Conference Agenda

This article delves into the development path of a systems engineer's thinking, focusing on the transition from abstract ideas to concrete tasks and actions through the structured application of Systems Engineering (SE). It underscores that cultivating a systems engineering mindset is a long and demanding process, requiring substantial investments of time, resources, and commitment from both individuals and institutions. The journey to becoming a proficient systems engineer extends far beyond completing a few courses; it necessitates comprehensive education and sustained practice to develop the advanced thinking and technical skills essential for success in the engineering field.

The article emphasizes the importance of systems thinking and the integration of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) into contemporary project lifecycles. It identifies the critical educational challenges of SE, particularly in bridging the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application in schools and universities. A detailed analysis of the systems engineer's learning path highlights the vital interplay between theoretical understanding, hands-on experience, and collaborative problem-solving. Practical examples, including university programs, illustrate the significant resources and interdisciplinary strategies required to shape capable professionals. Student feedback further reinforces the need for adaptive, practice-focused learning methods to address real-world challenges effectively.

This paper applies human-centred design principles to engineering education by investigating the relationships between student academic performance, online engagement metrics, and assessment strategies. By analysing datasets from three academic years (2021-2023), the study aims to provide actionable insights to enhance learning experiences and inform curriculum design as an educational product-service system. Key findings reveal that higher online engagement strongly correlates with better academic performance, with different patterns emerging across various levels of study and assessment types. Interestingly, postgraduate students achieve higher marks with lower engagement levels, suggesting more efficient learning strategies. The findings demonstrate how data analytics can inform the design of more responsive educational experiences that adapt to diverse student needs and engagement patterns—a core principle of human-centred design in engineering and design education.

Academia is challenged with learning and work in extended reality. This paper presents a pilot study, where a US university design class and an international university design class collaborated in a web-based 3D digital outdoor environment and then a web-based 2D digital outdoor environment with screen-based spatial proximity cues to provide students with informal design method learning and interaction. The spaces reflected spatial metaphors for these interactions to specifically support small groups. Students created avatars based on personas, took creative personal inventories, created, presented and discussed digital ID boards in small groups. Students were introduced to evaluation assessments such as the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ), an Immersive Tendencies Questionaire (ITQ), a workshop questionnaire, and a reflection assignment and class discussion. Findings presented are limited to the US class feedback. New foundations for future design learning and work are considered for these atmospheric mediated environments.

Like the definition of product design, the hosting of product design degree programmes tends to fall into two categories: art and engineering; Each having their own foci and educational approaches. Some faculties and departments, typically residing in the engineering camp, offer design degrees that provide students with a space to work in a semi-social environment, some even venturing to refer to those spaces as “studios”. Few offer a true “studio” environment, a dedicated space for each student to customise and work in. Regardless of the reason for not providing a studio for students, be it a limitation of size of cohorts, available space or necessary funds, there are greater implications on the student experience than purely the lack of physical space.

This paper presents the Design Director Approach to product design engineering education as a set of tenents that design educators can adopt in their practice. The Design Director Approach can introduce more student engagement opportunities, while embodying a mix of supervisory and coaching approaches, as well as using the psychological perspectives from Transactional Analysis to provide an industry-like interaction with students, providing further benefit and value to their learning experience.