Skip to main content

Learning Engineering Through Teams

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
  • 1184 Accesses

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 544))

Abstract

Certainly apprehensive with how things go in academia concerning engineering project education we observed and analysed different learning settings, either in engineering schools and companies, by discussing with different actors (academic community, teachers, pedagogical and scientific board elements, students). We exercised some alternative approaches to distinct learning paradigms, and we concluded for simple general recommendations that can be placed in practice in academia and companies, in engineering project contexts. The goal of our research is to make explicit a specific paradigm, an integrated way of looking into engineering practice and engineering learning, mainly in engineering projects context. Internalizing lessons from this alternative paradigm we deploy a way of doing in class that can be explored as active learning and project-based learning. The main advantage of our proposed approach is that learning occurs by doing and, we would say more importantly, learning occurs almost as a sub-product of doing. And in fact there are mix goals in our approach. One is performing, and obtaining results in engineering project design and development, the second one is a by-product and it is learning, enriching its own dynamic capabilities, and internalizing tacit and explicit knowledge about the work experienced. Of course the effectiveness of this model resides in the alignment of the two goals, which implies mature stuff and mature students almost about taking their master degree.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Argyris, C., Schon, D.: Organisational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Addison Wesley, Reading (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., Damasio, A.R.: The Iowa Gambling Task and the somatic marker hypothesis: some questions and answers. Cogn. Sci. 9(4), 159–162 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blake, R.R., Mouton, J.S., McCanse, A.A.: Change by Design. Addison- Wesley, Mass (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Borgford-Parnell, J., Deibel, K., Atman, C.J.: From engineering design research to engineering pedagogy: bringing research results directly to the students. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 26(4), 748–759 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bransford, J.: Guest editorial: preparing people for rapidly changing environments. J. Eng. Educ. 1–3 (2007). Guest Editorial

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bucciarelli, L.L.: Designing engineers, inside technology. In: Bijker, W.E., Carlson, W.B., Pinch, T.J. (eds.) MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burger, R.: 14 Surprising Project Management Statistics, Published November 2nd, Project Management (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Callon, M.: Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. J. Law, Power, Action Belief: New Sociol. Knowl? 32, 196–223 (1986). London, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  9. Damasio, A.: Descartes Error. Penguin Books, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Grinter, L.E.: Report of the committee on evaluation of engineering education (Grinter Report). J. Eng. Educ. 44(3), 25–60 (1955)

    Google Scholar 

  11. KPMG, Project Management Survey Report 2013, Strategies to capture business value (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mumford, E.: A socio-technical approach to systems design. Requirements Eng. 5(2), 125–133 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ryan, N.R.: Project retrospectives: evaluating project success, failure, and everything in between. MIS Q. Executive 4(3), 361–372 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Nonaka, I.: The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Bus. Rev. 69(6), 96–104 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H.: The Knowledge-Creating Company, How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press, New York (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Prabhakar, G.P.: What is project success: a literature review. Int. J. Bus. Manage. 3(8), 3–10 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pfaff, T.J.: Review of street-fighting mathematics: the art of educated guessing and opportunistic problem solving by Sanjoy Mahajan. Numeracy 8(2), 0–5 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. PMI’s Pulse of the Profession, 2015, Capturing the Value of PROJECT MANAGEMENT, PMI, February 2015

    Google Scholar 

  19. Riemer, M.J.: English and communication skills for the global engineer. Glob. J. Eng. Educ. 6(1), 91–100 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Schön, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Edgar, S.M., Alexei Serna, A.: Knowledge in engineering: a view from the logical reasoning. Int. J. Comput. Theor. Eng. 7(4), 325–331 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Standish Group 2015 Chaos Report

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vincenti, W.G.: What Engineers Know and How They Know It: Analytical Studies from Aeronautical History. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Code, K.: The Soft Science of Road Racing Motorcycles, California Superbike School, Hollywood, California (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Code, K.: A Twist of The Wrist, California Superbike School, Hollywood, California (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  26. NSP, National Society for Professional Engineers, Engineering Body of Knowledge (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The author thanks the students in the spring 2016 semester in the Project unit of the Engineering and Management of Energy Master at IST, Universidade de Lisboa. The case briefly summarized in Sect. 4 was the responsibility of EDPI and EDPR. It was mainly Eng. Tiago Duarte of EDPI who assumed the company view and played the role of educated client. Eng. Tiago Duarte was instrumental in the success of the experience. He played the role of a very educated client with which groups should negotiate and deal. Eng. Tiago Duarte was quite familiar with technology, company strategy, and economic restrictions and like that he could play very well the role of captain of the gates. Finally, my thanks to the Director of the InnoEnergy masters’ program Renewable Energy – RENE, to the InnoEnergy Iberia Education Officer, and to RENE Industry Liaison Officer. InnoEnergy is supported by the EIT, a body of the European Union.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Figueiredo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Figueiredo, J. (2017). Learning Engineering Through Teams. In: Auer, M., Guralnick, D., Uhomoibhi, J. (eds) Interactive Collaborative Learning. ICL 2016. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 544. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50337-0_37

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50337-0_37

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50336-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50337-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics