See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/224757914

Systems and creative thinking and student experience of design

Conference Paper in Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference · November 2004

DOI: 10.1109/FIE.2004.1408672 · Source: IEEE Xplore

CITATIONS READS
5 257

1 author:

Cecelia Wigal
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
25 PUBLICATIONS 41 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Cecelia Wigal on 03 November 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Session F4G

Systems and Creative Thinking and Student

Experience of Design
Cecelia M. Wigal
Associate Professor, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, College of Engineering and Computer Science, Dept. 2402, 615
McCallie Ave., Chattanooga, TN 37403 [email protected]

Abstract – The design process takes an initial idea or

problem and converts it to a final product or solution. DESIGN AT UTC
Some state that creative thinking occurs when the initial
idea is novel and becomes a valued product for a specific The elements of design are emphasized throughout the
application. A definition of systems thinking states it as a engineering curriculum of the University of Tennessee at
means for working through the design process. It helps Chattanooga (UTC), beginning with the freshmen year. At
define a phenomenon holistically—by its contents, least ten credit hours are devoted to teaching (to all
objectives, interactions, relationships, and environment— engineering majors) design concepts in an applied,
and uses analysis and synthesis to form new conclusions. interdisciplinary setting. At the freshmen level the students
This paper describes the basic theories behind systems are introduced to the foundations of design. At the sophomore
thinking and creative thinking and relates them to the level the students use design concepts to design and build
design process. The paper emphasizes the application of small structural and mechanical projects (trusses and
system and creative thinking in the freshman design instruments for measuring force and displacement). The
course at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga students also emphasize testing of the devices. At the junior
(UTC). This course emphasizes the use of systems and and senior level the students use design concepts to solve
creative thinking in its instruction and application of the real-life and open-ended interdisciplinary industry-based
design process. problems provided by industrial sponsors. The student
project teams work with the industry sponsors (in the
Index Terms – Creative Process, Creative Thinking, Creativity industrial setting) and a faculty advisor to develop, test, and
in Design, Systems Thinking most often prototype a solution. In addition, students apply
design concepts in a three credit hour discipline-based
INTRODUCTION capstone course during their senior year. The structure of the
design curriculum is shown in Figure 1.0.
The design process is a systematic decision-making process
that aids in evaluating and generating characteristics and
solutions for an entity or process to meet specified constraints Engineering Design Text Senior
and achieve specified objectives. Creative thinking is integral
Interdiscipline Discipline
to progressing successfully through the design process. cont’d (3 hrs) Design (3 hrs)
Creative thinking occurs when something novel is developed
that becomes a valued product in a specific domain. Creative Junior – Interdisciplinary Design and
thinking often occurs when a difficulty, problem, or Industrial Partners (3 hrs)
deficiency is sensed or an element is tested or proven.
Systems thinking, a process of defining a phenomenon Sophomore – Design and small
mechanical/structural applications (1 hr)
holistically—by its contents, objectives, interactions,
relationships, and environment—is also integral to the design Freshman – Introduction to Design
process. It uses analysis and synthesis to form new (3 hrs)
conclusions.
This paper investigates the relationship between systems
and creative thinking, their relationship to engineering and the
design process, and their relationship to student learning and
FIGURE 1
holistic thinking. It also describes techniques introduced to THE DESIGN CURRICULUM SEQUENCE AT UTC
freshman students to help them improve their creative and
systems thinking skills. Of interest is the ability of students to The goal of the design curriculum is to graduate students
understand these techniques and to apply them to the course who understand and can apply the steps of the design process
project. This paper also comments on teaching strategies that to various interdisciplinary and discipline-based applications.
have worked well in introducing creative and systems The first step toward meeting this goal is to introduce the
concepts and which have not. steps of the design process in UTC’s 3 credit hour freshman

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA

34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-18
 Session F4G
level course Introduction to Engineering Design. Then the and physical descriptions (see Figure 3). The operational
main focus is the reinforcement of this process and steps description introduces the entity and concisely defines how it
during the remaining three years of the curriculum. The meets its stated goal. The functional description is a
design process emphasized at UTC is shown in Figure 2. decomposition of the main function of the entity into its
subfunctions, taking care to define the required inputs and
outputs of each subfunction and the behavior of each function.
Client The technical description defines the arrangement, interaction,
Need Problem Definition and interdependence of the elements of the entity so that a set
of requirements is met. The physical architecture clarifies the
physical resources that support and constitute the entity, as
Conceptual Design well as their relationships [10].

Verification
Alternative Selection Operational
Goal Description

Preliminary Design
Functional Physical
Description Description

Detailed Design

Final Design Technical

(Fabrication Description
Specs & Design
Documents) Communication
FIGURE 3
PROCESS APPROACH TO SYSTEMS MODELING (ADAPTED FROM [10])

Product Validation
Systems thinking is a generalization of systems analysis
(Designed used to evaluate a variety of systems. There appears to be no
Object) formal accepted definition of systems thinking. However,
many advocates of “systems” and “systems theory,” and
FIGURE 2 “systems analysis” agree that the aim of systems thinking is to
THE DESIGN PROCESS (UTC EMPHASIS) spell out in detail what the whole system is, including its
environment, its objectives, and how the objectives are
The freshman design course uses short lectures and supported by the activities of its parts [2]. Others promote
hands-on design exercises to emphasize the body of the that the whole system is not just the sum of the parts or
design process—problem definition, conceptual design, subsystems; it is a system composed of interrelated
alternative selection, and preliminary design (see the shaded subsystems [3]. These interactions should be studied with
portions of Figure 2). Concurrent with the design respect to their dynamic as well as static relationships. Thus,
methodology is a graphics design laboratory on sketching and the subsystems of an entity should not be studied separately
CAD. A major outcome of the course is a small team design with the idea of putting the parts together into a whole. The
project, with application of basic engineering science, starting point has to be with the total system and should
engineering graphics, and written and oral presentation. consider feedback loops and dynamic interaction. Thus,
systems thinking can be defined as the process of defining a
SYSTEMS THINKING phenomenon holistically—by its contents, objectives and its
interaction with the contents, objectives, relationships, and
Systems analysis is fundamentally different than traditional resources of the environment in which it operates or is
forms of analysis. It begins with analysis—separating a study applied. It separates a system of study into individual pieces
into individual pieces—but emphasizes synthesis—looking at and looks at the relationships to form new conclusions.
the relationships between parts to form new conclusions. The majority of applications of systems thinking have
Systems analysis is most often used when confronting occurred in the area of process analysis and improvement
complex problems with a variety of variables that cannot initiatives in industry—specifically the initiatives that
readily be quantified and whose structures are not well improve process quality. Managers and consultants to
defined. It uses ad hoc models to represent variables (the industry have begun to recognize the value of transforming
environment, components, and alternatives) associated with from classical department-based organizations to process-
specific evaluation questions [1]. based organizations [4]. The process-based initiatives include
One model often used illustrates a process or entity as an benchmarking, concurrent engineering, continuous
architecture that involves operational, functional, technical, improvement (CI), ISO 9000, mistake-proofing, quality
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-19
 Session F4G
function deployment (QFD), six sigma, lean manufacturing, 4. Solution description
theory of constraints (TOC), Toyota Production System
(TPS), and total quality management (TQM). These are Interestingly, the first stage is similar to the problem
systems thinking based initiatives. For example, TOC is definition and conceptual design steps of the design process
based on a number of principles that mention systems and shown in Figure 2. The second and third stages are similar to
systems thinking—(1) systems thinking is preferable to the design process’s alternative selection step. And the fourth
analytical thinking, (2) an optimal system solution stage—solution description—provides a similar output as the
deteriorated over time as the system’s environment changes, preliminary design step. In addition, problem solving
(3) the system optimum is not the sum of the parts, and (4) involves back and forth movement between creative thinking
knowing what to change requires an understanding of the (divergent) and critical thinking—convergent thinking that
system’s current reality and its goal, and the difference applies accepted principles [11]. This connection illustrates
between the two [5]. that the creative process strongly supports and is imbedded in
the activities required of the design process.
CREATIVE THINKING Design projects provide a range of opportunities to act
creatively and provide creative solutions. These opportunities
The American Heritage College Dictionary [6] characterizes are defined and range from controlled to open opportunities.
creativity as being “original and expressive; imaginative.” The most simple and closed of these is selection design. This
Some interpret this as ideas coming from one’s unique is the act of selecting already available standard components
perspective. Others interpret creativity as looking at or seeing and assembling them in a straightforward manner to achieve
the same things as others, but thinking differently to make the design objection. The designer is able to select new
new connections [7]. Still, others dictate that creativity is a known components and combine them to do something that
product of the unconscious mind—something that occurs has previously been done. A more complex application of
when least expected. Also, there are those that believe creativity is configuration design. This involves taking
creativity is unexplainable—it eludes human understanding standard components and arranging them to improve
[8]. performance or physical features. An even more complex
No matter which definition one identifies with, creativity application of creativity is parametric design whose challenge
is used to look at problems and systems from a different is to take a design that already exists and vary the
viewpoint, often to generate solutions with regards to performance, physical, and operational parameters to achieve
satisfying constraints and design objectives, and often driven new design objectives. This application provides more design
by a desire to be original [11]. Creative thinking occurs freedom than the previous two applications. The last
through (1) divergent thinking that allows the evolution of application is most thought of as the application of
information generation and (2) transformation thinking that creativity—original design. This category refers to the design
allows the production of new patterns through gathered of objects and process that are a fundamental departure from
knowledge and experiences [12]. The creative outcomes are the existing [8].
achieved following a specific unconscious or conscious There are a number of techniques that help individuals
process: exploration, incubation, intimation, and illumination and teams address and capture their creative thoughts. One
[8]. popular team exercise is Brainstorming. A Brainstorming
Exploration involves immersion in the problem, session involves generating, in a supportive and noncritical
searching for new ideas, gathering a broad range of atmosphere, as many ideas for solving a problem as possible.
information, and clarifying and defining the problem. Being Brainwriting is a variation of Brainstorming that preserves the
receptive and open to listening is crucial here [9]. Incubation anonymity of the idea generators. Team members record their
involves the passive activity of taking time to digest the data ideas on slips of paper that are circulated among the team so
gathered. The problem is simmering in your unconsciousness new ideas can be added. Brainstorming can be enhanced with
where the ideas are free to recombine with other ideas in Mindmapping–a powerful graphic technique that uses words,
original patterns that you may not recognize in the conscious images, numbers, logic, rhythm, color and spatial awareness
state [9]. Many of our best ideas come when we are relaxed, to illustrate ideas and relationships. An example of a
doing some mundane task. Intimation is the step in the Mindmap is shown in Figure 4.
process where an idea is purposefully pursued. The problem
is plucked from the unconscious and attention is devoted to it
to seek a solution. Progress is being made and that progress
feels to be on the “right track.” The last step in the process is
illumination. This is the conscious recognition of an idea and
the transformation of the idea into action.
We can interpret the above stages as
1. Information gathering and stating of the problem
2. Idea generation
3. Solution generation

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA

34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-20
 Session F4G
Dynamics components; Survey; participate in
responsibilities of the team building
team leader and team exercises
members; ethics in the
team environment;
components of a
successful team.
Project Recording results of team Create personal MS
Management meetings; setting Project Gantt charts
reasonable goals; for semester; create
scheduling activities; team MS Project Gantt
creating a Gantt chart; chart; record minutes
using Microsoft Project for all team meetings

TABLE II
IED TOPICS AND ASSIGNMENTS – CREATING RESULTS
Topic Lecture Emphasis Assignment
Concept Defining concept Decide which device
FIGURE 4 Generation and generation and creativity; to improve; brainstorm
MINDMAP EXAMPLE – PROJECT ORGANIZATION [7] Creativity Model of the creative 10 possible solutions;
process; Blocks to create a morphological
APPLYING SYSTEMS AND CREATIVE THINKING creativity; techniques for chart of solution
aiding idea generation components
The Introduction to Engineering Design course (IED) at UTC Decision- Identifying the need for Select 3 to 5 solutions
emphasizes the integration of design, systems thinking, and Making decision-making tools; you believe best;
introduce pair-wise compare using
creative thinking. The means for introducing these concepts comparison, evaluation comparison
is a semester long project. Tables I and II summarize the scales and metrics, techniques; select best;
class discussions and assignments that introduce these comparison evaluation substantiate reason
using scales and weights
concepts.
Prototype Understanding the need Determine how to
Testing for test procedures; complete a puzzle;
TABLE I creating usable test write instructions for
IED TOPICS AND ASSIGNMENTS procedures; documenting another team to put
Topic Lecture Emphasis Assignment procedures puzzle together; write
Introduction to Defining the engineering test procedures for
Engineering design process and the new functions of your
entities involved. device.
Problem Defining client/customer Select a small tool or Documenting Creating a usable Create team report
Formulation needs appliance in need of Design package
improvement;
determine client and
client needs; create a
goal statement, design The Design Project
objectives and
constraints; present in The goal of the project in IED is to design a better device for
a report a specific customer. The device of emphasis is a small tool
Developing Identifying and List device attributes;
Design Criteria distinguishing between clarify objectives;
or appliance costing the student less than $25.00. The project
attributes, functions, define functions; begins the second design session meeting and is completed
objectives, constraints, create objective tree; the last week of class when the students demonstrate their
and implementations of a create 3 levels of prototype. The project has two parts—the individual
device. functional block
diagrams; present in
component and the team component. The individual
reports component emphasizes identification of the problem and
Technical Formatting for Create a report on understanding of the device. The team component
Writing readability; eliminating device research and emphasizes idea generation, decision-making, and design
vagueness, sexist findings
test. The project process is shown in Figure 5.
language, wordiness;
ensuring parallel
construction
Ethics and Recognizing ethical Complete survey on
Professional situations “Professionalism
Context Indicators”
Oral Types of oral Present research and
Presentations presentations; planning findings on device
and organizing; creating
and using slides; delivery
Group The triad of teaming Take Personality Style

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA

34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-21
 Session F4G
understanding of their device and its functional relationships.
Identify Identify Identify Objectives trees, functional block diagrams, and function
Problem Problem … Problem node trees are systems thinking tools designed to help the
students focus on understanding the device from an
environment focus. The students submit their trees and
Individual Under- Under- Under- diagrams to the instructor for feedback and improve for
Work stand stand … stand
adding to a revised first report to fully document their
understanding of their device and the users’ dilemma.
Clarify Clarify Clarify
… Design Project –Team Component

Midway through the semester the instructor places the

(Device Pool)
students in 3 to 5 member project teams. The members are
Select Device to Improve selected to optimize the variation in device and problem
Document statements. This is done so the project teams can witness the
Design variation in problem statements and applications. The
students are required to share and discuss their devices and
Brainstorm
Possible problem statements in detail with the other team members
Solutions
Solutions and then to decide which device problem to solve. Before
Team initiating this action, the students are introduced to concepts
Work Choose Best of group dynamics, personality styles, and team problem
Solution
solving.
The students are then introduced to concept generation
Develop and creative thinking practices. Brainstorming and Mind-
Prototype mapping are discussed and practiced. The qualities of a
creative thinker are discussed and the realization that all can
Test be creative thinkers is emphasized. Also emphasized is the
Prototype necessity to be open to other’s ideas and not to criticize those
ideas, especially in the brainstorming process. The students
then generate at least 10 possible solutions for their selected
FIGURE 5 device and problem statement. Students are also introduced
THE IED PROJECT PROCESS
to the concepts of morphological charts. Morphological
Design Project – Individual Component charts are another systems thinking tool that helps students
break the possible solutions into components and recombine
At the beginning of the semester each student selects and them to develop additional possible solutions. Morphological
purchases a small tool, appliance or tool he or she or someone charts also provide a framework for students to try combining
they know has observed as operationally or functionally the known into unknown recreations—an aspect of being
deficient. No two students can purchase the same type creative.
device. Initially the students learn all they can about this Once the 10 possible solutions are generated, the
device, its users, and its other clients to identify the problem. students are asked to select 3 to 5 they believe to be the
For example, the first assignment requires the students to “best” solutions based on ability to create a prototype and to
state the deficiency as a problem statement, so they must meet the customer criteria. This is a “we think” selection with
interview the users or clients of the device and thoroughly no basis in decision theory. Then the students are introduced
understand the device needs and the users’ concerns. They to several concepts of decision-making including pair-wise
then look at the device’s physical, functional, and operational and weighted comparisons. They select the best of the 3 to 5
features and define device attributes. They can learn about the solutions using these tools and the customer criteria outlined
device on the product website, on the website in their objective trees. The decision on how to weight the
www.howstuffworks.com, or by tearing down the device and criteria is sometimes based on the clients’ needs; other times
researching each component. From these attributes the based on a vote of opinion of the team members.
students break out design objectives, device functions, Each team is required to develop a prototype of the
constraints, standards or codes, and device descriptions. This solution. The students are provided no resources to create the
is a rather large first assignment but the students are provided prototype. They must depend on their personal knowledge
two weeks to complete the research and write the supporting and material they desire to invest in to complete the project.
report. This limits the students in some ways, but requires them to be
Later class instruction introduces the students to creative.
objective trees, input/output functional block diagrams, and The teams must develop procedures to test each new
function node trees to help them clarify and document their function of their improved device to determine whether it

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA

34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-22
 Session F4G
meets the customer criteria. We discuss the value of test The course does not force the students to use these techniques
procedures, how to create test procedures, and how to record though the instructor requests students to record how they
data. Design of experiments is not mentioned; however, the generate ideas and experience “group think.” The course
concepts of repeatability and reproducibility are. The test final does ask students to define a device using mindmapping
procedures, collected data, and analysis are included in the to illustrate their understanding of mindmapping and how it
team final report. can be applied. Most students attempt the exercise but
The team final report results from a compilation of the illustrate a linear thinking pattern. However, more students
device individual report from the first half of the semester are beginning to show spatial and visual representation and a
and the team exercises of the second half of the semester. tendency toward new connections (see Figure 6).
Each of the team exercises are reviewed by the instructor and
comments are provided prior to the submission date of the
report so the students can revise and improve their work. The
students must present their report in writing as well as orally.
The oral presentation includes a demonstration of the
prototype.

DISCUSSION

As is for any type of work expected of students, the results

and the feedback from the students experiencing the IED
project and the emphasis on design, and systems and creative
thinking vary. The students have much difficulty defining
their devices with respect to functions. The systems practice
of using input/output functional diagrams takes a level of
FIGURE 6
thinking they are not used to. They have some difficulty STUDENT GENERATED MINDMAP
defining the main function but even more difficulty
determining subfunctions and their relationships. The CONCLUSION
students, however, have much less difficulty defining the
operation of their device as a process of steps (linear The freshman design course at UTC takes the freshman
thinking). student away from the traditional student and instructor
The students perform well at defining the customer, expectations of the typical analytic engineering course. The
client, and designer objectives for their device. This appears emphasis on systems and creative thinking in the context of
to be a result of an emphasis on defining objectives as the design process is new to the students. The emphasis of
“being” statements with a specific phrase structure (to (action the instructor to grade on thinking processes instead of results
word) + (object) + (qualifying phrase)). Harder to define, is also foreign to the engineering students. Some students
however, are constraints that emerge from the objectives. are resistant to the experience, but many others openly enjoy
Even though constraints are described as limiting factors to the opportunity to create unique solutions.
the design space and boundaries to the system environment, As the course has evolved, it has produced better results
the students have difficulty stating the constraints so they can from the student as the instructor has begun to relate each
be measured. class topic to its role in the design process or systems or
The students react interestingly to the creative element in creative thinking. The “why” for each activity or exercise
the project. They, as it often is, enjoy creating a prototype of needs to be emphasized since the three concepts being
the solution to improve their device. However, they want to introduced are rather abstract.
start the prototype work before working through the creative Evaluation of the effects of the course on the student
process. The students tend to want to go from a shortened products during the sophomore, junior, and senior years is
“statement of problem and data gathering” stage to the presently occurring. There seems to be some changes to how
“solution description” stage. The course structure and students are thinking about defining a problem and evaluating
assignments, however, force the students to stay in the first alternatives appearing in a requisite sophomore course. This
stage and provide an opportunity to experience stage 2—idea will be assessed more thoroughly over the next 2 years as
generation—only after providing time for incubation. Some students progress through the design sequence.
teams take advantage of the creative process, especially the
idea generation stage. Others, however, find it difficult to
step outside of the “expectations box.” They want to find the
“right” answer instead of wanting to experiment with new
ideas.
Some students and teams experiment with non-linear
thinking techniques such as mindmapping and brainstorming.

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA

34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-23
 Session F4G
REFERENCES
[1] Simon, Herbert, The New Science of Management Decision, Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1967.
[2] Churchman, C. West, The Systems Approach, Dell Publishing Co., Inc.,
1989
[3] Kast, F. E. and J. El Rosenzweig, “The Modern View: A Systems
Approach,” Systems Behaviour, John Beishon and Geoff Peters (Eds.),
Harper & Row, pp. 14 – 28, 1972.
[4] Jambekar, Anil B. , “A Systems Thinking Perspective of Maintenance,
Operations, and Process Quality,” Journal of Quality in Maintenance
Engineering, Vol. 6 No. 2, MCB University Press, http://www.emerald-
library.com., 2000.
[5] Kolarik, William, Creating Quality: Process Design for Results, The
McGraw-Hill Co., Inc. United States, 1999.
[6] The American Heritage College Dictionary, 3rd Edition, Houghton
Mifflin Company, 1993.
[7] Wycoff, Joyce, Mindmapping—Your Personal Guide to Exploring
Creativity and Problem-Solving, The Berkley Publishing Group, 1991.
[8] Hyman, Barry, Fundamentals of Engineering Design, 2nd edition,
Pearson Education, Inc., New Jersey, 2003.
[9] Goleman, Daniel, Paul Kaufman, and Michael Ray, The Creative Spirit,
Alvin H. Perlmutter, Inc., 1992.
[10] Levis, Alexander H., “System Architectures” Handbook of Systems
Engineering and Management, Andrew P. Sage and William B. Rouse
(Eds.), John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1999, pp. 427 – 453.
[11] Conwell, James C., George D. Catalano, and John E. Beard, “A Case
Study in Creative Problem Solving in Engineering Design,” Journal of
Engineering Education, Vol. 82, No. 4, October 1993 pp. 227 - 231.
[12] Kerr, Barbara and Camea Gagliardi, “Measuring Creativity in Research
and Practice,” http://courses.ed.asu.edu/kerr/, May 2004.

0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 © 2004 IEEE October 20 – 23, 2004, Savannah, GA

34th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
F4G-24

View publication stats