Higher education should provide learning situations that prepare students for a future profession and make them world-ready. This paper reports insights from an international interdisciplinary collaborative project aiming to create learning experiences that are close to a professional situation. The collaboration setup simulates a setting of a digital agency with a development team in Sweden and a marketing team in Australia working together to solve a task. The collaborative project has been active since 2017, completing its fifth iteration in 2021. Postcourse survey results show that the students felt that a real situation was created with a high level of collaboration and commitment, internationalization, well selected digital collaborative tools, and that an interdisciplinary community of practice was created among the students.
Pages:
453-464
Affiliations:
Umeå University, Sweden
Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia
Keywords:
Internationalization
Collaboration
professional experiences
CDIO Standard 1
CDIO Standard 3
CDIO standard 4
CDIO Standard 5
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 8
CDIO Standard 10
Year:
2022
Reference:
Alexander, A., Smet, A. D., Langstaff, M., & Ravid, D. (2021, April). What employees are saying about the future of remote work (Tech. Rep.). McKinsey & Company.:
Berkey, D. D. (2010). International education and holistic thinking for engineers. In D. Grasso & M. B. Burkins (Eds.), Holistic engineering education (pp. 113–124). New York, NY: Springer.:
Borri, C., Guberti, E., & Melsa, J. (2007). International dimension in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 32(6), 627–637.:
Brown, T. (2008, July). Design thinking. Harvard Business Review, 86(6), 84–92.:
Cardozo, R. N., et al. (2002). Experiential education in new product design and business development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(1), 4–17.:
CDIO Initiative. (n.d.). CDIO optional standards 3.0. Retrieved from http://www.cdio.org/ content/cdio-optional-standards-30:
Churchill, E. F., Bowser, A., & Preece, J. (2013). Teaching and learning human-computer interaction: Past, present, and future. Interactions, 20(2), 44—53.:
Churchman, C. W. (1967). Wicked problems. Management Science, 14(4), B141–B142.:
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Lucas, W. A., & Brodeur, D. R. (2011). The CDIO syllabus v2.0. In Proceedings of the 7th international CDIO conference.:
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., & Brodeur, D. R. (2007). Rethinking engineering education: The CDIO approach. Boston, MA: Springer.:
Damnjanovic, V., & Novcic, B. (2011). Bringing the real world into your classroom applying the case study method(mm). In Changes in social and business environment (pp. 27–32).:
DuHadway, S., & Dreyfus, D. (2017). A simulation for managing complexity in sales and operations planning decisions. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 15(4), 330– 348.:
Ertas, A., Maxwell, T., Rainey, V. P., & Tanik, M. M. (2003). Transformation of higher education. IEEE Transactions on Education, 46(2), 289–295.:
Gibbons, S. (2016, July 31). Design thinking 101. Retrieved from https://www.nngroup .com/articles/design-thinking/:
Guillotin, B. (2018). Strategic internationalization through curriculum innovations and stakeholder engagement. Journal of International Education in Business, 11(1), 2–26.:
Hasso Plattner Institute of Design. (2010). An introduction to design thinking: Process guide. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/~mshanks/MichaelShanks/ files/509554.pdf:
Hirsch, P. L., et al. (2001). Engineering design and communication: The case for interdisciplinary collaboration. International Journal of Engineering Education, 17(4/5), 342–348.:
Isa, C. M. M., Mustaffa, N. K., Preece, C. N., & Lee, W.-K. (2019). Enhancing conceivedesign- implement-operate and design thinking (CDIO-DT) skills through problem-based learning innovation projects. In IEEE 11th international conference on engineering education (pp. 41–46).:
Kumar, J. V. (2018). Study of engineering and career. Chennai, India: Notion Press.:
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.:
Mechefske, C. K., Wyss, U. P., Surgenor, B. W., & Kubrick, N. (2005). Alumni/ae surveys as tools for directing change in engineering curriculum. In Proceedings of the canadian design engineering network (CDEN), 2nd international conference.:
Mejtoft, T. (2015). Industry based projects and cases: A CDIO approach to students’ learning. In Proceedings of the 11th international CDIO conference.:
Mejtoft, T., Cripps, H., Berglund, S., & Blöcker, C. (2020). Sustainable international experience. In The 16th international CDIO conference: Proc., vol. 2(2) (pp. 196–205). CDIO Initiative.:
Mejtoft, T., Cripps, H., & Blöcker, C. (2021). Internationalization at home. In 8:e utvecklingskonferensen för sveriges ingenjörsutbildningar. University of Karlstad.:
Mills, J. E., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Engineering education: Is problem-based or project-based learning the answer? Australasian Journal of Engineering Education.:
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.:
Srikanthan, G., & Dalrymple, J. F. (2002). Developing a holistic model for quality in higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 8(3), 215–224.:
on October 14, 2022 - 04:50 Maria Siiskonen
Conceive
Design
Implement
Operate
