Teaching strategies in a level-2, large class design course

Background: A change of teaching practice, incorporating a number of new teaching strategies, has been gradually introduced to the Design Practice, a level 2 design course at the School of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Adelaide. As a result, over recent years this design course has been transformed from a course with focus on an individual assessment of embodiment design of power transmission elements to a large class course with a more complex structure involving a blend of teaching methods. The process of change was initialized by incorporating the Warman design and build competition into Design Practice. Since this incorporation a project-based learning approach has steadily evolved to include learning experiences in developing communication skills, problem solving skills and the capacity to work in a team. Assessment criteria were modified to reflect the new course structure and emphasize learning outcomes. The new structure of the course also provided the opportunity to offer students a small group discovery experience, one of the latest initiatives at the Adelaide University. To further increase the effectiveness of these new teaching methods, undergraduate students, with previous experience of the Warman competition, were employed as peer mentors and tutors. Purpose or goal: The main motivation behind the change in teaching practice was to address the evolving requirements of contemporary engineering education programs by exposing students to many professional aspects important for their future career, and thus to achieve the best educational outcomes. Approach: This paper explains the new structure of Design Practice and examines student perceptions of the restructured course. Survey responses of two separate cohorts that have experienced the integrated Design Practice course, the 2011 class and the current 2014 class, are compared. An analysis of the data, both quantitative and qualitative, is discussed. Importantly, this analysis will provide information that will be used to ensure continued improvements to the learning and teaching approach already developed. Results: Students overwhelmingly agree that the course helped them to develop their analytical and problem solving thinking skills, and, despite large class sizes, exposed them to a small group discovery experience. They are also generally satisfied with the course quality, content and structure, including the peer tutors scheme. Most controversial aspects of the course, with noticeably lower level of students' agreement, are the level of logistic and structured support for the project, the Warman project being biased towards mechatronics, and course assessment, whilst relatively small component is awarded for quality of a competition device and competition score. Conclusions: The restructured Design Practice provides students with the opportunity to apply their theoretical knowledge to practical engineering problem, resulting in a creative, integrated theoretical and project based course that involves many challenges related to students' future engineering careers. Based on the survey results, large majority of the students are very enthusiastic about these challenges and they consider Design Practice to be one of 'the best' courses offered in the School of Mechanical Engineering.