77 Matching Results
EXEMPLAR CARD
By Bill Kline (In Memoriam), Bill Kline (In Memoriam) Doug Melton Doug Melton
What if every engineering graduate approached their work by focusing first on CREATING VALUE? Engineering solutions would inherently become more impactful to the beneficiaries, presumably collections of individuals, customers, citizens, and society as a whole. What if CREATING VALUE became a graduate's mental habit, part of their perceived locus of control, and an instinctual driver? Indeed, that's the aspirational goal of partner institutions in KEEN.This card is about understanding CREATING VALUE in depth and within the context of an entrepreneurial mindset. The KEEN Framework provides a starting point for two student outcomes related to creating value. Students should:Identify unexpected opportunities to create extraordinary value,Persist through and learn from failure. Alternately, the CREATING VALUE outcomes might be phrased as questions. Students achieving these outcomes will ask:"Do my solutions merely solve an apparent problem, missing an opportunity?""What solutions would be most valuable? In other words, how is 'value' contextualized? To whom, and does my solution satisfy a long-term need?""What can I learn from my setbacks and mistakes? What should I have done differently? What will I do differently next time?"Because the term "creating value" has such broad meaning, this list is not intended to provide a complete definition. Rather, within KEEN, the following forms a "starter set" for creating-value-related outcomes.To reach these outcomes, design exercises so that students:Become observers of unmet needs, empathetic ethnographersHabitually reframe problems as opportunitiesAsk questions that reveal authentic demandDevelop archetype users of engineering solutionsOffer solutions to problems, testing novel ideas with others to obtain formative feedbackCreate value from underutilized resourcesExtend existing solutions to new situations If habitually creating value is going to become part of a mindset, part of a disposition, then the goal of educational interventions is to create mental habits, akin to mental muscle-memory, that has an inclination to identify the value proposition of proposed work.To dive deeper, here's a sampling of directions that you might take CREATING VALUE:For Your Toolbox: A Process That Helps Establish a Mindset to First Focus on Creating ValueThe practice of specific skills can help establish a mindset, and a mindsets shapes the potential application of those skills. As heard recently "We don’t think ourselves into a new way of acting, we act ourselves into a new way of thinking." In the card titled Creating Value Means Going Beyond Problem Solving, author Bill Kline offers a tool that gets students thinking about features of a product or system, and about stakeholders, even unexpected ones. The process leads to a comparison of the features in terms of value, i.e. preferred by stakeholders. The process start focuses students on the essential ideas and conversations. With practice, the ideas are likely to become integral to the way engineers think about their role as an engineer, part of a mindset.Action Required: Creating and Delivering ValueWhen interviewed about her writing, the late, wise-cracking American detective author, Sue Grafton, offered a truism that equally applies to entrepreneurial thinking. She said, "Ideas are easy. It's the execution of ideas that really separates the sheep from the goats." In other words, actual value creation implies complete follow through, including execution of a process to deliver value. You might want to explore this idea in through a chapter of The Coming Jobs War by the CEO of Gallup organization, Jim Clifton. The author's opinions on the topic of delivering value are captured in the chapter controversially titled "Why Entrepreneurs Matter More Than Innovators." An Interesting Classroom Conversation: The Meaning of "Value"You can't talk very long or very deeply about "creating value," without addressing what "value" means. One definition is the ratio of benefits to sacrifice (in dollar, time, effort, etc.) But who determines benefits? Embracing the discussion leads to a rich discussion of perspectives, some conflicting or in tension. If you decide to lead a discussion about value, try highlighting at least two perspectives an let students explore that tension. Here are a few suggested questions to kick off the conversation with students:Extrinsic Value: A Market-based DeterminationQ: How do you determine what is valuable to others? Is value based upon what someone is willing to pay?Q: More specifically, how could we determine the value of things that are less utilitarian, say art and culture? Is the value of a work of art only based upon what the market will bear?Q: More pointedly, is the determination of value solely the purview of the customer (stakeholder, market)?Q: What are the benefits and drawback of a market-based view of value?Intrinsic Value: From The Heart of Ethics and PhilosophyYour students might enjoy a discussion that has caused debate among philosophers for millennia. What has intrinsic value? It's an important question for engineers, especially as they emphasize creating value, were the determination of value involves judgment about what is good. Student discussions are likely most valuable when they afford the opportunity to introduce philosophy, ethics and research data.Q: As professionals, we are constantly making decisions about our engineering solutions. How do we decide what is good for an individual? Good for society?Q: Since antiquity, people have offered the ingredients for human flourishing and well-being. Recent examples include the Subjective Well Being indicator, the Gallup organization's measurement of five elements of well-being, and the area of research dubbed "Happiness Economics." Let's try to assess the impact on well-being to our particular topic in engineering. When thinking about the value of our work on [e.g. wireless communications] , would you discuss how it is connected to human flourishing and well-being?Perception is Quirky: Value in Behavioral EconomicsBehavioral economics differs from traditional economic theory by introducing the human element of economic decision making. Economic decisions are not entirely based upon a traditional utilitarian value, but rather, are influenced by identifiable psychological behaviors, often associated with a contextualized relative perception of value. Behavioral economists suggest that people employ a mental-computational engine that's constantly performing a rough estimate of the return-on-investment for a large majority of daily decisions for routine and non-routine situations. The results are routinely skewed based on context and biases. It's quirky and whether illogical or not, influences value (of the extrinsic type described above).See the folders below for the following:(more coming soon)An expanded description of the creating-value-related outcomesResearch references and perspectives on creating valueOne short example of "creating value" in curriculumA collection of websites and other cards that you can use to promote "creating value" within your educational goals
CARD
By Meg West, Meg West Rachel Kajfez Rachel Kajfez
With this work, we aimed to assess student development of an entrepreneurial mindset using the 3Cs (creating value, curiosity, and connections) individually. To do this, we assess each of the 3Cs directly and indirectly. This card is a presentation of the direct assessment of creating value we have created. In the future, we will provide links to other cards that present the other 3Cs assessments as needed. The Assessment The creating value direct assessment consists of a prompt and a rubric. The prompt asks students to do the following: Brainstorm and identify a communication platform to be used by an engineering teamIdentify value categories (e.g. economic, social, environmental, etc.)Identify stakeholders (e.g. engineering team, communication platform owners, etc.)Identify the value for each stakeholder in each corresponding value category Students are asked to complete each step individually using the provided Excel spreadsheet. Steps 2 through 4 are completed within a matrix format, see the example below. The rubric assesses student ability to complete each component of the prompt (steps 1 through 4) on a 4-point mastery scale (accomplished – 3, emerging – 2, developing – 1, inadequate – 0). Each component of the prompt is mapped to the EM learning outcomes creating by The Ohio State University (see Learning Objectives section below). Use Of Assessment This assessment is used to track students' ability to create value over time. We will implement the assessment in both first-year design courses and capstone courses at our institution. This will allow us to track progress longitudinally and will give us insights into the effectiveness of EML integration into these courses. We have also integrated this assessment into TA training to gauge and develop their understanding of creating value before entering the classroom to aid students in EML activities.
An engineering education with emphasis on employing an entrepreneurial mindset includes value creation, which improves the odds of career and product design success.
CARD
By Michael Johnson Michael Johnson
I created this card to categorize and link to KEEN'zine articles that highlight specific elements of each of the 3C's. Articles may show up in multiple folders, so keep an eye out for that as you click through and read. Please use the comment section below to ask any questions that come up when reading the articles. Also, if I missed tagging an article, please comment and let me know through the comments. Happy reading!
CARD
By Bill Kline (In Memoriam), Bill Kline (In Memoriam) Doug Melton Doug Melton
The increasing complexity of the challenges facing our society and world suggests that engineering graduates must be outstanding problem solvers, designers, and value creators in a variety of settings. The solutions, designs, and systems created must solve technical problems and provide benefit to a variety of stakeholders who may have broad interests in financial, social, and environmental outcomes.Engineering education often focuses on the quantitative skills of problem solving yet solutions to many of the most challenging problems require higher level design, entrepreneurial mindset, and value creation skills. The opportunity to create value, or to fail to, occurs in many settings with engineers commonly called upon to create value in design settings. While being a good designer is a hallmark trait of an engineer, current approaches to teaching design need improvement because a high percentage of products and services introduced to the marketplace fail to find success. An engineering education with emphasis on employing an entrepreneurial mindset would improve the odds of success. Applying methods from systems engineering, this work extends the idea of developing a product to developing a successful solution within a system. That system includes stakeholders, features, and a series of views representing the designed system or product. It is shown that these results are highly complementary to existing conceptions of ‘creating value’ as part of the 3 C’s. Tools and views are presented for classroom use to support the 'creating value' objective through case studies of successful and unsuccessful products. Results from a first run of a class exploring these new approaches are provided in a 2018 ASEE paper.The elements of a ‘value creation’ mindset in an engineering education entrepreneurial context includes:1. Value is a relative concept and is illustrated through selection or choice.2. Creating and capturing value at the enterprise or organizational level can be illustrated in the completeness and alignment of product, business, and execution models. (customer desirability, technically feasible, business viability, organizationally implementable)3. The value of a product or offering can be studied by a. identifying important stakeholders and features and b. developing a product or offering to perform and exhibit the important features identified. 4. Products and systems are successful when they provide capabilities and characteristics that a significant number of stakeholders find attractive and choose over competing options.
CARD
By Ajmal Khan, Ajmal Khan Becky Benishek, Becky Benishek Erin Henslee, Erin Henslee Jacqueline Gartner, Jacqueline Gartner Jim Brenner, Jim Brenner plus 3 more
As presented at ASEE's Virtual Conference 2020 Not sure where to start with entrepreneurially minded learning (EML)? This set of cards (linked below) provides take & go resources that canvass the 3C's - Curiosity, Connections, and Creating Value - as well as Opportunity Recognition. Explore project-based learning (PBL), social and global biases, customer discovery, jigsaw activities, universal design, and more. These techniques can be connected to EML - and you can learn how through the cards below. Included are Exemplar cards that span all 3C's and Opportunity Recognition. There is one Exemplar card for each year to provide further help in using and adapting activities for your students.And there's a bonus card in the last folder: How Analogies Fit in a Framework for Supporting the Entrepreneurial Mindset.
CARD
By Kimberly Demoret Kimberly Demoret
A lecture and assignment describes the entrepreneurial mindset and other issues to consider when defining capstone topics. "Connections" are discussed in the context of Steven Johnson's book, "Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural History of Innovation". Students must write an assignment that references the Strategyzer value proposition canvas. Several relevant videos are in the slides and folder below.These materials were used in the Aerospace Capstone Design program, where some projects are defined by students.
CARD
By Doug Melton Doug Melton
When can you exclaim "BINGO! This creates value!" or even tell your students what value creation means?  asks Dr. Doug Melton. The notion of a value-creation scorecard helps guide my thinking. Faculty and students are more interested than ever in an education that equips them to CREATE VALUE. Through examples, Melton examines a collection of habits of mind that include curiosity, connecting information, and creating value. This keynote presentation frames the 2020 KEEN National Conference in Dallas TX Jan4-6, 2020. The theme is EMphasizing Value, where the EM stands for Entrepreneurial Mindset.
CARD
By Maysam Nezafati, Maysam Nezafati Joe Le Doux, Joe Le Doux Katherine Shook, Katherine Shook Kelvin Pierre Kelvin Pierre
How we used Entrepreneurial Mindset to eliminate bias in design? This card describes the framework of a project, designed for an undergraduate engineering course where students' curiosity is challenged to identify cases of non-inclusive engineering designs and work in teams to propose a solution to the flawed designs using the concepts they learned within the class or outside class. In this assignment, students share their personal experiences of exposure to a biased design as a story with their teammates (see this card) where they discuss the importance and impact of each design, both on a personal and societal level. Potentially a connection could be created between the personal experiences and the topics students choose which acts as an intrinsic motivation tool to work as a team to create value for the negatively affected people. Our experience from piloting the project in an engineering course:This project provides a platform for any engineering student to demonstrate their 3Cs. For the first time this assignment was executed in a major-required second-year analytically-focused biomedical engineering course called “Conservation Principles in Biomedical Engineering”; but the scope of resources shared here, can be customized for any engineering course. Also, based on class size, available infrastructures in the institutions, and format of the class (virtual, in-person, or hybrid) the instructors can modify the logistics or pace of the project phases. The quality of the artifacts significantly improved when students worked as groups of four. To evaluate the effectiveness of integrating EM using this project two implementation schedule was used. In the first approach the project was executed in two consecutive weeks at the end of semester. In the second approach, the project was dispersed through the semester. Both students and instructors found the second method more effective. Project's structure:Preparation: Brainstorming: students are asked to work on their own to look for examples of non-inclusive (biased, flawed) designs. Story 1 (motivation): they share a case of a flawed design that personally affected them or a loved one. In this story, they identify whom the existing process or design was intended to create value for, how bias affected the design, and how this impacted the person they are reflecting about. By having students tell a personal story we hope to make the impact of non-inclusive designs seem more real to them and to increase their motivation and sense of connection to the project. Phase 1:Case study: each student on the team shares their ideas for what they can work on together as a team. The team is tasked with identifying a flawed non-inclusive engineering design they’d like to learn more about and then developing a case study designed to inform and motivate members of the lay public about the flawed design and affected people. Story 2: each team member should write a creative story that illustrates, in an emotionally evocative and concrete way, how the flawed design (the one that they studied) has negatively impacted an individual or group of people. Phase 2:Proposal: the team create an engineering proposal for how to rectify the shortcomings of the existing design. To complete the second report, students use the engineering skills learned in the course to analyze the original design and to propose a new solution or a modification to the existing design, that will create value for the individuals who were not well-served by the original design. The objective of this part of the project is to allow students to see how the skills they have learned in the course can help them better understand how the design works, as well as how to improve it. Story 3: each team member should write a hypothetical story about a positive transformation that can happen to the affected user, if the proposal's modifications are executed successfully. This story should have technical details and have a professional audience. Presentation: (TED talk meets elevator pitch) the students present their work in a 2 minutes pitch presentation, addressing what was the value they created? why they think that is important? How they they want to solve the issue?
Summary: This activity is designed for capstone and other in-depth design classes where students tend to jump in to building projects which don’t create meaningful value for their client. This activity outlines how to have students develop hypotheses about how their project will create value, then interview users and clients, using the data they collect to test and refine their value propositions. While this activity works amazingly well to get students to think divergently about projects, and even pivot the direction they are pursuing, doing it well is quite time consuming so it is really only appropriate for long-term projects such as those found in capstone design courses.Background: Studies of how most students (who are novice designers) approach design finds they tend to want to jump in to building something, even if what they want to build doesn’t really meet the needs of their client or create lasting value. This activity is designed to interfere with this “design freezing” mindset and is appropriate for capstone and other longer-term design projects where students want to jump right into building a design project without first understanding how their work will create value for the client. Rather than a pre-packaged method, complete with exercises to hand out the goal of this card is give you some ideas to address how to to get teams to focus more explicitly on creating value. Please modify or adapt these materials to suit your needs.Caution: If your course has teams create products to tight specifications dictated by a client, this method may not be suitable. Rather it is appropriate in the case that a client has blinders on due to the fact that they are deeply embedded in the problem space or looks at a project through the lens of their own experience. Duration & Approach: This long-term (4-8 week) activity is designed to help student design teams explore a project idea from multiple perspectives before investing time, energy, and resources in creating a solution. To create value in a design project, students should be able to think divergently and thoroughly explore the problem space before they can begin to converge on a design that creates value. The issue that often arises is that students lack the experience to really understand the boundaries of the design space in which they will work. Since many students have little real-world experience a key aspect of design is to see a project from others’ perspectives. The approach outlined here has student teams identify project stakeholders then go into the community and conduct interviews to explore how the project they will eventually build creates value for various users. This approach is adapted from Steve Blank’s lean startup model.To understand how their project addresses (or fails to address) stakeholder needs, students first create a handwritten representation of their project called a stakeholder-feature model. This diagram has a team hypothesize what features will create value and which stakeholders the features will have value for. Using this diagram students use a semi-structured interview protocol to identify and test the (often unstated) hypotheses that are built in to the stakeholder-feature model. Students pair up to conduct interviews with potential stakeholders, and use the interview data to refine their model and identify how their project does or does not create value for their identified stakeholder.Benefits & Resources: The benefit to this approach is that students create hypotheses about how their project creates value and then test these hypotheses by interact directly from users of their design. The hypotheses are initially derived from the stakeholder-feature diagram but as students conduct interviews new hypotheses should emerge. The evidence they gather has been very effective in getting students to “unfreeze” their design thinking and pivot the direction of their project. Since this experience is uncommon in undergraduate engineering courses it also helps distinguish graduates. The largest drawback is that each interview is conducted by two students and takes about an hour on average, not including the time needed to find and contact interviewees. Thus there is a significant opportunity cost in terms of time in the course. While it is not focused on explicitly in this exercise, much of the information students will discover exists independently and could be discovered through reports by market research firms. Other information is in the broader literature and students who have strong research skills may be able to forego some of the interviews. In the author’s experience, however, while time effective library research is not as effective as talking to people. Note also that some programs may envision their graduates working in established firms where customer discovery is not as important. In this case the skills developed in discovering value in order to create it may not be seen as important and this exercise not have a workable cost-benefit ratio in terms of student time commitment.
EXEMPLAR CARD
By Ajmal Khan, Ajmal Khan Firas Hassan, Firas Hassan Heath LeBlanc, Heath LeBlanc Khalid Al-Olimat Khalid Al-Olimat
This card (and associated paper) supports the integration of curiosity, creating connections, and creating value (the 3Cs) of the entrepreneurial mindset in an electric circuits course with a lab component. We describe how a few key modifications that are reinforced continuously throughout the course can transform the course to support the 3Cs. Each of the 3Cs is targeted by a specific approach. Look at the Course Structure section for copies of the syllabus and course schedule to see how the entrepreneurially minded learning (EML) activities fit in the scope of the course. Curiosity is targeted through the formulation of exploratory questions and deeper exploration of those questions. For each lecture topic, a question has been generated by the instructor designed to stimulate student thought and to show students examples of good questions designed for deeper exploration of the topics. The first couple of minutes of class is spent discussing how the question is graded across five dimensions: grammar, clarity, relevance, topic orientation and potential for depth of exploration. Students submit their own sets of exploratory questions three times throughout the course. A single point formative assessment rubric has been created to provide students feedback on their questions. A brief research paper is assigned that requires students to formulate an exploratory question, identify at least one credible and relevant source to use to explore the topic of the question, identify new questions that arise during the research process, and report their findings. It is important for students to demonstrate they are aware of what they do not know by formulating follow-up questions during the research. Doing so demonstrates an ability for students to engage in effective self-study, which supports life-long learning. Students complete the short report with an assessment of their sources found during the research process. Look at the Curiosity-Related Activities section below for copies of the exploratory question rubric and brief research paper assignment. The conference presentation provided in the 2019 ASEE Conference Paper Link and Presentation section provides examples of questions scored on the rubric that are shared with students. Connections is targeted by circuit analogies related to more familiar topics. Connecting new topics to established student knowledge is a well-researched pedagogical approach firmly grounded in the science of learning. A dozen novel circuit analogies are provided in the paper (and even more are in the presentation) that are used in the course. An analogy reflection assignment is given that allows students to select either one of the analogies given throughout the course or to create their own analogy that connects the circuit content to a life experience or other topic. In either case, students are required to describe the underlying deep structure that is shared between the source and target of the analogy. It has been shown that students who partake in the exercise of identifying deep structure between analogs are more capable of transferring knowledge to novel situations. Look at the 2019 ASEE Conference Paper Link and Presentation section below for the presentation that provides the images used with the analogies that are presented to students. Also, look at the Connections-Related Activities sections for a copy of the analogy reflection assignment. Creating value is targeted through a circuit design-build-test project that requires a value proposition. Students are organized into interdisciplinary groups to design and build a temperature sensing circuit that utilizes a thermistor and meets certain design constraints but is open-ended in terms of the application, or need. Students are required to identify an important need or application for their temperature sensing circuit. They must justify the need through relevant market data and submit the idea for the need in a problem framing deliverable. Students also submit an individual design solution along with the problem framing document for formative feedback. The final proposal for the project has a value proposition section in which students summarize the value created by their design. Two suppliers must be identified and a cost comparison must be submitted in the final proposal. For more details on the design-build-test project, look at the Creating Value-Related Activities section for a copy of the project handout and rubric used for grading the final reports.
Creating value is any engineer's most important credential. When you focus on creating value, you'll connect to a passion and to people you might not have as you pursue valuable work.
Harnessing the creativity of the entrepreneurial mindset means having leaders in engineering who understand the value of curiosity, connections, and creating value.
Integrating Curriculum With Entrepreneurial Mindset introduces faculty to the framework of entrepreneurially minded learning centered on curiosity, connections, and creating value.
Integrating Curriculum With Entrepreneurial Mindset introduces faculty to the framework of entrepreneurially minded learning centered on curiosity, connections, and creating value.
What do we mean by an entrepreneurial mindset? It is a habit of mind. Learn how we equip engineering students to identify opportunities and create value.
Harnessing the creativity of the entrepreneurial mindset means having leaders in engineering who understand the value of curiosity, connections, and creating value.
An entrepreneurial mindset (EM) is a collection of mental habits. These include an attentiveness toward opportunities and a focus on their impact, all with the intention of creating value. Learn how EM can impact your students.
In an educational setting it is vital that we as educators are able to assess our learning outcomes and effectively measure student progress towards those objectives. With that being said, what can educators do when they trying to instill a characteristic that they don’t know how to asses? The engineering entrepreneurship community is tackling this issue head on, as the increasing popularity of injecting an entrepreneurial mindset into the engineering curriculum has brought some of these “hard-to-assess” traits into the spotlight. While the KEEN framework has provided a valuable communication tool around which to organize discussion and facilitate action incorporating entrepreneurship into engineering curricula, it has also raised significant questions around assessment of the framework elements. The constructs captured by the framework are beyond the scope of what engineering faculty are accustomed to teaching and assessing. The abstracted and conceptually overlapping nature of the framework elements further worsens this discomfort. Having a fully vetted example of how the framework might be digested into defined, assessable pieces would be of tremendous value to the network. The purpose of this work is, therefore, to address the need for applied assessment of the KEEN Entrepreneurial Mindset and to explore how the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) VALUE Rubrics might fill these gaps.The first goal for this work was to review the applicability of VALUE rubrics. The guiding research question for this phase was: Are the VALUE Rubrics applicable in regards to assessing the Entrepreneurial Mindset that KEEN promotes? Secondly, after this initial review, the rubric components deemed most applicable were extracted and the goal shifted to answering the question: How might the components of the VALUE Rubrics be reorganized around the elements of the KEEN Framework? Finally, after a thorough review of the resulting rubrics, the question again shifted to: How might these reorganized rubrics be modified and/or appended to better evaluate the KEEN Framework?A set of three rubrics has been developed based on a modification of the sixteen VALUE rubrics, reframed to fit the KEEN Framework. As previously stated, there are gaps in each of the three rubrics, some with more than others. Work is still needed to distribute, revise, and polish the text of the rubric rows, as well as to evaluate gaps in the rubric coverage. Additionally, while direct application of these exemplars is not the intended use case, there are some faculty who may opt to do so. Significant work remains in terms of validation of the rubrics. While they have been developed from highly reliable and validated source material, some revalidation is necessary to ensure good reliability and applicability of the rubrics as redesigned. This work was initially presented at ASEE 2019, as part of the ENT division.
EXEMPLAR CARD
By sri condoor sri condoor
This CardDeck links to a variety of innovation challenges developed by Saint Louis University.  The goal of the innovation challenges is to promote the entrepreneurial mindset through multiple exposures to innovation process in a competitive, multidisciplinary, team-based, creative environment. Just as everyone is encouraged to exercise everyday to keep the body fit, innovation challenges are designed to keep the mind fit. It’s a mind workout. The Innovation Challenges help participants to exercise their creative side, work in multidisciplinary teams, and experience the team dynamics. They learn to tackle a novel situation under intense competitive time pressure, while networking with others outside their disciplines, and most importantly, fine-tuning their entrepreneurial skills. In this CardDeck, each of the challenges are linked in folders below. At the bottom of this card you will find a link to the entire pdf and ibook that features all the challenges in one place. Note: The pdf does not contain rich media like videos and scrolling images. All assets have been uploaded to the individual cards and can be downloaded/viewed.