Personal Characteristics and Design-Related Performances
in a Creative Engineering Design Course
Yong Se Kim*, Byung Gu Kang**
CAD Laboratory, School of Mechanical Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University 300, Chunchun-dong, Jangan-gu Suwon, kyunggi-do, Korea 440-746,
* yskim@me.skku.ac.kr ** lovemaia@skku.edu
Abstract: The Creative Engineering Design (CED) course at Sungkyunkwan University is a design course for freshman engineering students. The objective of the course is to educate engineering students the basic design qualities in creative problem solving. The course provides learning opportunities in pursuing design solutions through collaborative efforts of design team work as well as innovative and effective design ideation methods and design presentation skills. The learning activities are through several design projects, design presentation and critiquing sessions and design-build-test competition. Each student of the class will experience various team work situations, from a single person design assignment to small group quality function deployment project and to bigger group conceptual design project and design-build-test project with all different compositions of the team members.
Various creativity-related tests were conducted on the students of the CED course during 2002. They include a personal creativity mode test, a brain bias test, Torrance test of creative thinking, a brainstorming test, and a visual reasoning test. The personal creativity mode test is the one developed by Professor Wilde of Stanford University based on Jungian creativity theory.
By analyzing the correlations between these test results and various design assignment performances, the interrelations of personal characteristics and design performances could be obtained. Furthermore, these results could be used in educating various design qualities for individual student in a more suitable manner reflecting his or her personal aspects. Also, the design tasks in the course could be organized better to make sure all aspects of design tasks closely related with various design creative modes. This paper will discuss the interrelations of personal characteristics and design performances based on the test results and their implications in design creativity education. Key words: Creative Engineering Design, Personal Creativity Modes, Design Creativity, Team Composition
1. Introduction
The Creative Engineering Design (CED) course at Sungkyunkwan University (SKKU) is a design course for freshman engineering students. The objective of the course is to educate engineering students the basic design qualities in creative problem solving. The course provides learning opportunities in pursuing design solutions through collaborative efforts of design team work as well as innovative and effective design ideation methods and design presentation skills. The learning is done through several design projects. The curriculum starts with a project for freehand sketching in conceptual design. Next, a Quality Function Deployment (QFD) project, where customer requirements are surveyed and critical design requirements are identified as well as critical parts and part features, is conducted using simple products that are familiar to most freshman-level engineering students
such as mechanical pencils. Also a conceptual design project is given where a new product is designed at conceptual level and design presentations and peer critiquing sessions are conducted. Finally, a design-build-test project is conducted where a working prototype is built and evaluated through a competition. Each student of the class will experience various different team work situations, from a single person design assignment to small group quality function deployment project and to bigger group conceptual design project and design-build-test project with all difference compositions of the team members.
In conducting these projects, students acquire learning about the design processes and skills in these processes. Also they have opportunities in learning and using various creative and rational design methods. Furthermore, various tests are performed on students so that personal characteristics and abilities are measured and utilized in forming design teams. These tests include a personal creativity mode test, brain bias test, Torrance test of creative thinking, brainstorming test, and visual reasoning test. The personal creativity mode test is the one developed by Professor Wilde of Stanford University based on Jungian creativity theory.
By analyzing the correlations between these test results and various design assignment performances, the interrelations of personal characteristics and design performances could be obtained. Furthermore, these results could be used in educating various design qualities for individual student in a more suitable manner reflecting his or her personal aspects. Also, the design tasks in the course could be organized better to make sure all aspects of design tasks closely related with various design creative modes. This paper will discuss the interrelations of personal characteristics and design performances based on the test results and their implications in design creativity education. This paper also discusses the team composition aspects using these personal characteristics. 2. Various Creative-Related Tests
A total of five different tests have been conducted in CED. The outcome of these tests are used in identifying personal characteristics and performances.
2.1 Personal Creativity Mode Test
The personal creativity mode test is the one developed by Professor Wilde of Stanford University. This test is to be referred to as Wilde test in this paper. Wilde test has been used at Stanford in composing design teams in project-based design courses. Wilde test is based on Jungian creativity theory. The personal creative modes are intrinsically related with the personal cognitive preference [Wilde & Labno 01]. Based on the cognitive theory of Jung, personal cognitive preferences can be identified based on four aspects, perceiving/judging preference, factual/conceptual perception, thinking/feeling judgment, and introverted/extroverted cognitive motivation. With these cognitive preferences, eight different modes of creativity can be identified as shown in Table 1. By further partitioning each mode into two and including two central ones, a total of 18 design team roles have been determined and associated with the personal cognitive preference modes as shown in Fig. 1 [Wilde 99].
In Wilde test, personal preference information on four areas of Introverted/Extroverted (I/E), iNtuitive/Sensing (N/S), Feeling/Thinking (F/T), and Perceptive/Judging (P/J) is obtained as well as principal interest and direction classification in perception domain as shown in Fig. 2. Also from the four area scores, Gough Creative Index (GCI) can be obtained. GCI is a creativity index derived from personal cognitive preference information of well known creative people [Gough 81], [Wilde 93].
At Stanford, Wilde test has been used in composing design teams so that the design team roles are distributed as evenly as possible for all the teams. As a way to verify the utility of this team composition method, they used the design team performances in a typical design competition as reflected in the quantity and the quality of the awards Stanford design teams received [Wilde 99], [Wilde & Fukuda 01].
Table 1. The eight personal creative modes [Wilde & Labno 01]
Fig. 1 Team Roles [Wilde 99]
2.2 Brain Bias Test
Brain Bias Test is based on the split-brain research of Dr. Roger Sperry [Carter & Russell 01]. According to his research, main features of left brain are parsing, successive or sequential, logical expression, focal perception, analytical, aggressive, sense of time, literal, linguistic/symbolic, verbal intelligence, intellect, quantifiable knowledge, and mathematical calculation. In short, left brain deals with conscious thought, logical analysis, outer awareness, use of language, method, and rules. On the other hand, main features of right brain are holistic, simultaneous, gestalt expression, oriented awareness, synthetic, passive present-mindedness, metaphorical, configurational, practical intelligence, sensuousness, experiential knowledge, and apprehension of patterns. In short, right brain deals with subconscious thought, emotional reaction, inner awareness, use of intuition, and creativity [Carter & Russell 01], [Jaušovec 99], [Sperry 74], [Kim & Kim 02].
Abridged form of the test in Workout for a Balanced Brain [Carter & Russell 01] was used for brain bias test. This test shows how much (very high, high, increased, or slight) left brain biased and how much right brain biased the subject is. This test includes different kinds of tests, each designed to address a different facet of the brain. It is composed of tests named spatial awareness, missing piece, psychometric, numerical, visual analogy, speed, visual classification, little puzzles, verbal, visual sequence, visual shapes, word definition, visual creativity, agility of mind, and verbal analogy. The result of the brain bias test showed that about half of the subjects were more left brain biased and the other half were more right brain biased.
2.3 Torrance Test of Creative Thinking
Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) is a creativity test based on the divergent thinking creativity theory of Guilford [Guilford 86]. In TTCT creativity test, ‘creative thinking abilities’ is defined as ‘the constellation of generalized mental abilities’ when creative achievement is practiced. TTCT tests creativity using 5 norm-referenced measures (fluency, originality, abstractness of titles, elaboration, and resistance to premature closure) and checklist of 13 criterion-referenced measures on creative strengths. TTCT is composed of figural and verbal portions. The figural portion of TTCT has been conducted in CED. The figural TTCT is mainly composed of 3 activities – (1) activity that composes a drawing so that the given curved shape forms a portion of the entire drawing, (2) activity that completes a drawing with given imperfect figures, and (3) activity that makes as many drawings as possible with a set of two lines. Each activity reflects personal inclination about respective characteristics of creative thinking [Torrance & Ball 84], [Torrance 90].
2.4 Brainstorming Test
Brainstorming tests were conducted for teams of 4-5 students. In the spring semester of 2002, three types of teams were assembled based on brain bias test results. A total of 24 teams were assembled with three types; teams of left brain-biased students, teams of right brain-biased students, and mixed teams. Four brainstorming problems were given to each team so that more complicated problems were given as they solve the problems [Kim & Kim 02].
In the fall semester of 2002, brainstorming teams were formed based on the perception direction results of Wilde test. Teams with four students were composed either of students with exclusively distinctive directions or of students with the same directions for two or more students. The brainstorming problems given is a sort of bug list type where the students discuss about problems of consumer electronic products and then brainstorm methods to remedy the most severe problems identified in the preceding session.
2.5 Visual Reasoning Test
The ability of a design engineer to visualize and reason about geometric aspects of physical objects and processes is crucial to the success of their professional activities. The essential relation between design creativity and visual reasoning has been argued by many design educators [McKim 72] and creativity researchers. Udall argued that the capability to see and integrate objects in various viewpoints (the lifting operation in mathematical jargon) is a decisive factor for design creativity [Udall 96]. More recently, constructive perception, the ability to coordinate perception of subtle features and relations in the external environment and conceptual generation of ideas and interpretations, has been proposed to form the foundations for design creativity, and this ability was measured by the capability of generating many interpretations of ambiguous drawings with some missing elements [Suwa & Tversky 01]. We believe there are many common aspects in constructive perception and visual reasoning processes.
As a way to test the student’s capability in visual reasoning before they receive any form of education on the matter, we conducted a simple test composed of relating orthographic projections and pictorial projections of polyhedral solid objects. For example, so-called missing view problems have been given to the students without much explanation on how to solve the problems but with a very general introduction on perspective projection and orthographic projections. We wanted to test the student’s uneducated visual reasoning capability as we tested their brain bias and personality. The missing view problem requires visually constructing a valid 3-D solid object by visually analyzing two 2-D orthographic projections, and forms the foundations of visual reasoning processes (See Fig.3 for an example of missing view problem). Though not used in CED course yet, we are developing an intelligent tutoring system for visual reasoning so that a self-paced adaptive learning of visual reasoning can be possible [Kim et al 01].
Fig. 3 Example of a Missing View Problem
3. Team Formation Using Personal Creativity Mode Test
Wilde’s personal creativity mode test provides personal cognitive attitudes on four aspects of I/E, N/S, F/T, and P/J, graphical representations of personal design creativity modes in both perception and judgment domains, principal interest, and direction information in perception domain. Three different team composition methods have been devised by Professor Wilde [Wilde & Fukuda 01].
z Phase 1 : Students are classified into three preference groups based on the personal creativity mode test, and the teams are formed so that each team will have all three preference groups. This was done using only the perception directions [Wilde & Fukuda 01].
Top View
Front View Side View
Solid (pictorial view) ?
z Phase 2 : Considering both perception and judgment domains, teams are composed so that as many team roles as possible can be acquired in all the teams [Wilde 99].
z Phase 3 : A more sophisticated composition method devised by Professor Wilde and implemented at Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Technology uses major conscious creative mode and minor conscious creative mode as well as four unconscious cognitive modes derived from creativity modes [Wilde & Fukuda 01]. In CED at SKKU, teams for conceptual design project and for design-build test project were composed using Wilde methods; phase 1 was used for conceptual design project, and phase 2 for design-build-test project.
4. Result of Experiment
The experiments used in this paper were conducted in CED classes of 2002 spring and fall semesters and 2003 spring semester. In finding interrelations of the experiments results, we used statistical methods using correlation coefficient analysis, average scores, and some specific results with distinctive characteristics.
Brain Bias and Brainstorming
From the results of the spring semester of 2002, average brainstorming scores are high for the teams with left brain-biased students (94.8/100); low for the teams with right brain-biased students (69.1/100); medium for mixed teams (81.9/100). The scores for each team were computed on the basis that the score of the team with the most ideas is scored 100.
The roles of the left brain are related with conscious thought, logical analysis, outer awareness, use of language, method, and rules [Carter & Russell 01]. This has been verified in the brainstorming test. Noting that the correlation coefficients for brain bias and the number of ideas in brainstorming were 0.23 in 2002 spring, and 0.26 in 2002 fall, the relation between left brain –bias and brainstorming is quite strong.
Visual Reasoning
The right brain is responsible for subconscious thought, emotional reaction, inner awareness, and use of intuition [Carter & Russell 01]. Visual reasoning is strongly related with the role of the right brain as shown in Table 3. This has been confirmed in Spring 2003 with correlation coefficient higher than 0.3.
Table 3. Result of Brain Bias Test and Visual Reasoning Test
The belief that visual reasoning capability is strongly related with design creativity can be supported by the GCI scores obtained from the personal creativity mode test. Note that the average GCI scores of those with high visual reasoning test scores are much higher as shown in Fig. 4 although the correlation coefficients for visual reasoning test and GCI are not high enough. Also the design performance results, such as sketch and 3D puzzle design, of those with high visual reasoning test scores as shown in Fig. 4 indicate that visual reasoning is crucial in design.
Fig. 4 Analysis of the VRT
The analysis results of TTCT show that the Creativity Index (CI) of TTCT and brainstorming performance have high correlation coefficients; 0.26 in 2002 spring, and 0.29 in fall 2002. Also the elaboration capability of 5 norm-referenced measure of TTCT and the home guidance assignment of CED have high correlation coefficients; 0.23 in fall 2002, and 0.27 in spring 2003. This supports that the home guide assignment requires elaboration capability in making a good explanation for others. In this way, we can concur that the design performances and personal characteristics identified through various tests could be related.
5. Discussion about Team Formation
In composing the design teams in a class environment, there is a principle to be abided by, though it may present obstacles in understanding the effects of team composition methods. Pedagogical aspects have higher priority than research aspects. As all the class activities are related with their course grades, we can not intentionally control the team formation as needed to identify some findings. Thus for all deliberate team formation cases, we made our best efforts to compose the teams so that all the teams are evenly well-composed. Only for relatively small tasks in the course even the otherwise usual, team formation method of random composition was used.
Relation between Contribution/Satisfaction and Perception Directions
In Fall 2002, team composition of phase 1 [Wilde 97] was used for conceptual design project, and team composition of phase 2 [Wilde 99] was used for design-build-test project. At the end of the projects, satisfaction level and contribution level of each member of all the teams have been surveyed. This indicates some useful findings. In the satisfaction survey of 2002 Fall, the students gave the satisfaction score with range from 1 to 5, where satisfaction score 5 indicates the highest satisfaction level, 1 indicates the lowest. For each team, average satisfaction level is shown together with the composition of the team in terms of perception directions.
It can be shown that the teams with a student of the south direction have lower level of average satisfaction, 3.85, compared with other teams, 4.29. That is, those teams without south direction characteristics have higher satisfaction level overall. Note that the south direction corresponds to the experiential creativity, with characteristics of going out and directly experiencing the world realistically, responding quickly to changes, fitting in with the actual situation. It could be argued that designing only at conceptual level would not fit those with south direction characteristics, and that this may contribute in a negative manner.
The results of various tests for the students who indicated very low satisfaction level (satisfaction ≤2) is shown in Table 4. Note that five out of six students with very low satisfaction have a process variable of people-oriented feeling based on emotion in judgment domain [Wilde & Labno 01]. Note, however, that their design performance scores are not at all bad, and their contribution level was relatively high. It could be argued that these students might have exaggerated dissatisfaction about the fact that they contributed more than other team members possibly due to their personal nature.
Table 4. Low Satisfaction
Relation between Creativity Mode and Design Roles
An interesting finding is obtained from the data about the real design performances as shown in Table 5. The contribution level of each student in each project has been surveyed by combining the levels of contribution each student claims and the other team members judge. Contribution score of 1 indicates that the level of contribution of the student is at the average level of the entire members of the team. Those with the strategist principal interest have high performance scores and high contributions in the conceptual design projects, while those with the mockup maker principal interest have high performance scores in the design-build-test projects. That is, the roles of the strategists are important in conceptual design projects, while those of the mockup makers are important in the projects where working prototypes are to be built. This justifies the principal interests defined based on the personal creativity mode test [Wilde 99].
Team Composition and Design Performance
By using the performance results of the QFD project for which teams were composed in a random manner, the utility of the team composition methods using personal creativity modes can be justified. Note that random team composition is the typical method used in most other design courses. The missing design roles of the QFD teams of the spring semester of 2003 are shown in Fig. 5 for only the teams with high or low performance scores. For example, only two roles (strategist and simulation) out of 16 roles are missing in team 6. As can be seen in Fig. 5, the teams with high performance scores have more roles covered in the teams, while the teams with low scores have many roles missing.
Table 5. Result between Interest and Grade
Fig. 5 Result of QFD
6. Summary and Conclusions
We have described the findings on various personal characteristics test results and design performances of a freshman level design course as well as our experiences in composing teams using personal characteristics. The analysis results have implication, on desired personal characteristics and creativity modes for some specific design tasks. For the tasks that require careful explanation, the elaboration aspect of TTCT is related. In producing a large quantity of ideas in a limited time frame while following given rules, those with left brain-bias or those with high TTCT creativity index perform better. For the design tasks requiring geometric and design reasoning (like
3D puzzle design), the students with high visual reasoning test scores and the students with right brain-bias obtained high performance results.
We have confirmed that team composition methods using personal creativity modes are useful and the design roles associated with the personal creativity modes are justifiable at least for some subset of the design roles. Using the satisfaction and contribution surveys for each member of the design teams, some guidance on team composition and understanding of some design roles could be facilitated. These results could form a foundation to develop design education strategies and methods. We envision that methods to enhance specific design creativity modes suitable for specific design tasks could be devised based on further findings of the relations between design performances and personal characteristics.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported in part by the Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea. It is acknowledged that all the hard work of the students of the Creative Engineering Design contributed significantly in obtaining the results described in this paper.
References
[Carter & Russell 01] Carter, P., and Russell, K., Workout for a Balanced Brain : Exercises, Puzzle & Games to Sharpen Both Sides of Your Brain, Quarto Inc, 2001.
[Gough 81] Gough, H. G., Studies of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in a personality assessment research institute, paper presented at the Fourth National Conference on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Stanford University, CA, 1981.
[Guilford 86] Guilford, J.P., Creative talent: Their nature, uses and development, Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited, 1986.
[Jaušovec 99] Jaušovec, N., Brain Biology and Brain Functioning, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Academic Press, pp.203-212, 1999.
[Kim et al 01] Kim, Y. S., Mcroy, S., and Dicker, J., Korea/U.S Collaborative Research on Intelligent Tutoring System for Visual Reasoning in Engineering and Architecture, Proc. Int’l. Conf. Computers in Education, Seoul, Korea, Nov. 2001.
[Kim & Kim 02] Kim, Y. S., and Kim, S. D., Various Creativity-related Test Results from a Creative Engineering Design Course, Notes of Learning and Creativity Workshop, 7th Int’l. Conf. in AI in Design, Cambridge, July. 2002.
[McKim 72] McKim, R., Experiences in Visual Reasoning, Brooks/Cole Publishing Company, Monterey, CA, 1972.
[Sperry 74] Sperry, R. W., Lateral Specialization in the Surgically Separated hemispheres. In Schmitt, F. O., and Worden, F. G., (Eds.), Neurosciences: Third Study Program, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1974.
[Suwa & Tversky 01] Suwa, M., and Tversky, B., Constructive Perception in Design, Computational and Cognitive Models of Creative Design V, Gero, J., and Maher, M. (Eds.), 2001.
[Torrance & Ball 84] Torrance, E.P., and Ball, O. E., Torrance test of creative thinkings: Revised manual, Scholastic Testing Services, Bensenville, IL. 1984.
[Torrance 90] Torrance, E. P., The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-technical manual, Scholastic Testing Service Inc, Bensenville, IL. 1990.
[Udall 96] Udall, N., Creative transformation: A design perspective, Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol.30, No.1, pp.3951. 1996.
[Wilde 93] Wilde, D. J., Changes Among ASEE Creativity Workshop Participants, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol.82, No.3, pp.167-170, July. 1993.
[Wilde 97] Wilde, D. J., Using Student Preferences to Guide Design Team Composition, Proc. ASME Intl. Conf. on Design Theory and Methodology, Sacramento, California, Sep. 1997.
[Wilde 99] Wilde, D. J., Design Team Role, Proc. ASME Intl. Conf. on Design Theory and Methodology, Las Vegas, Sep. 1999.
[Wilde & Labno 01] Wilde, D. J., and Labno, D. B., Personality and the Creative Impulse, unpublished manuscript.
[Wilde & Fukuda 01] Wilde, D. J., and Fukuda, S., A New Phase in Team Construction and Guidance, unpublished manuscript.
