Knowledge Base Repository
In addition to research papers, the Design Society is developing several valuable resources for those interested in the study of design. These include a repository of PhD theses, a library of case studies and transcripts of design activities, and an archive of our newsletters. Please note that these resources are accessible exclusively to Design Society members.
EXPERIENTIAL MACHINES TO ENHANCE LEARNING THROUGH PRODUCTIVE FAILURE
Persaud, Stefan; Flipsen, Bas; Taen, Robin
Type:
Year:
2025
Editor:
Bohemia, Erik; Buck, Lyndon; Grierson, Hilary
Author:
Series:
E&PDE
Institution:
TU Delft, Netherlands, The
Page(s):
493 - 498
DOI number:
ISBN:
3005-4753
ISSN:
978-1-912254-22-4
Abstract:
In the first-year engineering course, Understanding Product Engineering (UPE), the Productive Failure (PF) method is used to teach mechanics of materials, where students initially struggle with an unfamiliar concept for 15-30 minutes before receiving instructions, which enhances motivation and knowledge retention. Amongst other subjects, UPE includes modules on manufacturing techniques for plastics and metals, typically taught theoretically. To address the challenge of practicing this knowledge, a simple, safe, and cost-effective machine simulating thermoforming, injection moulding, and metal bending was introduced. Developed as a graduation project, this machine encourages experiential learning, which positively impacts knowledge retention and decision-making regarding material-manufacturing techniques. An A/B test is executed which compares the PF approach using the experiential machine with traditional direct instruction. Group A (nine students) used the machine and struggled before receiving instructional materials, while Group B (nine students) received direct instruction first. The students were interviewed on their experiences after the workshop, and tested online on the content. Results showed significant differences in student perceptions and experiences. Group A, using the experiential machines, felt more confident, enthusiastic, intrigued, and engaged compared to group B. However, test scores showed no significant differences between the two approaches.
Keywords:
