As the complexity of cutting edge products increases with advances in technology, there is a need to include activities in the undergraduate curriculum that allow students to learn basic systems engineering concepts, that promote the development of their systems thinking skills, and that allow them to practice these skills. To this end, the aim of this work was to impact students’ systems thinking skills at an early stage of their mechanical engineering curriculum, develop assessment tools to measure sophomore-level mechanical engineering students’ system thinking skills, and observe trends in measured systems thinking skills both before and after exposure to a new sophomore design course. This paper provides an overview of the new course, gives details about an Engineering Systems Thinking Survey (ESTS) that was developed to assess systems thinking skills in specific areas, and presents the results of the ESTS from implementation of the course during two separate semesters. The specific areas that were targeted were identification of customer needs, setting target product specifications, concept generation, and systems architecture. The survey results showed that the course was successful in improving students’ self-efficacy on each of the four topics, particularly in setting target specifications and systems architecture. In addition, comparisons of pre- and post-ESTS results showed improvements in student answers on the technical questions related to identification of customer needs, setting target product specifications, and concept generation, with a slight decrease in the area of systems architecture. While the newly developed course was successful in the dissemination of fundamental systems thinking and systems engineering concepts among students, the survey results indicated the need to strengthen students’ awareness of concept implementation. Future work will explore how to improve the course activities to help students learn how to apply the concepts, particularly for the topics of setting target specifications and systems architecture.

High order thinking skills include critical, logical, reflective, metacognitive, and creative thinking. They are activated when individuals encounter unfamiliar problems, uncertainties, questions, or dilemmas. Successful applications of the skills result in explanations, decisions, performances, and products that are valid within the context of available knowledge and experience and that promote continued growth in these and other intellectual skills. This research aimed to identify high order thinking skills of undergraduate students in Biology Education Department. This research was descriptive research (at the first academic year 2016/2017) in Biology Education Department, Universitas Lambung Mangkurat. This instrument was validated by expert judgment and tested toward 50 students. The results showed that the ability to analyze (C4), the ability to evaluate (C5), and the ability to create (C6) respectively were 31.81%, 69.88 %, 50.21 %. Overall the high-level thinking skills of students at Biology students is better.

Incorporating Basic Systems Thinking and Systems Engineering Concepts in a Mechanical Engineering Sophomore Design Course AbstractMechanical engineering undergraduate programs in the US commonly have in their curricula one or more courses and a capstone design project in which students can learn and put into practice some of the methodologies and tools typically used during the design and development of new products. However, in most instances the product design and development process considered is geared towards products of low to moderate complexity. Furthermore, usually little emphasis is placed on exposing students to systems thinking (ST) and systems engineering (SE) concepts. As a result, student teams often struggle when they have to design products involving multiple subsystems and areas of technical expertise. A possible strategy to incorporate ST and SE concepts in the undergraduate curriculum is to introduce the concepts in a gradual fashion, beginning in the freshman or sophomore year and culminating in a capstone design experience in which the students can apply and improve the knowledge, skills, and abilities that they have gained in their previous design related courses. This paper presents the approach that was used to include basic ST and SE concepts in a sophomore-level product design and development course for mechanical engineering undergraduate students. In addition, the results obtained during the first implementation, including data collected using two different assessment instruments, are discussed.

Although many US undergraduate mechanical engineering programs formally expose students to the basic concepts, methodologies, and tools used for the design and development of new products, the scope is usually limited to products of low complexity. There is a need to include activities in the undergraduate curriculum that allow students to learn basic systems engineering concepts, that promote the development of their systems thinking skills, and that allow them to practice these skills. This paper describes an initial effort at integrating systems engineering concepts in the curriculum focusing on a sophomore-level product development course. The paper discusses the approach that was used to identify topics related to systems thinking and systems engineering, provides the list of topics that were selected, and outlines the approach that will be used to incorporate those topics in the course. In addition, it provides the results of a pilot self-efficacy survey focusing on some of the topics selected that was delivered to junior students who had already taken a formal product development course. Although a specific course was considered, the same approach could be used in the context of the entire mechanical engineering undergraduate curriculum. Also, the results presented in the paper could be easily adapted to similar courses at other institutions.

Most undergraduate mechanical engineering curricula contain one or more courses that provide an introduction to the product design and development process. These courses include some topics that, without the proper motivation, may be perceived by students as being of low relevance. In addition, they also cover topics that may seem to be somewhat abstract and difficult to apply unless they are preceded by examples that clearly illustrate their practical value. The tasks of identifying customer needs and setting target specifications are typical examples of the first scenario described above. In general, engineering students have the notion that the activities of the detailed design phase are the ones that really matter and that those activities are the ones that determine the ultimate success of a product. They are so concerned with designing the physical components of the product correctly that they spend little time and effort in other steps that are necessary to make sure that they are designing the right product. The tasks of concept generation and defining the architecture of a product are good examples of the second scenario mentioned in the first paragraph. Most students quickly proceed to pick a concept that they think is viable without carefully exploring the entire solution space. In addition, when considering relatively complex products, many students don’t spend enough time considering aspects such as defining the interfaces between different components. As a result, student teams end up with a collection of components that are individually well-designed but integrate poorly, and the end product suffers accordingly. Short, introductory examples demonstrating the importance of tasks like the ones mentioned above were created in order to get the attention of students and spark their interest in learning about such topics. These presentations were also created with the intent that they would motivate students to apply what they had learned when designing their own product or system. Through the examples, which corresponded to real-world product development efforts, students were exposed to not just well-designed and well-made products or systems that turned out to be successful, but also to products or systems that failed in the marketplace or experienced significant problems because the designers failed to adequately perform a task such as identifying customer requirements. The latter clearly showcased the importance of such tasks and conveyed the fact that good technical design work can be rendered moot by failing to put the required effort into the early stages of the development of a product or system. This paper presents the general criteria used and the approach followed to select and develop short introductory examples for the topics of identifying customer needs, setting target specifications, concept generation, and systems architecture. It briefly describes the examples selected and presents the results of a pilot assessment that was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of one of those examples.