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019. and serve to guide educational development and profiling beyond the current Standards. A selected set of proposed optional Standards are recommended for further evaluation and possibly acceptance by the CDIO community.
Pages:
23
Affiliations:
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
KTH Royal Institute of Technology,Sweden
Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway
Singapore Polytechnic, Singapore
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Keywords:
Sustainable development
Digitalization
learning environments
faculty competence
CDIO Standard 1
CDIO Standard 2
CDIO Standard 3
CDIO standard 4
CDIO Standard 5
CDIO Standard 6
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 8
CDIO Standard 9
CDIO Standard 10
CDIO Standard 11
CDIO Standard 12
Year:
2019
Reference:
BCG (2015). Industry 4.0 – The Future of Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing Industries, Boston Consulting Group.:
Bennedsen, J., Georgsson, F., & Kontio, J. (2016). Updated Rubric for Self-Evaluation (v 2.1). Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland.:
Brodeur, B., & Crawley, E. F. (2005). Program Evaluation Aligned With the CDIO Standards, Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE Conference.:
Campbell, D. & Beck, H. (2010). Toward Internationalized Engineering Curriculum and Student Mobility. Proceedings of the 6th International CDIO Conference, Montréal, Canada.:
Cheah, S.-M., Leong, H. (2018). Relevance of CDIO to Industry 4.0 – Proposal For 2 New Standards, Proceedings of the 14th International CDIO Conference, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Kanazawa, Japan, June 28 – July 2, 2018.:
Chuchalin, A. (2018). Evolution of CDIO Approach to MSc and PhD programs, European Journal of Engineering Education, in press.:
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Lucas, W., & Brodeur, D. (2011). The CDIO Syllabus v2.0. An Updated Statement of Goals for Engineering Education. Proceedings of the 7th International CDIO Conference, Lyngby, Denmark.:
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D., & Edström, K. (2014). Rethinking Engineering Education – The CDIO Approach, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, New York, USA.:
Edström, K. (2017). Exploring the dual nature of engineering education: Opportunities and challenges in integrating the academic and professional aspects in the curriculum. Doctoral Thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technolgy, Stockholm, Sweden.:
Enelund, M., Knutson Wedel, M., Lundqvist, U., & Malmqvist, J. (2013). Integration of Education for Sustainable Development in the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 19 (1), 1-12.:
Gonzalez, A., Barrera, D., León, M. P., Curiel, M., & Prieto, L. D. (2018). Student Success: On the Need for a New Standard, Proceedings of the 14th International CDIO Conference, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Kanazawa, Japan, June 28 – July 2, 2018.:
Graham, R. (2018). The Career Framework for University Teaching: Background and Overview. Technical Report, Royal Academy of Engineering, UK.:
Graham, R. (2018). The Global State of the Art in Engineering Education, Technical Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.:
Kamp. A. (2014). Engineering Education in a Rapidly Changing World – Rethinking the Mission and Vision on Engineering Education at TU Delft. Technical Report, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands.:
Kohn Rådberg, K., Lundqvist, U. Malmqvist, J., & Hagvall Svensson, O. (2018). From CDIO to challenge-based learning experiences – expanding student learning as well as societal impact? European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 43 s. 1-16.:
Malmqvist, J. (2012). A Comparison of the CDIO and EUR-ACE Quality Assurance Systems. International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education (IJQAETE), 2 (2) pp. 9-22.:
Malmqvist, J., Edström, K., & Hugo, R. (2017). A Proposal for Introducing Optional CDIO Standards, Proceedings of the 13th International CDIO Conference, Calgary, Canada.:
Malmqvist, J., Hugo, R., & Kjellberg, M. (2015). A Survey of CDIO Implementation Globally - Effects on Educational Quality. Proceedings of 11th International CDIO Conference. Chengdu, China.:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (2018) NEET – New Engineering Education Transformation Home Page, neet.mit.edu.:
National Academy of Engineering. (2008). 14 Grand Challenges for Engineering, http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/8996.aspx:
Rosén, A., Edström, K., Grøm, A., Gumaelius, L., Munkebo Hussmann, P., Högfeldt, A-K., Karvinen, M., Keskinen, M., Knutson Wedel, M., Lundqvist, U., Lyng, R., Malmqvist, J., Nygaard, M., Vigild, M., & Fruergaard Astrup, T. (2019). Mapping the CDIO Syllabus to the UNESCO key competencies for sustainability. Proceedings of the 15th International CDIO Conference, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, June 25 – 27, 2019.:
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23.:
Taajamaa, V., Eskandari, M., Karanian, B., Airola, A., Pahikkala, T., & Salakoski, T. (2016). O-CDIO: Emphasizing Design Thinking in the CDIO Engineering Cycle, International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(3B), 1530-1539.:
Ulrich, K.T., & Eppinger, S.D. (2015). Product Design and Development, 6th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York. USA.:
United Nations (2015). Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, UN Resolution A/RES/70/1, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld:
Wikipedia. (2019a). Service Science and Engineering, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Service_science_and_engineering.:
Wikipedia. (2019b). VUCA – Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatility,_uncertainty,_complexity_and_ambiguity.:
on September 22, 2019 - 07:11 Tyrone Machado
Conceive
Design
Implement
Operate
