<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tiffany Bayley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">David Wheatley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Assessing a novel problem-based learning approach with game elements in a business analytics course</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Meagan Flus</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Design at hackathons: New opportunities for design research</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Design Science</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">E4</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar G. Nespoli</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">John S. Gero</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Exploring tutor-student interactions in a novel virtual design studio</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Design Studies</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">75</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gregory Litster</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Protocol analysis in engineering design education research: observations, limitations, and opportunities</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Studies in Engineering Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2021</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://doi.org/10.21061/see.27</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14-30</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Meagan Flus</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Emergence of the Project Manager Role in Student Design Teams: A Mixed-Methods Exploratory Study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Experience</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://peer.asee.org/35314</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mehrnaz Mostafapour</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">An Exploratory Study of Teamwork Processes and Perceived Team Effectiveness in Engineering Capstone Design Teams</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Engineering Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">36</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">436-449</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1B</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gregory Litster</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Operationalizing Jonassen&amp;rsquo;s Design Theory of Problem Solving: An Instrument to Characterize Educational Design Activities</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Experience</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://peer.asee.org/35011</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carlos Cardoso</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar Nespoli</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reflective Inquiry in Design Reviews: The Role of Question-Asking During Exchanges of Peer Feedback</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Engineering Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Claremont, CA</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">36</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">614-622</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p style=&quot;margin-bottom:6.0pt&quot;&gt;
	&lt;span&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;line-height:115%&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;NewRoman&amp;quot;,serif&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#211d1e&quot;&gt;Design reviews are common educational practice in domains engaged in project-based learning approaches. This is the ‘learning space’ where students meet with instructors, their peers and other stakeholders to discuss the progress of their work. A number of research studies have looked into various phenomena taking place during design reviews. In this study, we adopt an inquiry-driven framework to investigate how questions might facilitate critical and creative thinking processes during problem framing and idea shaping. We are particularly interested in how question-asking influences the quality of the feedback exchanged between peers working in different teams during design review meetings. Building on previous work, specifically in design research, we extend previous contributions not only on the role of questions as influencing the design thinking process, but also on their perceived value (by the respondents) and thus their general benefit for constructing valuable feedback in design reviews.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Meagan Flus</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Work in Progress: Improving Engineering Students&amp;rsquo; Need-finding Abilities</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference </style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://peer.asee.org/35649</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar G. Nespoli</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Comparing instructor and student verbal feedback in design reviews of a capstone design course: Differences in topic and function</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Journal of Engineering Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">35</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">221-231</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Recent implementations of design review meetings in engineering design courses encourage student peers to provide feedback, in addition to the course instructor and industry client. The purpose of this investigation was to compare feedback provided by students and course instructors and to determine how student peers’ feedback related to their own performance in the design course. We collected verbal feedback comments provided by the instructor and student peers in twelve design review meetings of a management engineering capstone design course. A total of 553 comments were coded along two dimensions: topic (design, project management, or communication) and function (comprehension, evaluation, or recommendation). Comments falling in the comprehension function were also further coded using an existing question-type typology. A comparison of instructor and student feedback revealed that the instructor provided not only more feedback than individual students, but also distributed it better across the diﬀerent topics and functions. Speciﬁcally, the instructor provides more feedback in the topics of design, communication and project management and is more likely to provide direct assessments and recommendations to student teams. Stronger student teams (i.e., those with better design outcomes) generally provide more feedback to their peers. Findings can help instructors promote better feedback-giving for themselves and students alike.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar G. Nespoli</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sarah Abdellahi</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">John S. Gero</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Comparison of Design Activity of Academics and Practitioners Using the FBS Ontology: A Case Study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.138</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Design Society</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Delft, The Netherlands</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1323-1332</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Academics teach engineering design based on design theory and best practices, practitioners teach design based on their experience. Is there a difference between them? There appears to be little prior work in comparing the design processes of design academics and practitioners. This paper presents a case study in which the design activity of a team of academics was compared to that of a team of practitioners. The participants’ verbalizations during team discussions were coded using the Function-Behaviour-Structure (FBS) ontology. A qualitative comparison reveals that the team of practitioners constructs the design space earlier and generally spends more time in the solution space than the team of academics. Further, the team of practitioners has a significant number of direct transitions from function (F) to structure (S), while no such transitions are observed for the team of academics. Given that this is a single case study, the results cannot be used as the basis for any generalizations on how academics and practitioners compare. This is a successful proof of methodologies that lay the foundation for a series of hypotheses to be tested in a future study.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sanjeev Bedi</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A &amp;ldquo;lattice&amp;rdquo; approach to design education: Bringing real and integrated design experience to the classroom through Engineering Design Days</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Conference on Engineering Design</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2019</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.46</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Design Society</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Delft, The Netherlands</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">429-438</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">While design is fundamental to engineering practice, modern training in engineering design has almost exclusively moved to the classroom, providing students little exposure to holistic, real-world design experiences that are well-integrated with the rest of the academic curriculum. In this paper, we perform a short review of how the model of engineering education in Canada has evolved over the last two centuries, identify the current deficiencies in teaching design in engineering curricula, and review how Chairs in Design Engineering at various Canadian engineering schools have tackled this identified need. We then describe in detail how this problem is being addressed at the University of Waterloo through Engineering Design Days. This approach is presented as a design “lattice” around which other curriculum threads (math, natural sciences, engineering science, design etc.) can grow in an integrated way. Different Design Days examples from various engineering programs are described to illustrate the general structure. We conclude by assessing the program’s impact and identifying opportunities for future development and assessment of the program’s effectiveness.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Erin Jobidon</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Barichello</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rania Al-Hammoud</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mehrnaz Mostafapour</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jason Grove</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Building engineering professional and teamwork skills: a workshop on giving and receiving feedback</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of ASEE's 125th Annual Conference &amp; Exposition</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ASEE</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Salt Lake City, UT</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mehrnaz Mostafapour</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conflict in Capstone Design Teams: Sources, Management, and the Role of the Instructor</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2018 Capstone Conference</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rochester, NY</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p style=&quot;margin-top:0in;margin-right:.25in;margin-bottom:6.0pt;margin-left:.25in&quot;&gt;
	Team conflict can severely impact capstone design teams’ effectiveness and project outcomes. While previous studies have identified common sources of conflict in capstone design project teams, they have mostly relied on instructors accounts of these conflicts. In this paper we present the results of a comprehensive survey of students in the capstone courses of eleven engineering disciplines at a Canadian university. Twenty-two percent of respondents reported having experienced significant conflict in their teams, typically resulting from role ambiguity, ineffective communication, relationship conflict, ineffective project management, and poor team membership behavior. Of those, seventy-six percent reported that team conflict(s) were eventually resolved. Unresolved conflicts were due to teams’ passive approach to conflict management, such as not trying to resolve the conflict or not requesting the intervention of the course instructor until very late in the course. Only twenty-six percent of students in conflict-ridden teams reported having notified the instructor; of those, seventy-two percent were satisfied with the instructor’s intervention. Those that did not notify the instructor were worried about the impact that “reporting” a teammate would have on him/her and team’s future relationship with that teammate. Capstone instructors can constructively assist capstone teams to identify and manage conflict by providing both structured training and need-based interventions.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar Nespoli</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jim Russel</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Facilitating need finding and problem formulation during cooperative workterms through virtual instruction - Pilot implementation results.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%"> DS92: Proceedings of the DESIGN 2018 15th International Design Conference</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Design Society</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dubrovnik, Croatia</style></pub-location><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2473-2484</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p class=&quot;DCNormal&quot;&gt;
	This project aimed to teach, facilitate the learning of, and assess need finding and problem formulation skills while students were immersed in an authentic practice environment during their coop work terms. An interdisciplinary team of engineering students was placed in a manufacturing facility where they were asked to need find and propose significant problems to solve while they were taught design methods remotely. Students reported that they learned more deeply than in a classroom environment because they were able to be in constant engagement with the problems they were trying to solve.
&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tiffany Bayley</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Teaching Line Balancing through Active and Blended Learning</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Decision Sciences Journal of  Innovative Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">16</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">82-103</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The design of balanced assembly lines, especially when considering workforce, material, and cycle time factors, is an important managerial decision‐making activity in manufacturing firms. Numerous active learning activities are available to assist instructors in teaching assembly line balancing to students. While effective in improving student engagement, they require considerable planning and expense on the part of instructors, and they may be difficult to implement in inflexible teaching spaces and lecture‐oriented curricula. We present a new approach to teaching line balancing using online videos depicting an assembly process. Students design an assembly line by determining themselves how to separate and time tasks, rather than by modifying an existing configuration. To save valuable classroom time, students complete a portion of the activity outside of class. This blended learning approach allows for all students to be engaged in the activity, both in and out of class. Furthermore, a controlled study showed that compared to the traditional lecture format, it better equips students to address less tangible aspects of line balancing, such as ergonomic and workforce factors, material handling considerations, and changing cycle time. With the online content for this activity completely developed and available, other instructors can easily implement this approach within their courses.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Maria Barichello</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Erin Jobidon</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rania Al-Hammoud</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Team Health Self-Assessment Tool and Workshop for Capstone Design Teams</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2018 Canadian Engineering Education Association Conference (CEEA18), Vancouver, British Columbia</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://ojs.library.queensu.ca/index.php/PCEEA/article/view/12969</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mehrnaz Mostafapour</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rania Al-Hammoud</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andrea Prier</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Erin Jobidon</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carol Hulls</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jason Grove</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eugene Li</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sanjeev Bedi</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Practicing What we Preach: A Multi-Disciplinary Team Teaching Multi-Disciplinary Teamwork</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of ASEE's 124th Annual Conference &amp; Exposition</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ASEE</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Columbus, OH</style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Faculty of Engineering at the University of Waterloo has identified teamwork as a skill that requires immediate attention [1]. A multi-disciplinary team was assembled to address this challenge. The team is made up of members of existing faculty and support groups from across campus: representatives from a student support unit, a teaching support unit, the First Year Engineering office, engineering faculty, and graduate students. In the beginning, the team struggled with how to leverage the unique and diverse skills and perspectives which initially brought them together. This lack of cohesion around teamwork practices ultimately led to inconsistent success and reception of the first learning modules. While the learning curve for the individuals involved was steep, this challenge led the team to reflect on their teamwork skills to ‘practice what they preach.’ In this paper, the team members address what they’ve learned about assembling, and working effectively in, multi-disciplinary teams. This paper discusses the formation of the team and initiative (applying the Institutional Entrepreneurship paradigm [2]); the reception of the created modules, from the students, instructors, and team’s perspective; and highlights the immense value and challenges that exist in working within multi-disciplinary teams. The paper will also address overcoming some of the challenges around an extra-departmental group developing learning modules from the ground-up within a university environment.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rania Al-Hammoud</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andrea Prier</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mehrnaz Mostafapour</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carol Hulls</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Erin Jobidon</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Eugene Li</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jason Grove</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sanjeev Bedi</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Teamwork for Engineering Students: Improving Skills Through Experiential Teaching Modules</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2017 Canadian Engineering Education Association Conference (CEEA17), Toronto, Ontario</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.v0i0.9414</style></url></web-urls></urls><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anjida Sripongworakul</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Project Management in Capstone Design Courses: Student Choices of Current Technologies</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2016 Capstone Design Conference, Columbus, Ohio</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar Nespoli</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Student Perceptions of Value of Peer and Instructor Feedback in Capstone Design Review Meetings.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2016 Capstone Design Conference, Columbus, Ohio. </style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Erin Jobidon</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andrea Prier</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Taghi Khaniyev</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Chris Rennick</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rania Al-Hammoud</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carol Hulls</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jason Grove</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Samar Mohamed</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stephanie Johnson</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sanjeev Bedi</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Towards a Multi-Disciplinary Teamwork Training Series for Undergraduate Engineering Students: Development and Assessment of Two First-Year Workshops.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of ASEE's 123rd Annual Conference &amp; Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar G. Nespoli</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Two-Dimensional Typology for Characterizing Student Peer and Instructor Feedback in Capstone Design Project Courses.</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of ASEE's 123rd Annual Conference &amp; Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">William Bishop</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Benny Mantin</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sanjeev Bedi</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">An Experiential Learning Activity to Promote Skill Development in First Year Engineering Students</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">roceedings of the 2015 Canadian Engineering Education Association Conference (CEEA15), Hamilton, Ontario</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Oscar Nespoli</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Peer Review in Capstone Design Courses: An Implementation Using Progress Update Meetings</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%"> International Journal of Engineering Education</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://www.ijee.ie/latestissues/Vol31-6B/08_ijee3109ns.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">31</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1799-1809</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;
	Peer review of design progress and artifacts is not very common in engineering design education. Yet, the broader educational literature suggests that the impact of peer (novice) review can be superior to instructor (expert) only review in various ways. This paper describes a systematic implementation of face-to-face peer review in progress update meetings(PUMs) of a management engineering capstone design series of courses. In biweekly PUMs the instructors met jointly with two teams at a time, paired based on topic similarity. Teams took turns presenting to and critiquing each other’s presentations and design progress. The format was well-received by students and was successful in increasing the diversity and wealth of knowledge teams could draw from during the meetings. A student survey revealed that students perceived that the regular joint PUMs encouraged them to maintain a steady progress in their design projects, facilitated peer-to-peer sharing of ideas, and were instrumental in helping teams improve on how they communicated their designs by providing multiple opportunities for revisions and refinement.
&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6(B)</style></issue></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Parmit Chilana</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Celena Alcock</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Shruti Dembla</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anson Ho</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Brett Armstrong</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Philip J. Guo</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Perceptions of non-CS majors in intro programming: The rise of the conversational programmer</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC)</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IEEE </style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Atlanta, GA, USA </style></pub-location><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Quantitative Model of Perception of Randomness in Structured Space</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Unpublished Doctoral Thesis</style></work-type></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>10</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Hurst</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Joint Progress Update Meetings in Capstone Design Courses: Encouraging Peer Review and Cooperative Learning</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Proceedings of the 2014 Capstone Conference, Columbus, Ohio. </style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ada Zacaj</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gender Differences in Engineering Education: An Exploratory Study</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2010</style></year></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Unpublished Master's Thesis</style></work-type></record></records></xml>