Engineers, facing increasingly complex problems, need to understand the technical and contextual aspects of their work to develop effective solutions. Assessments of comprehensive systems thinking skills are needed to support the development of these skills and to inform professional placement. Thus, our study investigated current systems thinking assessments in engineering by systematically reviewing existing assessments. We analyzed which systems thinking skills were emphasized, how they were evaluated, how data were collected and in what content areas assessments were based. The results revealed a range of assessments, in terms of type, format, and content area, but a lack of assessments that equally prioritized accounting for technical and contextual considerations. This overview of assessments can be used by employers and educators to select assessments appropriate for their contexts and goals. Overall, this study demonstrates a need for comprehensive systems thinking assessments that evaluate performance.

No abstract

Engineering designers, who are increasingly tasked with solving complex problems, leverage various forms of support to practice and develop their design skills as well as ultimately navigate the complexity of the problems with which they are faced. Design process models are one such form of support, particularly those process models that prescribe how to design. To better understand how process models impact design approaches, this preliminary study analyzed semi-structured interviews — focused on participants’ perceptions of three design process models — with six upper-level mechanical engineering students. Across participants’ responses, we identified eight dimensions used to distinguish the usefulness of each process model: impacts considered, project scope, stakeholder interactions, problem definition, project deliverable, solution novelty, solution type, and process applicability. In addition, participants differentiated the three process models based on iteration and the level of detail within a model. Our findings highlight the importance of accounting for varying interpretations across process model users and suggest that students would benefit from multiple design process models, including process models that recognize society and people in engineering decision-making.