No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Analysis of collaborative CAD user actions in design sprint: insights from an educational setting
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 May 2024
Abstract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Design sprints complement traditional teaching methods, especially in project-based learning courses. While this approach can potentially change Computer-Aided Design (CAD) usage, it is still underexplored. Therefore, this study explores the influence of design sprints on embodiment-focused CAD activities in project-based learning by examining differences in patterns of CAD user actions, focusing on design space and action types. The case involves two higher-graded and two lower-graded student design teams monitored with a non-invasive method across a two-day design sprint event.
Keywords
- Type
- Design Education
- Information
- Creative Commons
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.- Copyright
- The Author(s), 2024.
References
Azemi, F., Mehmeti, X. and Maloku, B. (2018), “The Importance of CAD/CAE systems in development of Product Design and Process of Optimization”, University for Business and Technology, https://dx.doi.org/10.33107/ubt-ic.2018.344.Google Scholar
Celjak, R., Horvat, N. and Skec, S. (2022), “Exploring the Potential of Tracking CAD Actions in Project-based Courses”, CAD Solutions, LLC, pp. 302–307, https://dx.doi.org/10.14733/cadconfp.2022.302-307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Celjak, R., Horvat, N. and Škec, S. (2023), “Comparing Collaborative CAD Modelling Patterns of High-Performing and Low-Performing Teams”, Proceedings of the Design Society, Vol. 3, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1007–1016, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.101.Google Scholar
Cheng, K., Davis, M.K., Zhang, X., Zhou, S. and Olechowski, A. (2023), “In the Age of Collaboration, the Computer-Aided Design Ecosystem is Behind: An Interview Study of Distributed CAD Practice”, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Association for Computing Machinery, Vol. 7 No. CSCW1, pp. 1–29, https://doi.org/10.1145/3579613.Google Scholar
Deng, Y., Mueller, M., Rogers, C. and Olechowski, A. (2022), “The multi-user computer-aided design collaborative learning framework”, Advanced Engineering Informatics, Elsevier Ltd, Vol. 51, https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101446.Google Scholar
Dym, C.L., Agogino, A.M., Eris, O., Frey and, D.D. (2005), “Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning”, The Research Journal for Engineering Education, Vol. 94 No. 1, pp. 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferreira, V.G. and Canedo, E.D. (2019), “Using design sprint as a facilitator in active learning for students in the requirements engineering course: An experience report”, Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, Vol. Part F147772, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 1852–1859, https://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3297280.3297463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flus, M. and Hurst, A. (2021), “Design at hackathons: New opportunities for design research”, Design Science, Cambridge University Press, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsj.2021.1.Google Scholar
“Github MUCAD-CLF”. (2022), available at: https://github.com/ReadyLab-UToronto/MUCAD-CLF/tree/v1.0 (accessed 15 November 2023).Google Scholar
Gopsill, J., Snider, C., Hicks, B., Gopsill, J., Snider, C., Shi, L. and Hicks, B. (2016), “Computer-aided design user interaction as a sensor for monitoring engineers and the engineering design process”, DS 84: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2016 14th International Design Conference, pp. 1707–1718.Google Scholar
Horton, A., Weiner, S. and Lande, M. (2018), “Project-Based Learning Among Engineering Students During Short-Form Hackathon Events”.Google Scholar
Huić, I., Horvat, N. and Škec, S. (2023), “Design Sprint: Use of Design Methods and Technologies”, Proceedings of the Design Society, Vol. 3, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1317–1326, https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.132.Google Scholar
McComb, C., Cagan, J. and Kotovsky, K. (2017), “Capturing Human Sequence-Learning Abilities in Configuration Design Tasks Through Markov Chains”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 139 No. 9, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4037185.Google Scholar
Phadnis, V., Arshad, H., Wallace, D. and Olechowski, A. (2021), “Are two heads better than one for computer-aided design?”, Journal of Mechanical Design, American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Vol. 143 No. 7, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4050734.Google Scholar
Sadeghi, S., Dargon, T., Rivest, L. and Pernot, J.-P. (2016), “Capturing and analysing how designers use CAD software”, Tools and Methods for Competitive Engineering (TMCE’16), pp. 447–458.Google Scholar
Stone, B., Salmon, J., Eves, K., Killian, M., Wright, L., Oldroyd, J., Gorrell, S., et al. (2017), “A multi-user computer-aided design competition: Experimental findings and analysis of team-member dynamics”, Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 17 No. 3, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.4035674.Google Scholar
You have
Access
Open access