Dancing with Ambiguity –

Design thinking in interdisciplinary engineering education

Ville Taajamaa 1st Author Heikki Sjöman 2nd Author

Information Technology Aalto Digital Design Laboratory
University of Turku Aalto University
Turku, Finland Helsinki, Finland
[Link]@[Link] [Link]@[Link]

Senni Kirjavainen Tuuli Utriainen

Aalto University Design Factory European Organization for Nuclear Research
Aalto University CERN
Helsinki, Finland Meyrin, Switzerland
[Link]@[Link]

Tapio Salakoski
Lauri Repokari Information Technology
Aalto University Design Factory University of Turku
Aalto University Turku Finland
Helsinki, Finland

Abstract 4. Attitude for failing, entrepreneurship

This paper studies two master –level project courses in two The depth and intensity of the learning process is closely
universities that use design thinking processes and problem– linked to the commitment and time spent in the course. These
based learning as the main educational approach in the courses findings are the same irrespective which of the courses is in
in question. One of the courses has been under development since question. There are clear differences as well. The understanding
1969 and another one was launched during 2012. Both are of the need for pragmatic prototyping and tolerance towards
interdisciplinary and multicultural by nature and have an ill- ambiguity is greater in other of the courses, namely the older one.
defined and open-ended real-life problem setting. In this paper This can be partly explained by more tested coaching methods
we examine the two courses impact on the learning results and more mature structure of the course.
concerning working life skills such as communication skills,
teamwork, design thinking, problem solving and an This research is limited to student and teacher perspective of
entrepreneurial mindset. We also seek to understand how these the learning results mentioned above. Industry, university
findings relate to design thinking and problem-based learning administration and other stakeholder opinions and perspectives
theories. For data gathering we used semi-structured interviews, are not in the scope of this paper. One limiting factor for the
study journals and surveys. The data is analyzed and first analysis is also the fact that all of the authors are somehow linked
divided into themes, which are then further analyzed. Research in to the courses in question.
method is close to grounded theory. Altogether 15 alumni and 10
students were interviewed from three different nationalities. We Keywords: design thinking, problem oriented project based
can conclude that in both course structures the students go learning, interdisciplinary engineering education
through a significant learning process that involves learning from
the areas of:

1. Communications, team dynamics, cross-cultural, and

INTRODUCTION
I.
multiple disciplinarity In this paper we illustrate two master’s level
2. Self-discovery, personal growth and team based group
university courses philosophies’ impact on the
work intended learning results [later referred to as ILO’s]
of these courses. The ILO’s concern working life
3. Design process, prototyping, testing and decision-making skills such as communication skills, teamwork,

1
design thinking, problem solving and having an Capstone –course, managed by University of Turku,
entrepreneurial mindset. Also possible similarities Finland is based on CDIO engineering education
and differences of these two project-courses framework [7] with emphasis on interdisciplinary
concerning their impact on different learning results and international dimensions. The courses and their
are studied. The main aim of these courses is to ILO’s are discussed in more detail in the
prepare the students for their future careers [1] and background-chapter of this paper.
offer them necessary skills to succeed. The structure Data was collected using thematic semi-
of both courses is based on design thinking and structured interviews, study journals and surveys.
problem oriented and project based learning [2, 3]. The interviews and surveys were constructed around
Teaching methods are a combination of integrative the following themes: teamwork, problem–solving,
and action–based learning enhancement [4] instead communication and other working-life skills in the
of traditional classroom lecturing. This pilot study courses. The question settings are not 100%
seeks to find out whether we can find recurring identical, as both courses were handled as separate
themes relating to the intended learning outcomes entities, albeit they have the same context and
later presented in data gathered from these two thematic approach.
courses alumni and students, and whether this would
be a fruitful subject for further studies. Fifteen (15) ME310-alumni were interviewed.
They all took part in the course one to eight years
Research methods and the gathered data are ago as a part of their curriculum in their studies in
described in the following chapter after which both Helsinki University of Technology, Helsinki School
of the courses and their background are discussed. of economics and Helsinki School of Art and Design
We also present previous literature on design that subsequently merged into one as Aalto
thinking [later referred to as DT] and problem University in 2010. ME310 interviews were
oriented and project based learning [later referred to conducted retrospectively, during a four-month
as POPBL] [2,3] as they are the two fields of study period from June to August [2013], to find out long-
that form the theoretical frame of this paper. In the term effects of the course. The interview questions
results-chapter the findings concerning the working were formulated with the help of a pre-questionnaire
life skills [5] and other phenomena that rose from answered by 13 current students during the spring
the empiric data are presented. The findings are quarter of 2013. Ten (10) students from University
presented in four groups that are based on thematic of Turku and Fudan University, Shanghai, who were
similarities found in the data. These findings are involved in an international and interdisciplinary
discussed later in a qualitative manner. Finally in Capstone –project sponsored by Hewlett-Packard,
limitations and future research-chapter we discuss Europe were interviewed. Students were from the
the limitations of this study as well as relevant future disciplines of: “microelectronics”, “embedded
research that could be carried out in the field and computing”, “computer science”, “marketing”,
how our findings could be implemented to practice. “finance and accounting”, “future studies”,
“educational sciences” and “east-asian studies”.
Empirical data was gathered in two different
II. METHODS, BACKGROUND AND DATA occasions: in the beginning, and in the latter part of
SOURCES the eight-month project, in January and in May
2013. In addition to the twofold alumni/student
perspective on these courses, teaching team
A. Data collection and analysis members from both courses were invited to reflect in
Empirical data for this paper was gathered from the discussion-chapter of this paper. The interviewed
two different course entities, ME310 –course, which students came from three different nationalities:
was initiated by Stanford University, USA and it has Finnish, Chinese and Serbian [18 + 6 + 1].
had Finnish participants since 2005, and Capstone –
course that is run by University of Turku, Finland Both of the data entities were initially analyzed
[UTU]. ME310 has been up and running since year individually and independently. In the first phase of
1969 and the course aims to “take on real life design the analysis four recurring themes were identified.
challenges brought forth by corporate partners” [6] These themes were such that came up in both data

2
entities. More detailed sub themes were then this kind of wicked challenges, but their education
categorized under these resulting repeated subjects; often leaves them under equipped to do so [25].
“communications, team dynamics, cross-cultural, Depending on the source there are many ways of
and multiple disciplines”, “self–discovery, personal describing the characteristics of the cognitive
growth, working methods, project management, process, which is in the core of design thinking.
development of group work”, “design process (user- Some describe it as abductive [19,26], some
centric design), prototyping, testing, decision integrative [16,18] or divergent balanced by
making” and “mindsets, attitude for failing, convergent thinking [16,18]. All these emphasize the
entrepreneurship”. In the second phase of the importance of creating multiple new solutions to
analysis similarities and differences from the two choose from instead of choosing from existing
data tracks were analyzed. The research method alternatives or creating only one solution to a
used is close to grounded theory [8] but it needs to problem [16,19,18]. Thus the explorative content of
be pointed out that the empirical part of this study is design thinking emerges already on a cognitive level
not substantial enough for a thorough GT process. [9].
Mindset and attitude towards problem solving
B. Design thinking – a combination of thinking, and practices also play an important role in design
acting and having the right mindset thinking. It can be described as explorational and
When discussing product development the term experimentational activity [22] that has a continual
design thinking is often mentioned and discussed, character [16,22] to it. One of the most important
and it is seen as a way of thinking that can tools for experimenting and searching for solutions
significantly enhance the design process and the is prototyping [18] in various ways and from early
outcomes of it [9]. No shared definition seems to on. One aspect that surfaces in various sources is
exist on what design thinking is and what it consists user-centricity [e.g. 22,23,27] and therefore testing
of [10] but most authors agree that design thinking is ones ideas and prototypes with users can be stated to
a way of solving problems that consists of thinking be of importance as well. The outcome of
and acting that together lead to new surprising experimenting and going through rounds of trial and
outcomes [e.g. 11]. According to Simon [12] design error should be learning and identifying directions
thinking is a process consisting of seven stages; for the process - that might not have been taken
defining the problem, researching, ideating, otherwise – while aiming for a significantly new
prototyping, choosing, implementing and learning. solution to a problem by questioning what is already
More recent studies show that design thinking is not known [22]. Therefore the nature of solving open-
only a set of actions, but rather a combination of ended problems requires disregarding the fear of
practices and cognitive approaches as well as a failure [24], acceptance of ambiguity [15,27] as well
mindset [e.g. 13]. Two perspectives on design as the ability to reflect in action [11].
thinking can be identified ‘design discourse’ and
‘management discourse’ [14], the first more focused
on design methodology and cognitive processes C. Problem Oriented and Project Based Learning –
[15,16,17,11] and the other on creating innovation Engineering approach
and value [e.g. 18,19]. We live in a world where systems gradually
become larger, the boundaries for engineering
The problems solved using design thinking knowledge and skills are increasingly more difficult
processes and methods are often complex and to identify and define [28]. It is more and more
loosely formulated, open-ended problems to which important that engineers master a combination of
there is no one correct answer [20]. This kind of disparate capabilities – not only technical
tasks, that are also called wicked problems [20, 21] competencies concerning problem solving and the
or system problems require a holistic way of solving production and innovation of technology, but also
that produces systemic, holistic solutions [22, 23, interdisciplinary skills of cooperation,
24], thus traditional ways of searching for solutions communication, project management and lifelong
are often too straight forward. University students learning abilities in diverse social, cultural and
need to acquire thinking and working skills to tackle

3
globalized settings. It is also suggested that this new approach and their preference for
engineers should develop broad perspective of traditional-structured approach their preference for
social, environmental and economic issues. [28] At learning environment which require less effort on
the same time engineers must excel in the actual their part; and problems arising from time stress.
engineering competencies [29,30]. [32] The theory suggests that qualities of the skills
learned through PBL are:
As a strategy for educational development,
problem-oriented and project-based learning • Acquisition of knowledge that can be retrieved
provides a possible answer to these challenges. and used in a professional setting
Thereby, POPBL provides the students with the
possibility of achieving sustainable and transferable • Acquisition of skills to extend and improve
skills, while at the same time exposing them to the one’s own knowledge
complexities of global and cultural issues [31]. • Acquisition of professional problem-solving
Personal competences are also developed. Students skills
learn to work in teams, potentiating their personality
and taking them closer to reality. The methodology Cognitive psychology sees that learning is active
arouses a spirit of investigation and innovation, process of constructing and deconstructing
creativity for the generation of new knowledge, knowledge and PBL is consistent which these
productive thought, and motivation to learn and findings. Knowledge is structured in interrelated
solve problems. [32] networks of concepts. Both higher degree of detail
and a higher density of relationships between these
In Project Based Learning [PBL] the students nodes makes the information more useful and
build their own knowledge by active learning, transferable.” [35].
interacting with the environment as suggested by the
constructivist approach, working independently or
collaborating in teams, while the teacher directs and D. Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary, and
guides and they make a real product. PBL is also Transdisciplinary Teamwork
helpful for developing long-term learning skills. It Multiple disciplinary approaches are becoming
offers multiple possibilities for developing technical, more and more popular in different universities [36].
contextual and behavioral competences. [33] Still there is confusion on what is meant by different
Throughout the different phases the scientific basis multiple discipline approaches. There is abundance
of project-based learning is maintained to generate of different definitions for disciplines starting from:
learning processes in which students are not passive multi–, pluri–, inter–, cross–, conceptual–, intra–,
recipients of knowledge, but are immersed in a pre- synthetic–, trans–, and interdisciplinary to mention a
professional experience [33]. few [36,37,38]. In this paper we focus on multi–,
In PBL learners develop deep, integrated inter–, and transdisciplinary approaches and define
understanding of content and process [34]. them in the next chapter. These terms should not be
Secondly, students learn to work together to solve used interchangeably.
problems. Collaboration involves sharing ideas to By definition in multidisciplinary teams the team
find answers to questions. In order to succeed in the members work in parallel or in different time
real world, students need to know how to work with sequence and stay on their disciplinary “silos” or
people from different backgrounds. Thirdly, this disciplinary base during their work [36,39,40].
approach promotes responsibility and independent Multidisciplinary team benefits from different
learning. As a final benefit, this approach actively disciplinary knowledge but does not create new or
engages students in various types of tasks, thereby holistic knowledge. In interdisciplinary teamwork
meeting the learning needs of many different participants work jointly. Teams’ objective is to find
students [33,34]. a coherent and holistic end result by analyzing,
Teaching by means of PBL presents several synthesizing and harmonizing different disciplines.
challenges for the teacher. These include: teachers’ In transdisciplinary approach traditional disciplinary
content knowledge, students’ lack of experience in boundaries are made transparent and team members
share a conceptual framework and aim to address

4
the problem setting by using different disciplinary- • Analyze technical problems in a systems view
specific approaches, theories and concepts
[36,39,40,41]. • Analyze and solve technical problems which
are incompletely stated and
We state that the main objective of using multiple
disciplines approach in engineering education • Develop iterative strategies subject to multiple
context is providing different perspectives on constraints
problems and comprehensive research questions, to • Develop strategies for systematic choice and
develop communication and teamwork abilities, and use of available
to be able to solve real-life complex problems in a
real-world setting. Reasoning is that this will • Engineering methods and tools
enhance the graduating engineers’ readiness to meet • Make estimations and appreciate their value
the requirements of working-life. In this context and limitations
multiple disciplines can include approaches and
levels such as multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary • Make decisions based on acquired knowledge
and transdisciplinary [36,39]. • Pursue own ideas and realize them practically
E. The courses studied; learning objectives and • Assess quality of own work and work by
philosophy others
1) UTU Capstone
Capstone–course in the University of Turku • Work in a true project setting that effectively
[UTU] is a master´s level team-based project course utilizes available resources and applies good
with real-life ill-defined problem setting and a timely project management practices
defined customer, typically from an industrial or • Explain mechanisms and processes behind
governmental operator. The course structure was progress and difficulties in projects
created in 2011 as a part of a thorough university
level engineering education degree reform, and it is • Communicate engineering in an
under constant developed. In UTU´s case the interdisciplinary environment to different
multidisciplinary science university status has stakeholders – orally, in writing and
enabled the creation and execution of graphically.
interdisciplinary Capstone–courses in an “in-house”
manner. The problem setting is open-ended and the Fig. 1. Intended Learning Outcomes for the Capstone–project [42].
teams are always from more than one discipline.
Minimum requirement is that the team consists In the assessment of the Capstone -projects the
students from different engineering disciplines. Most criteria is as follows: analysis of the problem,
often the course utilizes the wide spectrum of prototyping and proof of concept, communication
disciplines provided by a multidisciplinary science within and to the stakeholders, innovativeness of the
university or universities. It lasts for an academic solution. Assessment is done on the basis of
year, typically from 8 to 11 months, and it can be as workshop results, mainly presentations, study
big as 30 ECTS, typically 15 ECTS for the actual journals, and the project report. Also customer
project and 15 [5+5+5] ECTS from related courses. feedback is taken into account.
It follows the CDIO framework [9] but added with a
clear emphasis and goal for achieving 2)ME310
interdisciplinary learning outcomes for the students Mechanical Engineering 310 (ME310) is an
as well as relevant working life skills. The interdisciplinary, project-based course for Master-
ILO´s for Capstone–course, listed below, show a level students in Aalto University, and represents a
clear emphasis for working with ill-defined true integration of engineering, business and design
problems in an interdisciplinary team setting. The disciplines. Originally created at Stanford
rationale for this is that this way the student will a) University, the course has operated continuously for
acquire relevant working life skills and b) identify over forty years. Over nine demanding months,
his own strengths and weaknesses as an engineer. students learn and apply the Stanford/IDEO design

5
process in product development to prototype, test themes that came up, the other – and most important
and iterate to solve real world design challenges for - being Self-discovery, presented in the next chapter.
multinational corporate sponsors. Originally created “It took time to learn how to communicate to the Chinese students
to provide engineering students with real life so that I could say it what I wanted without being too strong. Now,
engineering challenges, the course has shifted from later that we have become friends it is so different, we can talk about
anything. This said it is still not easy with everyone. I tend to talk more
practical engineering experience, to design of with those with those whom I have a good relationship with. Despite
mechatronic systems, to design innovation, global the nationality”. capstone student
collaboration and entrepreneurship. Plus, a high “In the beginning I did not understand that the background
premium is placed on community building and research is being to assist the prototyping phase. And neither did
networking amongst ME310 students, alumni and almost any other non-engineering team members. I realized in early
Spring and I think still after that there are some that thought that we
faculty. do the study and that’s it.” capstone student
ME310 is all hands-on, all the time. Also, each “I expected to learn interdisciplinary communication, but I didn't
team in ME310 pairs with another team from a expect it to be this hard, adding cultural differences and
communication with international counterpart, it can easily be one of
foreign university to jointly solve the proposed the hardest project I have done in terms of how process went, but it is
design challenge. These partnerships add diversity to also the project that triggered most of self discovery, through this
the project teams and give students the opportunity experience, I know more about what I am good at and what I need to
improve“ ME310 Alumnus
to experience true international collaboration – an
“Learning different working styles. Not only learn about cultures,
essential skill required in this highly globalized but also feel and try it out concretely.” ME310 Alumnus
world [43].
“Teamwork is very different from the teamwork I have done
III. RESULTS before. Not only because people are from different backgrounds but
because the commitment is different” capstone student
Findings from the both semi–structured thematic
interview settings as well as from the study journals Distant work sets practical limitations for the
were categorized under these four themes that were working hours and ways of working. It is easy to
repeated in the data “communications, team misunderstand what is happening behind the scenes.
dynamics, cross-cultural, and multiple disciplines”, “Learned how to deal with the short time of communications
between Stanford and Europe, also learn how to solve conflicts and to
“self–discovery, personal growth, working methods, understand how mad or upset somebody really is” ME310 Alumnus
project management, development of group work”,
“design process (user-centric design), prototyping, Both data sets had multiple disciplines in their
testing, decision making” and “mindsets, attitude for team settings. Interdisciplinary learning seems to
failing, entrepreneurship”. In this section these been embedded inside the other themes as
findings are analysed and the themes further facilitating factor for learning communication, self-
explained in this chapter. discovery, prototyping etc. Especially in Capstone
course the students were in their disciplinary silos in
[Link], team dynamics, cross-cultural, the beginning of the course. The coaching process
and multiple disciplines has an important role in making the disciplines
For both courses the importance of transparent.
communication came up in all of the interviews. “This has made me even more enthusiastic about my own
discipline. At the same time I have learned about different ways of
For Capstone course the communication was the thinking and doing things. I see these things co-exist nicely” capstone
single biggest theme that came from all of the student
interviews. Communication was also seen as the B. Self–discovery, personal growth, working
biggest area of development. Communication
methods, project management, development of
included the use of e-tools [email, Skype, Google,
group work
Doodle, Trello, etc], cultural communication,
communication inside the team and to all the The 2nd theme consists of pragmatic skills &
stakeholders, and communication between the learning such as project management and working
teaching team and the students. Language was one methods but more importantly also more thorough,
barrier, time differences, and distant working all long-lasting and in-depth self-discovery and
affected the level and depth of communication. For personal growth experiences. Especially for ME310
ME310 communication is one of the two main course participants this theme was the single biggest

6
theme that arose from the data. For many ME310 We found it out ourselves. You have to tolerate chaos and uncertainty
and just go forward and you have to do it yourself”. capstone student
alumni the course was a life changing experience
and they have been able to validate what they really “We should have been able to start the work as a team earlier.
Now it took two months to get the whole team together.” capstone
want to do in their life after the course experience. It student
was also very clear that working with the best and “I was asking myself what is happening next. What did he
succeeding in that would boost your self-confidence [teacher] mean by that? Is he going to do it or is it our job. Things
to a new level. Many felt that during the course they should be clear and everything locked two weeks before it happens.”
learned which are the real drivers of the people and capstone student
themselves. In Capstone course this was not so
evident. One limiting factor here might be that the C. Design process (user-centric design),
ME310 participants have had from 1 to 8 years time prototyping, testing, decision making
to reflect what was actually important and what not.
This said it is evident that the coaching process from Hands-on approach in learning and coaching is
UTU Capstone needs to be further developed. appreciated and encouraged in both courses.
Especially in ME310 this is the main philosophy as
“Understanding what were the drivers of doing good job, such as
personal promises, end goal, own ambitions, work and time committed mentioned in the course definition in Background
already, owning the product, not the external carrots (in this case: section. Prototyping and making things tangible is
study credits)” ME310 Alumnus embedded in everything that is done starting from
“Want to work with people with great ambitions and ability to be day one. The course also utilizes prototyping
outside comfort zone” ME310 Alumnus facilities provided by the Aalto Design Factory [44]
“Prioritizing what one want to do and with whom. Courage to which helps the actual making of prototypes.
hunt for what I really want.” ME310 Alumnus Learning space provided by the Design Factory
“Everything is possible, no limits in the world.”ME310 Alumnus encourages for hands-on learning and testing your
“Understanding that I am on the same line with the best students ideas in practice [44] and this is aligned with the
of the world” ME310 Alumnus course objective of ME310 as well.
“Just to work with foreign students is great. I can think and test “Everything is prototype – e.g. a lecture” ME310 Alumnus
things that I could not even imagine before. First time in my study
career we think about the customer” capstone student “Key learning outcome for me from the course was the approach
to user-centric design. it's not about becoming an expert in a certain
“I have learned time management. This is one of the many courses field (ie. automotive, gaming, tech, wood industry) but rather learning
I have and there is much to do.” capstone student a process that can be applied to a multitude of situations. That's the
key of teaching the IDEO circle process...to become versatile
Many of the Capstone students felt insecure in designers that can parachute into any scenario, apply the approach
the beginning of the course. Lack of clear goal and a set of tools and produce innovative ideas effectively and
setting by the staff and structures for course made efficiently. ME310 Alumnus
some of the students unsure what is expected of “Learned to seek dead-ends and go hunting for needs”ME310
Alumnus
them. Coping with this feeling and getting forward
with the project was difficult. Being out of comfort “Learned to master open-ended early stage project and apply design
process for it”ME310 Alumnus
zones are important elements for both courses. For
some students it was difficult to understand that “See the goodness in crazy ideas too.”ME310 Alumnus
tolerating ambiguity is one of the intended learning “Ideation process is never finished. Learned to stop and not to focus
outcomes. They wanted to have clear controlled details in too early phase of prototyping.“ME310 Alumnus
structures and tangible objectives and someone who “[Learned] not to rank out ideas at first hand, but test and validate
should have given clear tasks and objectives. This them. You never know where the value lies.” ME310 Alumnus
was especially valid for the non-engineering The frequent cycle of the design process in
students coming from the disciplines of humanities ME310 enables students to make a lot of decisions
but for others as well. and through that learn about the decision-making.
“Teachers should take more role in the beginning - especially for
chinese who need someone to control and show way” capstone
student “It is important to make decisions; even wrong ones bearing in mind
the decision maker anyway have the responsibility”
“First I thought that we should have had a student who will be a
math teacher because we could have achieved this situation so much “Make small decisions by intuition and others based on test results.”
faster. But not any more because now we know about math teaching. “Prototype decides it for you” ME310 Alumnus

7
 Prototyping is one of the development areas for “You can always draw confidence from the course while being
entrepreneur who is naturally not getting too much feedback.”
the Capstone –course. Prototyping was done in two ME310 Alumnus & entrepreneur
parts of the course: in March in Finland during an
intensive workshop week and in May in Shanghai.
Both occasions were beneficial and tangible results IV. DISCUSSION
were achieved but not enough. Making ideas The results presented earlier illustrate that design
tangible and proving your learning to yourself and to thinking [DT] [2] practices, cognitive approaches,
the team by creating a prototype needs more and mindset all have positive influence for
emphasis. enhancing learning results for engineering students
“It was surprising to find out that even I could contribute to the [4]. Design thinking literature emphasizes the
actual prototyping. I thought that it was just for the tech guys.”
capstone student importance of collaboration with people from other
disciplines in order to design complex solutions
“Before this course I did not even know what the word
prototyping meant”. capstone student [22]. The results show, that especially learning
results in the area of working life skills [1,5] such as
project-based teamwork, communication and
D. Mindsets, attitude for failing, entrepreneurship problem-solving skills [3] were improved in the due
Looking at the intended learning results for both of the courses. Also self-discovery, understanding of
courses the self-discovery and a change in mindset the importance of different practices such as
are of the highest level of personal growth and prototyping and the students’ entrepreneurial
learning results [see background section]. The mindset were increased. In short the students go
students feel that these learning results have changed through a significant process of personal growth if
them the most. Considering that the ME310 alumni they have committed themselves to the course. In
have been in the working life already for several the case examples the students have achieved
years this makes the claim highly valid and interdisciplinary learning level [36,37,38] and are
important. able to learn from each other and at the same time
they are able to clarify their own knowledge and
“In real world there are contradictions within the stakeholders. skills for themselves and for the other team
Gained skills and experience how to work out these.” ME310
Alumnus members, as seen in the Communications theme
“I have gained self-confidence during the project. I feel that I am
group of the results introduced earlier [38,39].
more ready to enter working life. I have been able to make mistakes Our findings support the fact that a team can go
now, I won´t make the same mistakes there”. capstone student
through different phases of multiple disciplines
“Everyone was doing a lot - contributing to the project. This
made me motivated to work hard as well”. capstone student
during the project from silo-based multidisciplinary
even to transdisciplinary where there are literally no
“In this project I understood that we need to learn to do things by
ourselves”. capstone student disciplinary boundaries within the team. The
development is not necessarily linear. Instead the
The course changed the attitudes of some alumni learning and the level of multiple disciplines can be
and it was hard for them to see failure as a negative cyclic or even parallel and can happen only partially
matter anymore but actually the opposite: inside the team.
“Nothing is actual failing, more like opportunity to learn.”
ME310 Alumnus Interdisciplinary team based project approach
brings clear added value to the self-discovery. This
Many of the ME310 participants felt that the was evident in both cases, more so in ME310.
decision to start an own company was initiated by Similarities between the two studied courses are
the learning process during the course. evident in terms of intended learning results [42] and
“Feeling more secure about entrepreneurship” the philosophy of teaching: Student-centered,
“The course exhales entrepreneurship.” learning by doing, emphasis on tangible prototypes
“[Attitude changed] From very negative to very possible option”
and finally the cyclic nature of the course: do–test–
ME310 Alumnus learn->do–test–learn->.
“Gives readiness for to be an entrepreneur.“ ME310 Alumnus ME310 has long development history and an
alumni network that can be utilized both in course

8
subjects and more importantly in teaching team Especially in Capstone -course a lot of resistance
formation. It also utilizes a learning space that is was shown in the beginning towards the student
suitable for courses emphasizing learning-by-doing centric learning. Students would have wanted more
hands-on approach [44]. While the students go control from the teaching team and ready-made
through the different phases of multi-, inter, and solutions – in short traditional teaching. During the
even transdisciplinary [36,37,38], in terms of course this changed and the majority of the students
learning results the phase of transdiscplinarity [37] saw the learning that can be achieved through
was the highest. It is not, however, self-evident that embracing uncertainty ie. ‘dancing with ambiguity’.
there is a hierarchy between the definitions and it is
always context driven but it seems that in a
teamwork, problem and project based course setting V. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
transdisciplinary teamwork brings the highest level In this paper we do not discuss the effects of
of learning results. assessment, industry collaboration, and the
Communication inside and to the students from university administration at all. Focus is on student
the teaching team is of paramount importance to learning and how to enhance this from a faculty
learning. This was evident especially in Capstone point of view. Cultural differences that occur and
course. For the students to be able to go through the affect team dynamics in the project courses are
process of tolerating ambiguity the teaching team difficult to make explicit. What issues are related to
must support them. Not by giving answers but by cultural differences in terms of e.g. nationality,
being there, making the right questions and also by gender, language, disciplines of study are neither in
simply encouraging the students to go forward the scope of this paper.
despite the ill-defined situation. If the teaching team All of the authors have been somehow linked to
is not able to support and encourage there is too the ME310 course and the first author of this paper
much responsibility left to the students. Failing fast is the responsible teacher for the Capstone -course in
and hence succeeding quicker needs the prerequisite question. This potentially affects the analysis of the
that there is a safe and supportive environment for research results. Themes that arise are potentially
failure. In ME310 this process starts from the very biased and already subconsciously filtered by the
first course recruitment interviews and is aligned researcher by his or her preliminary thoughts of the
throughout the course. In Capstone course this is outcomes and experience of the course. This
still in work-in-progress phase. phenomenon is impossible to avoid with this
Capstone course is still, and hopefully it will be problem setting. In the writing process of this paper
for an eternity, in a developing phase. According to active reflection and discourse within the author-
the results the importance of learning-by-doing and team has been the only means to minimize the
the need to make everything explicit i.e prototyping phenomenon described above.
should be more emphasized. ME310 student Results, that are qualitative in nature, support the
experiences in prototyping are more explicit. One of scientific approach and method very well. The
the reasons can be that prototyping and the do-test- amount of data is reasonable and within the scope of
learn cycle is more emphasized already in the very scientific research as well. The statistical depth and
beginning of ME310. In Capstone especially for the quantitative differences between the feedback and
non-engineering students it was difficult to grasp, analyzed data from the courses, however, lack solid
even in the halfway of the project, that this is all scientific content. The questionnaires used in the
about doing, and not about producing reports [see ME310 to Capstone were different at some points
results]. This poses a clear development demand for and all the material used in this paper is qualitative
the teaching teams in Capstone -courses. On the by nature. In Capstone’s case data gathering
other hand it can be argued that the interviewed included also statistical data but there were ruled out
capstone students cannot yet resonate and reflect from the analysis phase of this paper in order to have
their learning results. This research should be done as uniform approach as possible.
again after three to five years after they are alumni.
Then the data would be truly comparable. For future research the main interest areas lie in
finding more about the learning process of the

9
students, and especially how the teaching teams can [23] D. Dunne, & R. Martin, “Design thinking and how it will change
management education: An interview and discussion”, Academy of
affect and enhance learning. Management Learning & Education, 2006, 5(4), 512-523.
[24] C. Owen, “Design thinking: Notes on its nature and use”, Design
Reseach Quarterly, 2006, 2(1), 16-27.
[25] M. Laakso, & M. Clavert, “Promoting creativity and design thinking
REFERENCES skills among university students”, Manuscript accepted for publication
in: Bas, E. & Guilló, M. (eds.). INJUVE Special Issue on “Youth and
Future Images”. In press.
[1] M. Daniels, “Developing and Assessing Professional Competencies: a [26] R. Martin, “How successful leaders think”. Harvard business review,
Pipe Dream?”, Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala 2007, June, 60-67.
Dissertations from Faculty of Science and Technology 738, AUU, 2011
[27] K. Michlewski, “Uncovering design attitude: Inside the culture of
[2] L. Hassi & M. Laakso, “Making sense of design thinking” In designers”, Organization Studies, 2008, 29(3), 373-392.
Karjalainen, T-M., Koria, M. & Salimäki, M. (eds.) IDBM papers vol 1.
Helsinki: International Desgin Business Management Program, Aalto [28] J.E. MILLS, et al. Engineering education—Is problem-based or project-
University, pp. 50-62., 2011 based learning the answer?. Australasian Journal of Engineering
Education, 2003, 3: 2-16.
[3] [Link], [Link], X. Du, and [Link], Problem-oriented
and project-based learning (POPBL) as an innovative learning strategy [29] R. Henshaw, 1991, "Desirable attributes for professional engineers",
for sustainable development in engineering education, European Journal Broadening Horizons of Engineering Education, 3rd Annual conference
of Engineering Education, Vol.33, No. 3, June 2008, 283-295 of Australasian Association for Engineering Education, pp. 15.,
[4] [Link], Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment, Higher [30] J.D. Lang, Susan Cruse, Francis D. McVey, and John McMasters.
Education 32: 347-364, 1996, Kluwer Academic Publishers "Industry expectations of new engineers: A survey to assist curriculum
designers." Journal of Engineering Education 88, no. 1 (1999): 43-51.)
[5] A. Piri, “Tekniikan alalta vastavalmistuneiden kysely 2012”, Tekniikan
Akateemisen Liitto TEK (In Finnish), [Link], 2012 [31] [Link],. "Future engineering skills, knowledge, and identity."
Engineering science, skills, and bildung (2006): 165-185.
[6] [Link]
[32] RÍOS, Ignacio de los, et al. Project–based learning in engineering higher
[7] E.F. Crawley, Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D.R., “Rethinking education: two decades of teaching competences in real environments.
Engineering Education, The CDIO Approach”, Springer, 286 pages. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2010, 2.2: 1368-1378.
2007 [33] F. Moti, I. Lavy & D. Elata. "Implementing the project-based learning
[8] B. G. Glaser, A. L. Strauss, The Discovery of Grounded Theory: approach in an academic engineering course." International Journal of
Strategies for Qualitative Research, 1967 Technology and Design Education 13, no. 3 (2003): 273-288.
[9] S. Kirjavainen, & T.A. Björklund, “The central role of exploration in [34] J. Krajcik, C. Czerniak & C. Berger, “Teaching children science: A
designing business concepts and strategy”, Proceedings of The 18th project-based approach. Boston: McGraw-Hill. 1999
International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED. 2011. [35] [Link], P.A.J. Bouhuijs, J. G. M. M. Smits, “The suitability of
[10] L. Kimbell, “Beyond design thinking: Design-as-practice and designs- problem-based learning for engineering education: theory and practice.”
in-practice”, Paper presented at the CRESC Conference, Manchester. Teaching in higher education, 2000, 5.3: 345-358.
2009. [36] Bernard C.K. Choia and Anita W.P. Pak, “Multidisciplinarity,
[11] D.A. Schön, “The reflective practitioner – How professionals think in interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services,
action” (2nd edition) Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. 1991. education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of
[12] H.A. Simon, H. A. “The Sciences of the Artificial”, Cambridge: MIT effectiviness” Clin Invest Med, vol. 29, no 6, pp. 351-364, 2006
Press. 1969. [37] J.T. Klein, “Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice” Detroit,
[13] L. Hassi, & M. Laakso, “Design Thinking in the management discourse: Mich: Wayne State University Press, 1990
Defining the elements of the concept”, Proceedings of The 18th [38] K. Huutoniemi, J.T. Klein, H. Bruun, J. Hukkinen,“Analyzing
International Product Development management Conference, IPDMC. interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators”, Elsevier, 2009
2011. [39] P. Rosenfield, “The Potential of Transdisciplinary research for
[14] U. Johansson, & J. Woodilla, “How to avoid throwing the baby out with sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social
the bath water: An ironic perspective on design thinking”, EGOS sciences”, Soc. Sci. Med., Vol. 35 35, No 11. Pp 1343-1357, 1992
Colloquim 2010: June 30 – July 3, Lisbon, Portugal. 2010. [40] Bernard C.K. Choia and Anita W.P. Pak, “Multidisciplinarity,
[15] N. Cross, “Designerly ways of knowing”, Berlin: Springer. 2006. interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services,
[16] B. Lawson, “How Designers think – The design process demystified” education and policy: 2. Promotors, barriers, and strategies of
(4th edition), Oxford: Architectural Press. 2005. enhancement” Clin Invest Med, vol. 30, no 6, pp. 224-232, 2007
[17] H.A. Simon, “The sciences of the artificial” (2nd edition), Cambridge: [41] Bernard C.K. Choia and Anita W.P. Pak, “Multidisciplinarity,
The MIT Press. 1981. interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services,
[18] T. Brown, “Change by design: How design thinking transforms education and policy: 3. Discipline, inter-discipline distance, and
organizations and inspires innovation”, Harper Business. 2009. selection of discipline” Clin Invest Med, vol. 31, no 1, pp. 41-48, 2008
[19] R. Martin, “The design of business: Why design thinking is the next [42] [Link], T. Westerlund, [Link], T. Salakoski, “Interdisciplinary
Capstone Project”, 41th SEFI Conference, Leuven, Belgium, 2013
competitive advantage”, Boston: Harvard Business Press. 2009.
[43] Aalto University, “ME310 course brochure”, Nettiopsu, 2013.
[20] R. Coyne, “Wicked problems revisited”. Design studies, 2005, 26, 1,
p.5-17. [44] T. Björklund, S. Luukkonen, M. Clavert, S. Kirjavainen, & M. Laakso,
[21] R. Buchanan, “Wicked problems in design thinking”, Design “Aalto University Design Factory through the eyes of its community
members”. 2011.
Issues,1992, 8, 2, p.5–21.
[22] T. Brown, “Design thinking”, Harvard business review, 2008, June, 84-
92.

10