north american aerospace project: cdio in aerospace ... documents/design...north american aerospace...

Download North American Aerospace Project: CDIO in Aerospace ... Documents/Design...North American Aerospace Project: CDIO in Aerospace Engineering Education Jean Koster, ... and systems •

Post on 17-Mar-2018




1 download

Embed Size (px)


  • North American Aerospace Project:

    CDIO in Aerospace Engineering Education

    Jean Koster, CU

    Edward F. Crawley, MIT

    Rob Niewoehner, USNA

    Peter Gray, USNA

    AIAA ASM, Jan 6, 2011

  • What is CDIO?

    What is the North American

    Aerospace Project?

    What have we

    accomplished? What do we have




    We envision an education that stresses the

    fundamentals, set in the context of

    Conceiving Designing Implementing Operating

    products, processes, and systems

    A curriculum organized around mutually supporting

    disciplinary courses, with C-D-I-O activities highly


    Design-implement experiences set in both classrooms

    and modern learning workspaces

    Active and experiential learning incorporated into

    disciplinary courses

    Comprehensive assessment and evaluation processes

  • NAAP Program History

    Early CDIO collaborators in U.S. have been almost

    exclusively Aerospace Programs (MIT, USNA, EPM, CU,



    MIT/USNA/CU core team responds/ awarded NASA ARMD

    NRA for Innovations in Aeronautics Education

    Industry jumps in

    Apr 09- Formal launch

    Apr 11- Conclude active development

    11-12- Plan for sustainability


    The following sponsors have put resources into supporting development and dissemination.





    General Electric


  • Program Tasks

    1. A refined and stakeholder-validated description of the

    knowledge and skills desired in graduating students by

    the US aerospace industry, adapted from CDIO syllabus

    2. Student Learning assessment tools

    3. PjBL effectiveness measures

    4. Faculty Development Workshop

    5. Master Teacher Seminar

    6. 12 Project Based Learning (PjBL) packages for ready

    adoption at other institutions.

    7. Project website

    8. Final report

  • Project Dissemination Template

    Note: The Project Overview and Learning Objectives descriptions should fit on 2 sides of 1 sheet of paper. These

    two items become the extractable short-form which can then be easily cataloged with other projects for review

    by instructors looking for a suitable project activity for their class.

    1. Project Overview (1 page)

    1.1. Overall goal or purpose

    1.2. Societal context and relevance

    1.3. Integration (e.g., where project fits in a course, program, or curriculum)

    1.4. Description (e.g., complexity, duration, group size and number, budget)

    1.5. Learning activities and tasks (brief summary)

    2. Learning Objectives (1 page)

    2.1. Technical objectives (e.g., basic math, science and engineering knowledge, skills, processes and


    2.2. CDIO outcomes (e.g., personal and professional skills and attributes teamwork, communication,

    conceiving, designing, implementing and operating skills)

    3. Student Instructions

    3.1. Project description (e.g., brief description of project purpose and context)

    3.2. Learning objectives

    3.3. Learning activities including specific procedures, tasks, etc.

    3.4. Assessment criteria and standards

    3.5. Equipment, tools, supplies and/or materials

    3.6. Safety and risk mitigation procedures

    3.7. Deliverables (e.g., products, oral and written reports, and/or reflective journals)

  • Instructor Guide

    4.1. Commentary on conducting the project keyed to the Student Instructions

    4.2. Team Organization and Management suggestions (e.g., number of groups and group size, initial organization,

    and ongoing management)

    4.3. Assessment

    4.3.1. Criteria (e.g., to judge the quality of student products, processes, or performances relative to the learning

    outcomes and activities)

    4.3.2. Methods and materials (e.g., rubrics for oral/written reflection methods, peer/team self-evaluation,

    assignments, lab reports, and standard quizzes embedded in the learning activities)

    4.4. Resources

    4.4.1. Budget (e.g., recurring and non-recurring expenses)

    4.4.2. Equipment and tools

    4.4.3. Materials and supplies (e.g., reusable and consumable including hazardous materials)

    4.4.4. Staffing (e.g., describe particular skills and scope of commitment of instructors, technical staff, and others

    with additional expertise or licensure)

    4.4.5. Spaces (e.g., minimum feasible space requirements per student or per student team, whether space is

    dedicated or used only during student activity, and use of space for design, build, operate, and storage)

    4.4.6. Other resources (e.g., computer hardware and software)

    4.5. Safety and Risk Mitigation

    4.5.1. Operational safety

    4.5.2. Governing policies and regulations (e.g., governmental and institutional)

    4.6. Other information, for example

    4.6.1. Possible variations in the project

    4.6.2. Supplementary multi-media and other resources

    4.6.3. Sample student products from previous iterations of the project

  • Project Website

    Goal- Web 2.0 repository of PjBL project packages and

    assessment tools for use by any interested institution

    Work to date.

    Site developed fall 10. Currently in test by extended team.

    Work plan

    Year 1 project modules to go live this spring

    Documented projects available for download

    Peer review process to be codified

    Open to upload by new contributors

  • Student Learning Assessment

    Project Based Learning Modules

    Based on the experience gained during the first year of the project

    the following template for embedded assessment was developed:

    I. Learning Outcomes

    - Technical discipline-specific outcomes

    - CDIO outcomes-commonly utilized and/or taught

    II. Sources of Assessment Information

    - Student products (behaviors and artifacts) that provide documented

    evidence of student achievement

    III. Assessment Methods, Criteria and Standards

    - Methods-documents and processes to be used to assess the sources

    (i.e., to examine assessment information in order to judge or evaluate it)

    - Criteria: the salient components, qualities or characteristics of the sources

    - Weights ascribed to the various criteria

    - Standards: the level(s) of proficiency to be attained

  • Lighter Than Air Vehicle (MIT, Dava Newman)

    Exploratory Freshman Design/Build/Fly experience

    (semester before choosing major)

    Teams of 6 build a lighter-than-air vehicle, participate in

    two formal design reviews and final competition

    Approximately 6 week scope

    Project occurs in final third of semester

    Competition in gym

    ~$500/team (recurring)

  • Lighter Than Air Vehicle

    Technical Objectives

    Performance (calculation of lift and drag)

    Engineering tradeoffs (maneuverability vs. stability)

    Design of radio control system

    Professional Objectives

    Defining function, goals, and architecture

    Team & project management

    Test & verification



  • MoRETA (MIT, Dave Miller)

    Multi-semester capstone to design and implement a

    realistic-scale space system

    Specification developed by students in response to

    customer requirements from NASA

    Students form functional sub-teams to develop aspects of

    common project

  • MoRETA

    Subject repeats every 2

    years, new project for

    every iteration

    2007-8: Students designed

    & built an autonomous

    lunar rover

  • Upcoming MIT Projects

    MIT developing two new projects in Spring 2011

    Extension to Dragonfly: New structural project

    Teams use Dragonfly project as testbed for both analytic

    prediction and empirical testing of structural behavior

    New avionics component for capstone project

    In a large team, students design and build an unmanned

    vehicle used for calibration of the radar range at

    Lincoln Laboratories

  • Dragonfly (USNA, Eric Hallberg)

    Sophomore Design/Build/Fly experience immediately upon

    starting major, coincident with intro to airplane perf

    Teams of ~6 build a kit electric RC flyer, and then redesign

    for some performance requirement (e.g.- maximum weight,

    maximum increased weight, minimum power)

    Approximately 1 month scope

    2 lab periods early in semester to build and fly

    2 lab periods late in semester to redesign/build/test

    competition in field house

    project & technical debrief

  • Dragonfly

    Technical Objectives

    Airplane performance (propulsion, drag, creation of lift)

    Intro to airplane S&C

    Professional Objectives

    Problem Identification and Formulation

    Team & project management

    Systems thinking/integration











    0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

    Velocity (fps)






    Extra Power

  • Flight Test Engineering (USNA, Rob N.)

    Discrete lab modules complementing Airplane Perf & S&C


View more >