Development of Student Comfort with Various Fabrication Methods in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Design Curriculum

Tyler Carter Kreipke, CSC; Kerry Meyers

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Baltimore , Maryland
Publication Date: June 25, 2023
Start Date: June 25, 2023
End Date: June 28, 2023
Conference Session: Design in Engineering Education Division (DEED) Technical Session 7
Tagged Division: Design in Engineering Education Division (DEED)
Page Count: 20
DOI: 10.18260/1-2--43167
Permanent URL: https://strategy.asee.org/43167
Download Count: 126

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Tyler Carter Kreipke, CSC University of Notre Dame

visit author page

Tyler Kreipke, CSC, received his Bachelor of Science from Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology in 2011, majoring in Biomedical Engineering with a concentration in Biomaterials and minoring in German. He completed his doctorate in Bioengineering from the University of Notre Dame in 2017, where his dissertation focused on bone mechanobiology. He is currently pursuing theology studies at the seminary at the University at Notre Dame, while also serving as an instructor in the Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Department there. He expects to complete his Master of Divinity in 2023. His research interests include developing student self-efficacy and encouraging thinking across the curriculum in mechanical engineering, specifically in design contexts.

visit author page

biography

Kerry Meyers University of Notre Dame

visit author page

Dr. Kerry Meyers holds a Ph.D. in Engineering Education (B.S. & M.S. Mechanical Engineering) and is specifically focused on programs that influence student’s experience, affect retention rates, and the factors that determine the overall long term success of students entering an engineering program. She is the Assistant Dean for Student Development in the College of Engineering at the University of Notre Dame. She is committed to the betterment of the undergraduate curriculum and is still actively involved in the classroom, teaching students in the First-Year Engineering Program.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Student self-efficacy, or a student’s belief in their ability to perform particular tasks, positively contributes to a number of beneficial student characteristics. The development of student-perceived competence with engineering processes should, therefore, serve as a fundamental goal for engineering curricula. This study seeks to provide further insight into what types of activities contribute to the development of student self-efficacy towards particular common fabrication methods in aerospace and mechanical engineering. Undergraduate engineering students enrolled in 3 different 200-level design courses in the aerospace and mechanical engineering department at a medium-sized, Midwestern, private university were asked to participate in a survey characterizing their comfort level with and prior exposure to various fabrication methods. The fabrication methods analyzed in this study included additive manufacturing (e.g. 3D printing), basic fabrication methods (e.g. hand tools, drill presses), advanced fabrication methods (e.g. CNC mills/routers, water-jet cutters), and 3D modeling (e.g. SolidWorks). Throughout the semester, students were introduced to these topics in the 3 courses via lectures, short practical assignments, and multi-week design projects. The survey was administered at 3 or 4 different timepoints throughout the semester, dependent upon the course. Appropriate data collection timepoints for each course were determined as coming after the completion of course-specific milestones that exposed students to the different fabrication methods. Aggregate and course-specific data from the survey were used to assess how student comfort with relevant fabrication methods changed throughout the semester. Effects of prior outside exposure to these fabrication methods and gender were also explored. Results showed that student comfort level with each fabrication method generally increased throughout the semester in the 3 courses in response to different assignment types. The greatest increases in comfort were seen from projects that required students to engage with fabrication methods to which they had little previous exposure. In some cases, the comfort levels developed from shorter practical assignments were not statistically different than those from multi-week projects. This study suggests that lectures may be a good introduction to increase student comfort/confidence with some fabrication methods, but students/curricula can benefit even more from the incorporation of experiential and project-based learning activities that require the use of various fabrication methods, such as shorter practical assignments and multi-week integrative projects, respectively.

Citation
Format

Kreipke, CSC, T. C., & Meyers, K. (2023, June), Development of Student Comfort with Various Fabrication Methods in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Design Curriculum Paper presented at 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Baltimore , Maryland. 10.18260/1-2--43167

TY - CPAPER
AB - Student self-efficacy, or a student’s belief in their ability to perform particular tasks, positively contributes to a number of beneficial student characteristics. The development of student-perceived competence with engineering processes should, therefore, serve as a fundamental goal for engineering curricula. This study seeks to provide further insight into what types of activities contribute to the development of student self-efficacy towards particular common fabrication methods in aerospace and mechanical engineering. Undergraduate engineering students enrolled in 3 different 200-level design courses in the aerospace and mechanical engineering department at a medium-sized, Midwestern, private university were asked to participate in a survey characterizing their comfort level with and prior exposure to various fabrication methods. The fabrication methods analyzed in this study included additive manufacturing (e.g. 3D printing), basic fabrication methods (e.g. hand tools, drill presses), advanced fabrication methods (e.g. CNC mills/routers, water-jet cutters), and 3D modeling (e.g. SolidWorks). Throughout the semester, students were introduced to these topics in the 3 courses via lectures, short practical assignments, and multi-week design projects. The survey was administered at 3 or 4 different timepoints throughout the semester, dependent upon the course. Appropriate data collection timepoints for each course were determined as coming after the completion of course-specific milestones that exposed students to the different fabrication methods. Aggregate and course-specific data from the survey were used to assess how student comfort with relevant fabrication methods changed throughout the semester. Effects of prior outside exposure to these fabrication methods and gender were also explored. Results showed that student comfort level with each fabrication method generally increased throughout the semester in the 3 courses in response to different assignment types. The greatest increases in comfort were seen from projects that required students to engage with fabrication methods to which they had little previous exposure. In some cases, the comfort levels developed from shorter practical assignments were not statistically different than those from multi-week projects. This study suggests that lectures may be a good introduction to increase student comfort/confidence with some fabrication methods, but students/curricula can benefit even more from the incorporation of experiential and project-based learning activities that require the use of various fabrication methods, such as shorter practical assignments and multi-week integrative projects, respectively.
AU - Tyler Carter Kreipke, CSC
AU - Kerry Meyers
CY - Baltimore , Maryland
DA - 2023/06/25
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Development of Student Comfort with Various Fabrication Methods in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering Design Curriculum
UR - https://strategy.asee.org/43167
DO - 10.18260/1-2--43167
ER -