Making Tough Decisions

Lesson Content

• Lesson Plan Template:

  CTE Lesson Plan

• CTE Course Info and Benchmark Notes

  
  

  Course Title: Applied Engineering Technology I

  Course Number: 8401110

  Career Cluster: Engineering & Technology Education

  CIP Number: 0614130100

  Course Type: TECH-ED - High School Technical Education Programs

  CTE Benchmarks:

  • CTE-TECED.912.8401110.1.1 - Explain the rapid increase in the rate of technological development and the trade-offs between competing values (e.g., availability, cost, desirability, waste, et al.,) in the selection of resources
  • CTE-TECED.912.8401110.2.4 - Explain the relationship between design criteria and design constraints and how a design’s criteria, constraints, and efficiency can compete with each other.
  • CTE-TECED.912.8401110.2.6 - Identify the factors that ensure the safety and sustainability of an engineering design or product.
  • CTE-TECED.912.8401110.2.11 - Describe a decision table and how it is used to evaluate proposed solutions to an engineering problem.

• Unit Outline

  
  

  This lesson is designed to be used with the case study, “Building Piece by Piece.” See CPALMS resource ID # 215757.

• Career Connection

  
  

  This lesson includes the career building skills of critical thinking, analyzing information and data, teamwork, and oral communication. This lesson helps students connect the importance of analyzing the trade offs between competing values when designing products with the practice of it for their future assistant engineering role. Students will have to use academic and technical skills to precisely explain their expert judgment on the most optimal design solution, all the while balancing design constraints and design criteria that have been placed to limit the group. By conducting this research and analysis of competing design constraints and design criteria, they are preparing themselves for a role on an engineering design team.

• Learning Objectives

  
  

  Students will be able to:

  • Describe the relationship and competition between competing values, design criteria and design constraints in a design problem.
  • Describe the function of a decision matrix as it relates to the Engineering Design Process.
  • Create a decision matrix, analyze the results, and form data backed conclusions based on the result.
  • Research the advantages and disadvantages of certain design criteria and design constraints.

• Prior Knowledge

  
  

  Students should be familiar with/able to:

  • The steps and their associated actions of the Engineering Design Process.
  • Conduct research and find proper, relevant, and reliable resources.
  • Properly citing information.
  • Work as a responsible, positive, and professional team member.
  • Different types of materials and their respective properties.

• Guiding Questions

  
  
  • What is a design constraint? How does it drive a design problem?
  • What is a design criteria? How does it drive a design problem?
  • How might ethics be accounted for in the designing of a bridge, cell phone, skyscraper, or even a rollercoaster?

• Procedure

  
  
  1. To introduce the lesson, begin with a class discussion. Ask the students, “How can we balance design criteria and constraints while simultaneously maintaining a safe and sustainable effort?”
     • During discussion, prompt students to consider examples of design criteria or design constraints that engineers face on different projects. For example, how might ethics be accounted for in the designing of a bridge, cell phone, skyscraper, or even a rollercoaster.
  2. Review a variety of different types of constraints and criteria with students. This should be a short review with a few different examples that could be found in a decision matrix, such as time, material, durability, safety, weight, and flexibility.
  3. Next, shift the focus to children’s toys and the design constraints and design criteria associated with them. Have students discuss in pairs about how balancing competing values applies to the designing and production of children's toys.
     • See Discussion Questions and Guiding Questions Attachment for example questions that could be used to lead and guide discussions.
     • During discussion prompt students to consider the following:
       • What are the different materials and aspects of your childhood toys? Your younger family members, parents, etc.?
       • What are the different constraints and criteria set on engineering design teams designing children’s toys?
       • What does ethics have to do with creating children’s toys?
       • What toys are you hearing people say they or someone they know uses / used? Why do you think that is? What features do these commonly mentioned toys have?
       • What toys are you not hearing people say they or someone they know uses / used? Why do you think that is? What features do these less mentioned toys have? Is there a reason these toys are not being used a lot?
  4. Provide students with a copy of the case study, “Building Piece by Piece,” (See CPALMS Resource ID # 215757). As students read the case study, instruct them to annotate the text.
     • Circle parts of the Engineering Design Process
     • Underline best practices
     • Highlight vocabulary
  5. After reading the case study, pose the following discussion questions for a class discussion:
     • Why did the design team conduct different forms of research?
     • How did conducting different forms of research improve the insight of information that the team was receiving?
     • What other information is needed to determine how to balance design criteria and design constraints?
     • How does Ryan's outlook impede on the idea of ethics in engineering?
     • Which team members' outlook aligns closest with balancing ethics, design criteria, and design constraints? How and why?
  6. Divide the class into small groups. Each group will be assigned a different design criteria or design constraint that is going to be their design teams “top priority.”
  7. Independently, provide students with time to reread the case study, this time annotating the different aspects of their assigned top priority that was displayed in the case study.
  8. Next, in their assigned small groups, give students the opportunity to conduct research on their assigned topic. Students should use credible information and industry websites to complete their research.
  9. Afterwards, groups should compile their research and create a decision matrix.
     • Consider having the students use multipliers when assigning a score. For example, if the group's “top priority” is durability, have the scores be multiplied by x2 or x3 and a “less important” have a multiplied of x1 or x1.5.
     • See Decision Matrix Templates Attachment.
  10. To bring the lesson to a close, provide students with the Exit Ticket (see Exit Ticket Attachment).
      • The Exit Ticket asks students to respond to the following questions:
        • In what ways did you find using a decision matrix helpful in coming to a final decision?
        • How can engineers balance competing values when designing a product?
          • Values like design criteria, design constraints, safety, sustainability, or durability.
        • Have you ever thought about the different design constraints and design criteria that goes into designing a child’s toy? How has this changed your perspective?
        • How do you see the toy industry shifting with the improvement and rapid development of technology in the next 20 years?
        • As you are preparing for the workforce, how can you apply what you did in this project to your future work experience?

• Teacher Notes

  
  
  • Reliable Research Resources:
    • Examples of credible sites include International Organization for Standards (ISO) and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
  • Group Sizes Suggestion:
    • When starting the group work, students should be organized in small groups of 2 - 3. This size of a group should allow for students to split the work evenly and have something to be doing.
    • Time permitting, during discussions the teacher could have students pair up to discuss the different guiding and discussion questions. Then, have each group share out their answer to a few of the questions.
  • Expanding upon this lesson:
    • For Step 2, students could complete a Venn Diagram comparing and contrasting assigned design constraints and criteria.
    • The teacher could also expand the scope of this lesson by incorporating different design criteria, such as material science and their properties. The ASTM would be an extensive, reliable source.
      • • For example:
          • • Electrical Properties : Electrical Resistivity.
            • Mechanical Properties: Modulus of Elasticity, Modulus of Resilience, Modulus of Rigidity, Tensile Strength, Compression Strength, Strength to Weight Ratio, or Modulus of Toughness.
            • Thermophysical Properties: Density, Thermal Conductivity, Heat Capacity, Viscosity, Vapor Pressure, or Compressibility.
    • If applicable and possible, the students could create a technical presentation detailing what their top priority was, their research findings, and their material selection based off of their research.
      • For example, a technical presentation on why safety is the most important priority in the engineering design process accompanied with the decision on what material to use to make the safest children's toy.
    • If applicable and possible, the students could complete one or more of the next steps in the engineering design process.
      • For example, students design a children’s toy based on their research, design constraints, and design criteria.