Advertisement

A Study of Critical Thinking and Cross-Disciplinary Teamwork in Engineering Education

  • Hulya Julie YaziciEmail author
  • Lisa A. Zidek
  • Halcyon St. Hill
Chapter
Part of the Women in Engineering and Science book series (WES)

Abstract

Preparing engineer students for a career in engineering reaches beyond typical coursework, memorizing equations and solving end of the chapter problems. Students must learn to work and solve problems in a cross-disciplinary environment. As engineering curriculum needs to be reassessed to focus more on skills, capabilities, and techniques as well as cultivating ethical values and attitudes, more research is needed to understand what contributes to critical thinking skills, and overall higher academic achievement. The study of critical thinking skill in engineering education and cross-disciplinary collaboration of engineers are to be further explored. An underlying theme is that critical thinking is not taught, rather it is developed through experiential learning and systematic approaches to problem solving. This chapter describes the critical thinking performance of engineering students in association with their thinking styles and in relation to cross-disciplinary team setting.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Multidisciplinary Grant Research Initiative (MDRI, Number 2014–32), Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, FL.

References

  1. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) (2015) Criteria for accrediting engineering programs [online]. http://www.abet.org/wp…/2015/05/E001-15-16-EAC-Criteria-03-10-15.pdf. Accessed 18 Dec 2015
  2. Agdas S (2013) Effects of problem-based learning on development of critical thinking skills and dispositions in engineering. In: Abstract of Ph.D. dissertation presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida, August 2013Google Scholar
  3. Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU) (2009) Critical thinking VALUE rubric. AACU Critical Thinking Value Matrix. https://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/critical-thinking
  4. Association to Advance Collegiate Schools in Business (AACSB) (2013) AACSB assurance of learning standards: an interpretation, AACSB White Paper No. 3. http://www.sdabocconi.it/sites/default/.../2_aolwhitepaper_final_11_20_07.pdf. Accessed 3 May 2013
  5. Banning M (2006) Measures that can be used to instil critical thinking in nurse prescribers. Nurse Educ Pract 6:98–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Behar-Horenstein L, Niu L (2011) Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: a review of the literature. J Coll Teach Learn 8(2):25–41Google Scholar
  7. Bloom BS (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook 1: cognitive domain. Longmans Green, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Boden D, Borrego M, Newswander LK (2011) Student socialization in interdisciplinary doctoral education. Higher Education 62:741–755.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-011-9415-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonney CR, Sternberg RJ (2016) Learning to think critically. In: Mayer RE, Alexander PA (eds), Handbook of research on learning and instruction, Taylor and FrancisGoogle Scholar
  10. Borrego M, Newswander LK (2008) Characteristics of successful cross-discipline engineering education collaborations. J Eng Educ 97:123–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Borrego M, Foster MJ, Froyd JE (2014) Systematic literature reviews in engineering education and other developing interdisciplinary fields. J Eng Educ 103(1):45–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST)/Critical Thinking Skills Tests/Products/Home-Insight Assessment (n.d.). http://www.insightassessment.com. Accessed 4 July 2012
  13. Chen H, Chiang R, Storey V (2012) Business intelligence and analytics: from big data to big impact. MIS Quarterly 36(4):1165–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chiang R, Goes P, Stohr EA (2012) Business intelligence and analytics education, and program development: a unique opportunity for the information systems discipline. ACM Trans Manage Inf Syst 3(3):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coso AE, Bailey RR, Minzenmayer E (2010) How to approach an interdisciplinary engineering problem: characterizing undergraduate engineering students’ perceptions. IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Washington, DC.  https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2010.5673313
  16. Facione PA (2000) The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character, measurement, and relation to critical thinking skill. Informal Logic 20(1):61–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghanizadeh A (2017) The interplay between reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-monitoring, and academic achievement in higher education. Higher Education 74:101–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greeno JG, Collins AM, Resnick LB (1996) Cognition and learning. In: Berliner DC, Calfee RC (eds) Handbook of educational psychology. Macmillan, New York, pp 15–46Google Scholar
  19. Heizer J, Render B (2014) Principles of operation management, 9th edn. Pearson Publishing, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. Johri A, Olds BM, O’Connor K (2014) Situative frameworks for engineering learning research. In: Johri A, Olds BM (eds) Cambridge handbook of engineering education research. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 47–66Google Scholar
  21. Lattuca LR, Knight DB, Ro HK, Novoselich BJ (2017) Supporting the development of engineers’ interdisciplinary competence. J Eng Educ 106(1):71–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Manyika J (2011) Big data: the next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity, executive summary. McKinsey Global Institute. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/big_data_the_next_frontier_for_innovation. http://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/publications/big_data/pdfs/MGI_big_data_exec_summary.pdf
  23. National Academy of Engineering (2004) The engineer of 2020: visions of engineering in the new century. National Academies Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Newswander LK, Borrego M (2009) Engagement in two interdisciplinary graduate programs. Higher Education 58(4):551–662.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-009-9215-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sheppard SD, Macatangay K, Colby A, Sullivan WM (2008) Educating engineers: designing for the future of the field. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  26. Paul R, Elder L (2010) The miniature guide to critical thinking concepts and tools. Foundation for Critical Thinking Press, Dillon BeachGoogle Scholar
  27. Siemens G, Long PD (2011) Penetrating the fog: analytics in learning and education. http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/penetrating-fog-analytics-learning-and-education
  28. Simpson E, Courtney MD (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Int J Nurs Pract 8(2):89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sternberg RJ (1997) The concept of intelligence and its role in lifelong learning and success. Am Psychol 52:1030–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. St. Hill H, Yazici HJ, Zidek L (2015) Innovations in interprofessional education (IPE)—health professions, engineering and business: learning styles, critical thinking, and the impact on education and practice. In: IPE research paper presented at ASAHP 2015 Annual Meeting, Scottsdale, AZ, 28–30 OctoberGoogle Scholar
  31. St. Hill H, Yazici HJ, Papkov T, Zidek L (2018–2019) Unpublished manuscript in reviewGoogle Scholar
  32. Terenzini PT, Reason RD (2010) Toward a more comprehensive understanding of college effects on student learning. In: Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Consortium of Higher Education Researchers (CHER), Oslo, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  33. Watson G, Glaser EM (1980) Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal: forms A and B; manual. Psychological CorporationGoogle Scholar
  34. Watson G, Glaser E (2002) Watson-Glaser critical thinking appraisal, UK edition: practice test. Psychological Corporation, LondonGoogle Scholar
  35. Yazici HJ (2004) Student perceptions of collaborative learning in operations management classes. J Educ Business 80(2):110–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yazici HJ (2005) A study of collaborative learning style and team learning performance. Education + Training 47(3):216–229MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yazici HJ (2016) Role of learning style and interactive response systems on student learning outcomes in undergraduate business education. Int J Oper Manag Educ 6(2):109–134Google Scholar
  38. Yazici HJ (2017) Innovative assignment approach in operations course for enhancing critical thinking, engineering education track, interactive presentation. In: IISE Annual Meeting, Pittsburg, PA, 20–23 May 2017Google Scholar
  39. Yazici HJ, St. Hill H (2016a) Assessment of critical thinking learning outcomes in interdisciplinary education. In: IISE Annual Meeting, IS Evaluation and Teaching Tools Track, Anaheim, CA, 21–24 MayGoogle Scholar
  40. Yazici HJ, St. Hill H (2016b) Critical thinking learning outcomes in operations with an interdisciplinary approach. In: POMS 27th Annual Conference, Teaching/Pedagogy in P/OM Track, Orlando, FL, 6–9 May 2016Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hulya Julie Yazici
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lisa A. Zidek
    • 2
  • Halcyon St. Hill
    • 3
  1. 1.Lutgert College of Business, Florida Gulf Coast UniversityFort MyersUSA
  2. 2.U.A. Whitaker College of Engineering, Florida Gulf Coast UniversityFort MyersUSA
  3. 3.Marieb College of Health and Human Services, Florida Gulf Coast UniversityFort MyersUSA

Personalised recommendations