Teaching Design Freedom: Exploring the Effects of Design for Additive Manufacturing Education on the Cognitive Components of Students’ Creativity
Teaching Design Freedom: Exploring the Effects of Design for Additive Manufacturing Education on the Cognitive Components of Students’ Creativity
复制标题
教学设计自由：探索增材制造教育设计对学生创造力认知成分的影响
DOI：
10.1115/detc2018-85938
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
N. Meisel
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rohan Prabhu;Scarlett R. Miller;T. Simpson;N. Meisel
面向制造的设计为工程师提供了一种适应传统制造工艺限制的结构。然而，通常很少强调能够实现新的设计几何形状的工艺的能力，这通常是设计使用添加制造(AM)技术制造的产品时的焦点。此外，已经进行了有限的研究，以了解对AM的能力(即机会主义)和限制(即限制性方面)的知识如何影响设计结果。本研究旨在探讨加法制造的机会主义与限制性(双重)设计(DFAM)教育对工科学生创造过程的影响。基于创造力的成分模型[1]，通过改变(1)对AM的动机和兴趣，(2)DFAM自我效能感，以及(3)在设计过程中对DFAM的重视程度，来测量这些影响。之所以选择这些指标，是因为它们代表了“任务动机”和“领域相关技能”的认知成分，而这些认知成分反过来又会影响创造性生产中领域知识的学习和使用。研究结果表明，虽然短时(45分钟)的DFAM干预并没有显著改变学生对AM的动机和兴趣，但在干预之前，学生对AM表现出了较高的动机和兴趣。教授学生DFAM的不同方面也会提高他们在不同主题上的自我效能感。然而，尽管学生在各自的培训领域表现出了更大的自我效能感，但在设计过程中，他们对这些DFAM概念的重视程度并没有表现出差异。此外，与机会主义的DFAM相比，所有三个教育组的学生都表现出更高的限制性概念的使用。
Design for manufacturing provides engineers with a structure for accommodating the limitations of traditional manufacturing processes. However, little emphasis is typically given to the capabilities of processes that enable novel design geometries, which are often a point of focus when designing products to be made with additive manufacturing (AM) technologies. In addition, limited research has been conducted to understand how knowledge of both the capabilities (i.e., opportunistic) and limitations (i.e., restrictive aspects) of AM affects design outcomes. This study aims to address this gap by investigating the effect of no, restrictive, and both, opportunistic and restrictive (dual) design for additive manufacturing (DfAM) education on engineering students’ creative process. Based on the componential model of creativity [1], these effects were measured through changes in (1) motivation and interest in AM, (2) DfAM self-efficacy, and (3) the emphasis given to DfAM in the design process. These metrics were chosen as they represent the cognitive components of ‘task-motivation’ and ‘domain relevant skills’, which in turn influence the learning and usage of domain knowledge in creative production. The results of the study show that while the short (45 minute) DfAM intervention did not significantly change student motivation and interest towards AM, students showed high levels of motivation and interest towards AM, before the intervention. Teaching students different aspects of DfAM also resulted in an increase in their self-efficacy in the respective topics. However, despite showing a greater increase in self-efficacy in their respective areas of training, the students did not show differences in the emphasis they gave to these DfAM concepts, in the design process. Further, students from all three education groups showed higher use of restrictive concepts, in comparison to opportunistic DfAM.