0
Research Papers: Design Education

Piecing Together Product Dissection: How Dissection Conditions Impact Student Conceptual Understanding and Cognitive Load

[+] Author and Article Information
Elizabeth M. Starkey

Department of Industrial and
Manufacturing Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
310 Leonhard Building,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: ems413@psu.edu

Alexander S. McKay

Industrial and Organizational Psychology,
The Pennsylvania State University,
140 Moore Building,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: asm273@psu.edu

Samuel T. Hunter

Industrial and Organizational Psychology,
The Pennsylvania State University,
140 Moore Building,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: sthll@psu.edu

Scarlett R. Miller

School of Engineering Design,
Technology and Professional Programs,
Department of Industrial and
Manufacturing Engineering,
The Pennsylvania State University,
213 Hammond Building,
University Park, PA 16802
e-mail: shm13@psu.edu

Contributed by the Design Education Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received April 11, 2017; final manuscript received February 8, 2018; published online March 23, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Katja Holtta-Otto.

J. Mech. Des 140(5), 052001 (Mar 23, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: MD-17-1261; doi: 10.1115/1.4039384 History: Received April 11, 2017; Revised February 08, 2018

Product dissection has been widely deployed in engineering education as a means to aid in student's understanding of functional product elements, development of new concept ideas, and their preparation for industry. However, there are large variations in the dissection activities employed in education with little research geared at understanding the impact of these variations on student cognitive load requirements and, ultimately, student conceptual understanding. This is problematic because without this knowledge, we do not know what components of product dissection impact (positively or negatively) conceptual understanding of the dissected product and how this is related to the cognitive requirements of the dissection activity. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate how the type of product dissected (complexity and product power source), the virtuality of the product (physical or virtual), and the type of dissection activity performed impacted student conceptual understanding and cognitive requirements through a factorial experiment with 141 engineering students. While the type of cognitive load varied between virtually and physically dissecting products, no differences were found in subsequent levels of conceptual understanding. This indicates that virtual environments may be used as a proxy for physical environments without impacting the conceptual understanding of products by students. These results are used to develop recommendations for the use of product dissection in education and propel future research that investigates relationships between example-based design practices and student understanding outcomes.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Bhatnagar, A. , 2015, “Product Dissection: A Method for Hands on Engineering Education,” J. Eng. Educ. Transform., 28(3), pp. 99–104. [CrossRef]
Lamancusa, J. S. , Jorgensen, J. E. , and Zayas‐Castro, J. L. , 1997, “The Learning Factory—A New Approach to Integrating Design and Manufacturing Into the Engineering Curriculum,” J. Eng. Educ., 86(2), pp. 103–112. [CrossRef]
Lamancusa, J. S. , Jorgensen, J. E. , and Fridley, J. L. , 1996, “Product Dissection—A Tool for Benchmarking in the Process of Teaching Design,” Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Salt Lake City, UT, Nov. 6–9, pp. 1317–1321.
Grantham, K. , Okudan, G. L. , Simpson, T. W. , and Ashour, O. , 2010, “A Study on Situated Cognition: Product Dissection's Effect on Redesign Activities,” ASME Paper No. DETC2010-28334.
Toh, C. , and Miller, S. R. , 2013, “Product Dissection or Visual Inspection? The Impact of Designer-Product Interactions on Engineering Design Creativity,” ASME Paper No. DETC2013-13087.
Otto, K. N. , and Wood, K. L. , 1998, “Product Evolution: A Reverse Engineering and Redesign Methodology,” Res. Eng. Des., 10(4), pp. 226–243. [CrossRef]
Lefever, D. , and Wood, K. , 1996, “Design for Assembly Techniques in Reverse Engineering and Redesign,” ASME Design Theory and Methodology Conference, pp. 1–28.
Sheppard, S. D. , 1992, “Mechanical Dissection: An Experience in How Things Work,” Engineering Education: Curriculum Innovation & Integration, Santa Barbara, CA, Jan. 6–10, pp. 1–8. http://www-adl.stanford.edu/images/dissphil.pdf
Hande, A. H. , He, W. , Bakarat, N. , and Carrol, M. , 2005, “Product Dissection: An Important Tool for a First Year Introduction to Engineering Course Project,” ASEE North Central Conference, Ada, OH, Apr., pp. 1–12. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.122.3651&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Borrego, M. , Froyd, J. E. , and Hall, T. S. , 2010, “Diffusion of Engineering Education Innovations: A Survey of Awareness and Adoption Rates in U.S. Engineering Departments,” J. Eng. Educ., 99(3), pp. 185–207. [CrossRef]
Devendorf, M. , Lewis, K. , Simpson, T. W. , Stone, T. W. , Stone, R. B. , and Regil, W. C. , 2010, “Evaluating the Use of Digital Product Repositories to Enhance Product Dissection Activities in the Classroom,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 9(4), p. 041008.
Devendorf, M. , Lewis, K. , Simpson, T. W. , Stone, R. B. , and Regli, W. C. , 2007, “Evaluating the Use of Cyberinfrastructure in the Classroom to Enhance Product Dissection,” ASME Paper No. DETC2007-35549.
Toh, C. , Miller, S. , and Simpson, T. , 2015, “The Impact of Virtual Product Dissection Environments on Student Design Learning and Self-Efficacy,” J. Eng. Des., 26(1–3), pp. 48–73. [CrossRef]
McKenna, A. F. , Chen, W. , and Simpson, T. , 2008, “Exploring the Impact of Virtual and Physical Dissection Activities on Students' Understanding of Engineering Design Principles,” ASME Paper No. DETC2008-49783.
Chou, S. W. , and Liu, C. H. , 2005, “Learning Effectiveness in a Web‐Based Virtual Learning Environment: A Learner Control Perspective,” J. Comput. Assisted Learn., 21(1), pp. 65–76. [CrossRef]
Toh, C. , and Miller, S. R. , 2013, “Exploring the Utility of Product Dissection for Early-Phase Idea Generation,” ASME Paper No. DETC2013-13096.
Zacharia, Z. C. , Olympiou, G. , and Papaevripidou, M. , 2008, “Effects of Experimenting With Physical and Virtual Manipulatives on Students' Conceptual Understanding in Heat and Temperature,” J. Res. Sci. Teach., 45(9), pp. 1021–1035. [CrossRef]
Feinberg, S. , and Murphy, M. , 2000, “Applying Cognitive Load Theory to the Design of Web-Based Instruction,” Professional Communication Society International Professional Communication Conference and 18th Annual ACM International Conference on Computer Documentation: Technology & Teamwork (IPCC/SIGDOC 2000), Cambridge, MA, Sept. 24–27, pp. 353–360.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. , Kester, L. , and Paas, F. , 2006, “Teaching Complex Rather Than Simple Tasks: Balancing Intrinsic and Germane Load to Enhance Transfer of Learning,” Appl. Cognit. Psychol., 20(3), pp. 343–352. [CrossRef]
Warter-Perez, N. , and Dong, J. , 2012, “Flipping the Classroom: How to Embed Inquiry and Design Projects Into a Digital Engineering Lecture,” ASEE PSW Section Conference, pp. 1–17.
Jamieson, L. H. , and Lohmann, J. R. , 2012, “Innovation With Impact: Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education,” ASEE, Washington, DC, Report. http://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/innovation-wth-impact-executive-summary.pdf
Froyd, J. E. , Wankat, P. C. , and Smith, K. A. , 2012, “Five Major Shifts in 100 Years of Engineering Education,” Proc. IEEE, 100(Special Centennial Issue), pp. 1344–1360. [CrossRef]
Telenko, C. , Wood, K. , Otto, K. , Elara, M. R. , Foong, S. , Pey, K. L. , Tan, U.-X. , Camburn, B. , Moreno, D. , and Frey, D. , 2016, “Designettes: An Approach to Multidisciplinary Engineering Design Education,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 138(2), p. 022001. [CrossRef]
Abdulwahed, M. , and Nagy, Z. K. , 2009, “Applying Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle for Laboratory Education,” J. Eng. Educ., 98(3), pp. 283–294. [CrossRef]
Trevelyan, J. , 2007, “Technical Coordination in Engineering Practice,” J. Eng. Educ., 96(3), pp. 191–204. [CrossRef]
Prince, M. J. , and Felder, R. M. , 2006, “Inductive Teaching and Learning Methods: Definitions, Comparisons, and Research Bases,” J. Eng. Educ., 95(2), pp. 123–138. [CrossRef]
Clyne, A. M. , and Billiar, K. L. , 2016, “Problem-Based Learning in Biomechanics: Advantages, Challenges, and Implementation Strategies,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 138(7), p. 070804. [CrossRef]
Anderson, L. W. , Krathwohl, D. R. , Airasain, P. W. , Cruikshank, K. A. , Mayer, R. E. , Pintrich, P. R. , Raths, J. , and Wittrock, M. C. , 2001, A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Longman, White Plains, NY.
Bloom, B. S. , 1956, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Education Goals, Longman, White Plains, NY.
Bransford, J. D. , Brown, A. L. , and Cocking, R. R. , 1999, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Lamancusa, J. S. , Torres, M. , Kumar, V. , and Jorgensen, J. , 1996, “Learning Engineering by Product Dissection,” ASEE Annual Conference, Washington, DC, June 23–26, pp. 1–13. https://peer.asee.org/learning-engineering-by-product-dissection.pdf
Brereton, M. , Sheppard, S. , and Leifer, L. , 1995, “How Students Connect Engineering Fundamentals to Hardware Design: Observations and Implications for the Design of Curriculum and Assessment Methods,” Tenth International Conference on Engineering Design Prague (ICED), Prague, Czech Republic, Aug. 22–24, pp. 336–342. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.32.3157
Krishen, A. , 2008, “Perceived Versus Actual Complexity for Websites: Their Relationship to Consumer Satisfaction,” J. Consum. Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction Complaining Behav., 21, pp. 104–123. https://faculty.unlv.edu/anjala/Krishen_JCS_2008.pdf
Zacharia, Z. C. , and Olympiou, G. , 2011, “Physical Versus Virtual Manipulative Experimentation in Physics Learning,” Learn. Instr., 21(3), pp. 317–331. [CrossRef]
Chen, S. , Chang, W. H. , Lai, C. H. , and Tsai, C. Y. , 2014, “A Comparison of Students' Approaches to Inquiry, Conceptual Learning, and Attitudes in Simulation‐Based and Microcomputer‐Based Laboratories,” Sci. Educ., 98(5), pp. 905–935. [CrossRef]
Zacharia, Z. C. , 2007, “Comparing and Combining Real and Virtual Experimentation: An Effort to Enhance Students' Conceptual Understanding of Electric Circuits,” J. Comput. Assisted Learn., 23(2), pp. 120–132. [CrossRef]
Chittaro, L. , and Ranon, R. , 2007, “Web3D Technologies in Learning, Education and Training: Motivations, Issues, Opportunities,” Comput. Educ., 49(1), pp. 3–18. [CrossRef]
Kirschner, P. A. , Sweller, J. , and Clark, R. E. , 2006, “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching,” Educ. Psychol., 41(2), pp. 75–86. [CrossRef]
Sweller, J. , 1994, “Cognitive Load Theory, Learning Difficulty, and Instructional Design,” Learn. Instr., 4(4), pp. 295–312. [CrossRef]
Atkinson, R. C. , and Shiffrin, R. M. , 1968, “Human Memory: A Proposed System and Its Control Processes,” Psychol. Learn. Motiv., 2, pp. 89–195. [CrossRef]
Miller, G. A. , 1956, “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information,” Psychol. Rev., 63(2), pp. 81–97. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Peterson, L. , and Peterson, M. J. , 1959, “Short-Term Retention of Individual Verbal Items,” J. Exp. Psychol., 58(3), pp. 193–198. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Chan, M. S. , and Black, J. B. , 2006, “Direct-Manipulation Animation: Incorporating the Haptic Channel in the Learning Process to Support Middle School Students in Science Learning and Mental Model Acquisition,” Seventh International Conference on Learning Sciences, Bloomington, Indiana, June 27–July 1, pp. 64–70. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1150044&dl=ACM&coll=DL
Tsang, P. S. , and Velazquez, V. L. , 1996, “Diagnosticity and Multidimensional Subjective Workload Ratings,” Ergonomics, 39(3), pp. 358–381. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mayer, R. E. , 2005, “Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning: Coherence, Signaling, Redundancy, Spatial Conguity, and Tempora Contiguity Principles,” The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 183–200. [CrossRef]
Schweppe, J. , and Rummer, R. , 2014, “Attention, Working Memory, and Long-Term Memory in Multimedia Learning: An Integrated Perspective Based on Process Models of Working Memory,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., 26(2), pp. 285–306. [CrossRef]
Mayer, R. E. , and Chandler, P. , 2001, “When Learning is Just a Click Away: Does Simple User Interaction Foster Deeper Understanding of Multimedia Messages?,” J. Educ. Psychol., 93(2), pp. 390–397. [CrossRef]
Tabbers, H. K. , Martens, R. L. , and Merriënboer, J. J. , 2004, “Multimedia Instructions and Cognitive Load Theory: Effects of Modality and Cueing,” Br. J. Educ. Psychol., 74(1), pp. 71–81. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Höffler, T. N. , and Leutner, D. , 2007, “Instructional Animation Versus Static Pictures: A Meta-Analysis,” Learn. Instr., 17(6), pp. 722–738. [CrossRef]
Sweller, J. , 1988, “Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning,” Cognit. Sci., 12(2), pp. 257–285. [CrossRef]
Ume, C. , and Timmerman, M. , 1995, “Mechatronics Instruction in the Mechanical Engineering Curriculum at Georgia Tech,” Mechatronics, 5(7), pp. 723–741. [CrossRef]
Giurgiutiu, V. , Lyons, J. , Rocheleau, D. , and Liu, W. , 2005, “Mechatronics/Microcontroller Education for Mechanical Engineering Students at the University of South Carolina,” Mechatronics, 15(9), pp. 1025–1036. [CrossRef]
Kalyuga, S. , Ayres, P. , Chandler, P. , and Sweller, J. , 2003, “The Expertise Reversal Effect,” Educ. Psychol., 38(1), pp. 23–31. [CrossRef]
Starkey, E. M. , McKay, A. S. , Hunter, S. T. , and Miller, S. R. , 2016, “Dissecting Creativity: How Dissection Virtuality, Analogical Distance, and Product Complexity Impact Creativity and Self-Efficacy,” Design Computing and Cognition (DCC), Evanston, IL, June 27–29, pp. 59–77.
Doyle, T. E. , Baetz, B. W. , and Lopes, B. , 2011, “First-Year Engineering Bicycle Dissection as an Introduction to Sustainable Design,” Canadian Engineering Education Association, St. John's, NF, Canada, pp. 1–5.
Novak, S. , and Eppinger, S. D. , 2001, “Sourcing by Design: Product Complexity and the Supply Chain,” Manage. Sci., 47(1), pp. 189–204. [CrossRef]
Donderi, D. C. , 2006, “Visual Complexity: A Review,” Psychol. Bull., 132(1), pp. 73–97. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Rubio, S. , Díaz, E. , Martín, J. , and Puente, J. M. , 2004, “Evaluation of Subjective Mental Workload: A Comparison of SWAT, NASA‐TLX, and Workload Profile Methods,” Appl. Psychol., 53(1), pp. 61–86. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

A sample functional layout diagram of the mixer (complex, electric power source) with 11 out 23 unique parts. Written words were replaced with text for legibility.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

A sample SLA post-test of the mixer (complex, electric power source) for question of how mechanical motion is achieved receiving full points for sketch and written description

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Handout given to participants to record their cognitive load during product dissection

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In