You may view the full issue below or download the full issue in .pdf here.

Project Construction for Undergraduate Non-Engineering Seniors

F.R. Beard and B. E. Miller
Department of Agricultural Systems Technology and Education
Utah State University, Logan Utah
Email: rbeard@cc.usu.edu  Telephone: 435-797-0573

Abstract: A senior level design course for non-engineering undergraduates provides the opportunity for students to develop and exercise creative and imaginative talents in the design of agricultural projects.  The course emphasizes an agricultural systems approach and involves group and individual design activities based on standard design principles.  The course resembles employment in a professional occupation where assignments are given and “employees” are expected to successfully complete such activities in a timely manner, with minimum supervision.  Common instructional problems are related to students with little or no experience in design principles, limited level math skills, and the increasing tendency for agricultural students to lack traditional agricultural mechanics skills.  Smaller group projects are completed at the beginning of the course and each student must complete an individual final design project.  Multiple PowerPoint presentations are required throughout the course and a final poster presentation accompanies the prototype design project displayed at the end of the course.

Intended Audience:  This information presented in this paper will prove beneficial to undergraduate agricultural systems and agricultural education instructors offering basic construction design principles to upper level college students.
 

Introduction
In the fall of 1997 a capstone agricultural systems technology (AST) course was introduced in the Agricultural Systems Technology and Education (ASTE) Department at Utah State University (USU).  Since that time it has been taught 10 times to senior level students in classes with enrollments ranging from four to 22 students per semester.  Each student enrolled in this course is required to participate in numerous group and individual design activities, and to complete an individual final project that provides a solution to a clearly identified problem.

Throughout the semester, each student prepares and updates a PowerPoint presentation with pictures that tracks the weekly progress on their project.  The PowerPoint presentation is then used to develop a poster presentation to accompany their prototype project, and both are displayed at a formal gathering of fellow students and USU faculty near the end-of-semester.  For the most part, students have constructed original projects; however, the projects have also included educational materials, strategies for improved agricultural operations, the building of equipment that is no longer manufactured, and the redesign of large structures that have failed.

The projects have ranged from electronic educational materials where a CD is the finished project, to the redesign and rebuilding of hay barns that had repeatedly collapsed due to snow loads or wind loads.  Most of the design projects are smaller in size (less than 10ft x 10ft x 10ft) and have been completed in the ASTE laboratories.  Five students have completed large projects at distant sites and two students have completed the course while enrolled as distance education students.  The distance education students were required to be on the USU campus for their final presentations.

Related Publications
All AST undergraduate students at USU are required to complete the senior capstone course.  “This course provides a structured environment to utilize skills to develop a concept or idea to implementation.” (Miller et al., 2004, p 3).  Capstone courses are common in secondary education programs.  Such courses incorporate the information from other classes, into an educational experience where multiple disciplines are reflected.  Capstone courses were described by Andreasen (2004) as having five key elements, described as the five R’s, indicated in the Model for the Integration of Experiential Learning into Capstone Courses.  The five R’s are identified as receive, relate, reflect, refine, and reconstruct, and they are used to process and evaluate learning within a capstone course.

In order to address the important elements of capstone undergraduate courses, college educators incorporate a variety of instructional techniques such as critical thinking, numerous problem solving exercises, and team projects with cooperative learning to motivate students, enhance the design experience, and prepare agricultural graduates for career goals (Kesler, 1998; Christy, Lima, and Ward, 2000).  The development of critical thinking skills is an important component of undergraduate education and a necessary step in preparing graduates for employment success (Miller and Polito, 1999).

Such educational strategies may involve inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning, or a combination of both.  “The inductive teaching method process goes from the specific to the general and may be based on specific experiments or experiential learning exercises.  Deductive teaching methods progress from the general concept to the specific use or application.” (Dameus, Yilley, and Brant, 2004, p 7).  College classes are often taught using a traditional lecture approach; however, upper level undergraduate courses utilize cooperative learning to involve the students and promote an improved understanding of the course content (Caprio, 1993).

Cooperative learning relies on input from several sources.  “This collective information-gathering process provides multiple perspectives on the issues and a richer pool of information from which to derive choices or solutions.”  (Kingman et al., 2004, p 2).  One of the very best sources of information is the Internet.  “The widespread use of the Internet for communications, for a source of the latest information, and as a marketing tool has rapidly increased the need for technological expertise in management.” (Peart and Shoup, 2002, p.2).

Crawford et al. (1994) described the goals of a design curriculum as integrating the design problem-solving process into classrooms, demonstrating that technical concepts relate to daily life, offering strategies for applied rather than theoretical science and mathematics, and promoting teamwork skills that are so greatly needed in employment and other aspects of life.  “The term “design technology” is generally used to describe curricula that vary from arts and crafts to industrial technology to engineering.” (Crawford et al., 1994, p 171).

Numerous techniques have been used to teach design principles.  These approaches include (e) reviewing case studies, (a) applying reverse engineering to an existing product, (b) developing a useful and/or marketable product, (c) creating a full size product or project, (d) creating a scaled down version of a product or project, (f) conducting competitions for ‘best project’ given certain constraints or conditions, (g) creating or conducting projects on a nonprofit basis, and (h) rebuilding or redesigning of existing projects (Burton and White, 1999).

Subrahmanian et al. (2003) described an innovative design practice as systematic steps involving conceptual design, parameter design, detail design, prototyping, and implementation.  Murano and Knight (1999) recommended involving undergraduate students in a variety of comprehensive research studies that will enhance team building abilities, problem-solving, critical thinking, and basic research design techniques.

Another important consideration for design education was described by Parrott (2002, p 1697):

With the ever-growing pressures on the environment caused by a rising human   population and the associated consumption of natural resources, engineers are increasingly required to deal with problems related to environmental management, Ecosystem restoration, or the mitigation of human impact on wildlands.  The result is that many engineers now find themselves applying engineering principles to ecological systems that, unlike the structures and machinery that constitute the stereotypical domain of an engineer, are made up of living components.

Grade assessment for undergraduate design is problematic because of the varying experience and knowledge levels of students.  Stewart, Brumm, and Mickelson (2004, p. 14) stated that “Multiple assessments were helpful for understanding how students learned and what methods were perceived as helpful for learning.”  The range in student skills, knowledge, and experience have a decided impact on the quality of finished projects, for both simple and difficult design assignments.  Gentili et al. (1999) encouraged assessment methods to determine a student’s design capabilities during a point midway or earlier during an undergraduate degree.  The evaluation methods include short answer exams, a team design assignments, reflective papers, and self assessment.

Given this rather wide range in student abilities, many complications occur during the teaching of a design course. McLoud and Cos, (2003, p 9) described educational design activities as, “Along the way there were many frustrations and many things did not work out as planned.” They made it clear that detailed explanations of design requirements and a thorough understanding of expectations are necessary for design experiences to be successful.

Senior Design Project
Employment opportunities involving creativity and innovation offer the young professional very challenging and rewarding careers.  While it is a test of ingenuity and intellect to solve complex design problems, the instruction that agriculture students receive during their academic tenure does not normally promote such abilities.  The intent of this design course is to give upper-division undergraduate students the opportunity to exercise creative and imaginative talents in the design of an agricultural project.  An agricultural systems approach will be emphasized with design activities based on basic research principles.

Student will rely heavily on standard design reference materials in determining size, spacing, load, and other characteristics of project construction.  The typical references include the ASAE Standards (2005), the National Electrical Code (2002), and the Midwest Plans Services Structure and Environments Handbook (1983).

Agricultural Systems Approach To Solve Design Problems
Applying a systems approach, with respect to agriculture problems, requires a diverse knowledge base and the realization that the various aspects of agriculture interact with one another.  Without the knowledge base, many aspects of a total system are not included in design considerations.  Design considerations must allow for and manage the interactions within and among the solutions to a problem.  The design approach should include a holistic and quantitative approach to a variety of interrelated problems within a larger problem solution.  Each component of a project or activity interacts with other parts in the systems relationship.

This approach to solving problems requires the designer/developer to consider a variety of things when scheduling activities, adopting a new operational strategy, building a new structure, purchasing a piece of equipment, writing guidelines, and other requirements.  A decision or change in one area influences other areas.

When designing or developing a project, some of the system components to consider include: load carrying capacity; operating life, sustainability,  ergonomics, economics of construction and operation, failure analysis, ethical considerations, moral considerations, legal constraints, federal, state, and local codes and regulations, environmental considerations, safety concerns, resale value, disposal of residuals and byproducts, recycling strategies, aesthetic factors, personal accountability, financial responsibility, liability, and time commitments.  Correct forethought and planning will allow for the integration of changes, additions, or deletions while minimizing the negative impact.  Sayings such as “Prior planning prevents poor performance.” And “Hind sight is 20-20.” were coined, not because of successes, but rather as a result of experiences with failure.

Standard Principles of Design
Design principles are based on a set of steps that are followed when solving a complex problem.  Experience may allow a designer/developer to complete a step quickly, but omission of a single step can and most often does result in a waste of time, resources, and dollars.  The following are the standard design steps followed.

Step One: Problem Identification or Description
A design process is normally initiated by the identification or description of a problem.  The process may result from the need to correct a previous design flaw, a need to develop a new product to remain competitive, or sometimes it is a whole new design challenge resulting from an imaginative idea.  There is a distinct difference between recognition of a need and problem identification.  Problem identification is more specific.  For instance, a city’s contaminated water reservoir may appear to be the problem, when in fact, the source of the contamination is the real problem.  No doubt the reservoir must be cleaned, but a long term solution must eliminate the source or sources of contamination.  Future contamination must be prevented or a city cannot continue to use the reservoir.

Step Two: Problem Definition
Problem definition is the second step in finding a solution.  The problem definition in step two differs from the problem’s identification or description in step one in varying degrees.  If a problem is simple, in that the solution is simple, then these first two steps are very similar.  In cases where a problem and its solution are very complicated, then step one and step two differ considerably.  For small design problems, an appropriate description may also be the definition and often provides insight into a solution.  For major design problems, a description may include considerable information or an extensive explanation, without offering a solution.  The definition of a problem begins with the gathering of information (design step one) and an attempt to establish the limits or overall impact of the problem.  The problem definition should outline the parameters or scope of the problem.  The definition should explain the conditions or constraints under which an appropriate solution must function.  The definition must include the actual design criteria.

If a problem is inadequately defined, than an almost infinite number of solutions exist.  If a problem definition includes design details in too great of detail, then the possible solutions are greatly constrained and creativity can be restricted.

For common design problems, a clear, concise statement (single sentence) can be developed to adequately define the problem.  The writing of a problem definition is an evolutionary process because as more information is learned or gathered about a problem, the more accurately and concisely the problem can be defined.  As the designer gains problem solving experience, this second step requires less time and results in very concise problem definitions.

This second step is one of the most critical stages in the design process.  Poor problem definition often leads to unacceptable or unnecessarily complex solutions.  An uncomplicated example of when poor problem definition might occur is as follows.  A design is needed for an irrigation system to efficiently water plants during extended dry periods.  There is not an accessible water source and electrical power is not available.  Initial solutions might involve digging a well and installing electrical power or a diesel powered pump.  However, upon further investigation it is determined that the plants are actually 100 newly planted pine trees and irrigation will be needed for no more than three years.  This greatly alters the solutions that might be cost effective and appropriated.

Step Three: Identify Solutions
During this step, the designer/developer should not be satisfied with a single design alternative, but should insist upon consideration of many possible solutions.  Ideas should be permitted to flow freely and should be recorded for more intensive scrutiny, consideration, and analysis at a later time.  Major design decisions are to be avoided at this step – seek only to identify solutions.  Although brainstorming sessions are less commonly used, they often stimulate new ideas and begin the process of taking a fresh, new look.  Sources for new ideas may involve a literature (Internet) search, investigating solutions in related fields, or talking with peers.  If some method of stimulating the design imagination appears to work, then a designer should endeavor to perfect this technique.

Step Four: Selection Feasible Solutions
The selection of feasible solutions to a design problem involves making decisions.  This is seldom easy and often must be prefaced by eliminating unacceptable solutions, further defining the problem, and identifying the restrictions or limitations that govern possible solutions.  If a problem can be reduced in dimension (redefined) by any manner, this is the step where it should occur.  During this phase of the design, it may be necessary to return to an earlier step for further refinement.  A designer saves time and prevents wasted resources if she or he can eliminate inappropriate or unacceptable solutions.  The next step of the design process involves an evaluation of possible solutions and is the most expensive and time consuming activity in solving a complex problem.

In the selection step, the underlying hypothesis is that some procedure or mechanism exists for determining which solution is better.  What may not be obvious is that individual bias can restrict the decision process and greatly hamper success.  Most people are familiar with the anecdote involving a man whose only tool was a hammer and who treated each problem as if it were a nail.  As you might guess, this will result in an identical problem solving technique for every problem.  A better solution might involve the manner is which a lazy person responds to work.  The lazy person tries to find an easier way to get work done and in doing so often spends more time in contemplation and less time working.

Step Five: Evaluate, Research, and/or Analyze Possible Solutions
This is the most technically difficult step of the design/development process.  For industries involved with complex problems, such as the design of a new automobile or the development of a disease curing vaccination, this is typically the most expensive phase of project completion.  For engineers, this step involves many hours in the development of mathematical models and detailed graphical analysis.

In the latter stages of this step, the most appropriate solutions become obvious and this phase then centers on optimization of design.  With a clear perspective of the problem and experience with design parameters, one can reduce the level of abstraction and focus on greater detail.  Note, that without a solid grasp of language and mathematics, individuals with the talent for creating unique and intuitive designs cannot implement their ideas or explore them adequately to attain full potential.  This type of situation frequently occurs when a private individual invents something, but a large company, with research, design, and marketing expertise, reaps the profits.

Step Six: Implement Solution
In the sixth step of design, specifications are written, plans are drawn, and initial prototypes are constructed.  The development of a working model is of prime importance in project design.  During this step, decisions are made that improve the design, make it easier to manufacture, reduce the cost, or simply make it more attractive to the consumer.  This is where the plans and designs developed in step five are implemented.  With the utilization of computer graphics, three-dimensional drawings, spatial analysis, and mathematical modeling, steps five and six become very similar.  If modern computer tools and design calculations are not used, this step literally becomes a trial and error process with numerous modifications required.

Step Seven: Evaluation of Solution
Every project that is designed or developed must be evaluated.  Frequently, this phase of prototype development is referred to as a prototype or beta version and only a limited number are constructed or developed to be placed in operation for evaluation.  Prototypes are built and tested to correct design flaws and finalize design parameters.  This step of a successful design sequence should culminate with actual implementation.

Schedule of Course Assignments
The design course described in this paper is scheduled to meet twice each week for two hours.  Students are required to purchase the majority of their project materials by the end of the third week, within the first 12 hours of class meetings.  During the first two weeks of class, students work in groups with two or three members.  The small groups build prototypes of projects while applying all of the design principles discussed earlier in this paper.  Table 1 outlines the basic course assignments and lists the value of each assignment toward the final grade.

Table 1. Course assignments and recommended value as a percentage of final grade.

The goal is to commit everyone to a specific design project early in the semester and have the project reach completion by the tenth week of the semester.  This allows time for each student to make changes and improvements on his or her prototype.  A major problem can occur if a student selects a project beyond her or his skill level and/or a project has to be changed several weeks into the completion of the course.  Either of these situations requires much additional work for the student and the instructor.  Of course the most common problem is that students procrastinate on completing their project and in the rush to finish, produce poor quality and/or incomplete projects.

Assessing the Weekly Assignments and Final Design Project
The diverse nature of student backgrounds and experiences, combined with the wide range of design projects, make grade assessment problematic.  Although there is precedence set to work six days and rest on the seventh, it is far more common for college students to rest six days and “pull and all nighter.”  To prevent such activity, due dates are set for the entire semester and rigidly followed.  Further, a 25% penalty is assessed for assignments completed after the due date.  The assessment of course assignments and projects are based on a variety of factors and the following short list is in order of importance.  This assessment strategy is used on the weekly assignments and group activities to make students familiar with the assessment process.

1.  Understanding and application of design steps (10%
2.  Knowledge and understanding of various aspects of the design assignment/project (15%)
3.  Finished assignment/product must satisfy all design criteria (25%)
4.  Function and appearance of the completed assignment/project (25%)
5.  Timely completion of assignment/project (25%)

Conclusion
A senior design capstone course offers many opportunities to advance undergraduate education.  It both allows and requires information from other courses to be incorporated into practical applications and encourages creativity.  Design courses are the perfect venue to practice team activities and cooperative learning.  Selection of an appropriate project and the skill level on the part of the student are two of the most critical factors for success in a project design course.  An inappropriate project or an over estimation of a student’s abilities can result in a less that effective learning environment.

It should be noted that a design course such as described here is very  time intensive for the professor and the students, requiring significant one-on-one contact between the instructor and student.  This student-instructor relationship is similar in nature to the interaction between a major professor and a graduate student near the time of thesis or dissertation completion.  It is recommended that design classes with enrollments larger than five students, utilize student mentors and other faculty to serve as individual senior project supervisors.  Student mentors might include more advanced graduate or undergraduate students with design experience.

A project design course, although not entirely dependent on laboratory facilities, relies heavily on those technologies common to traditional agricultural mechanics courses.  Both the complexity involved with such facilities and the skill levels required on the part of the students makes this course extremely time intensive for the professor and the less experienced students.  A brief description of 35 senior design projects that have been typically undertaken by senior level students are listed in Appendix 1.

References
Andreasen, R.J. 2004. Integrating experiential learning into college of agricultural capstone courses: implications and applications for practitioners.
        NACTA Journal. 48(1):52-67.

ASAE Standards, 52nd ed. 2005. Standards Engineering Practices Data. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE

Burton, J.D., and D.M. White, 1999. Selecting a model for freshman engineering design.
        Journal of Engineering Education. 88:327-332.

Caprio, M.W. 1993. Cooperative learning; the jewel among motivational-teaching techniques: forming positive associations and attitudes about science
        to motivate student interest and Improve learning. Journal of College Science Teaching. 23(5):279-281.

Crawford, R.H., K.L. Wood, M.L. Fowler, and J.L. Norrell. 1994. An engineering design
        Curriculum for the elementary grades. Journal of Engineering Education. April 1994,
        172-181.

Christy, A.D., M. Lima and A.D. Ward. 2000. Implementing real-world problem solving projects
        In a team setting. NACTA Journal. 44(3):72-77.

Dameus, A., D.S. Tilley, and M. Brant. 2004. Effectiveness of inductive and deductive teaching
        Methods in learning agricultural economics: a case study. NACTA Journal. 48(3):7.

Gentili, K.L., J.F. Maccauley, R.K. Christianson, D.C. Davis, M.S. Trevisan. D.E. Calkins, and M.D. Cook. 1999.
        Assesing students’ design capabilities in an introductory design Course. Proceedings of the 1999 Frontiers in
       Education Conference. pp. 13bl.8-13.