Over the past four years, we have redesigned Harvard’s introductory mechanical engineering course to introduce the principles, practices, and pleasures of mechanical engineering in an accessible format. The main goals of the course are to provide experience in the design process, demonstrate the connection between engineering science and design early in the curriculum, and build student enthusiasm for engineering, serving to attract and retain students. Unlike most introductory mechanical engineering courses, we cover strength of materials and machine elements, material usually presented much later in the curriculum, in order to provide tools for the students to quantitatively evaluate their designs. By providing just enough of this background knowledge to allow for analysis of designs, we demonstrate the connection between engineering science and design early in curriculum and motivate in-depth coverage of these topics in later courses. The laboratories for the course build enthusiasm for engineering by incorporating exciting design projects and introducing students to some of the most attractive mechanical engineering tools. Students learn 3-D solid modeling with CAD software, create prototypes from CAD models using manual and CNC machining, and reverse engineer common consumer products. Using these tools, students build their own hardware prototypes for both a cantilever beam catapult and a model all-terrain-vehicle. These exercises, carefully chosen to reinforce the strength of materials and machine elements concepts, culminate in design contests that enhance the visibility of engineering within the larger university community and increase student interest in the field.

1.
“Engineering Criteria 2000,” Engineering Accreditation Commission of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, 1996.
2.
McMasters, J. H. and Matsch, I. A., 1996. “Desired Attributes of an Engineering Graduate - An Industry Perspective,” 19th AIAA Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Technology Conference, New Orleans, L.A.
3.
Dym
C. L.
,
Agogino
A. M.
,
Eris
O.
,
Frey
D. D.
, and
Leifer
I. J.
,
2005
Engineering Design Thinking, Teaching, and Learning
,”
Journal of Engineering Education
. vol.
94
, pp.
103
120
.
4.
Ditcher
A. K.
,
2001
Effective Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, with Particular Reference to the Undergraduate Education of Professional Engineers
.”
International Journal of Engineering Education
. vol.
17
, pp.
24
29
.
5.
Brereton, M., Sheppard, S., and Leifer, L., 1995, “Students Connecting Engineering Fundamentals and Hardware Design Observations and Implications for the Design of Curriculum and Assessment Methods,” Frontiers in Education. Atlanta. GA.
6.
Devon
R.
,
Bilen
S.
,
McKay
A.
,
Pennington
A. D.
,
Serrafero
P.
, and
Sierra
J. S.
,
2004
Integrated Design: What Knowledge is of Most Worth in Engineering Design Education
,”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
20
, pp.
424
432
.
7.
Kazmer D. O., 1998 “On the Divergence of Case Studies and Hardware Prototypes in Active Learning.” ASEE Northeast Regional Meeting, Amherst, MA.
8.
Speaking of Teaching: The Stanford University Newsletter on Teaching, 1993, “Active Learning Getting Students to Work and Think in the Classroom.” vol. 5
9.
Sheppard, S., Mechanical Dissection. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University.
10.
Demetry
C.
and
Groccia
J. E.
,
1997
A Comparative Assessment of Students’ Experiences in Two Instructional Formats of an Introductory Materials Science Course
,”
Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
86
, pp.
203
210
.
11.
Bonwell, C. C. and Eison, J.A., “Active Learning: Creating Excitement in the Classroom,” The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development, Washington D.C. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, 1991.
12.
Liu
Z. E.
and
Schoenwetter
D. J.
,
2004
Teaching Creativity in Engineering
.”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
20
, pp.
801
808
.
13.
Harris
D.
,
2001
A Case for Project-Based Design Education
.”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
17
, pp.
367
369
.
14.
Graaff
E. D.
and
Kolmos
A.
,
2003
Characteristics of Problem-Based Learning
.”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
19
, pp.
657
662
.
15.
Poinke
C. D.
,
Parsons
J. R.
,
Seat
J. E.
,
Weber
F. E.
, and
Yoder
D. C.
,
2001
Balancing Capability, Enthusiasm and Methodology in a First-Year Design Program
,”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
17
, pp.
381
385
.
16.
Yokomoto, C. F., Rizkalla, M. E., and O’Loughlin, C. I., 1998 “A Successful Motivational Freshman Design Experience Using Attached Learning.” Frontiers in Education Conference, Tempe, AZ, pp. 493–499.
17.
Hirose
S.
,
2001
Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology
,”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
17
, pp.
512
517
.
18.
Barr
R. E.
and
Juricic
D.
,
1994
From Drafting to Modern Design Representation: The Evolution of Engineering Design Graphics
.”
Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
83
, pp.
263
270
.
19.
Slocum, A. H., Design and Manufacturing I, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
20.
Durfee, W.K., Introduction to Engineering, ME2011, Department of Mechanical Engineering. University of Minnesota.
21.
Feisel
L. D.
and
Rosa
A. J.
,
2005
The Role of the Laboratory in Undergraduate Engineering Education
,”
Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
94
, pp.
121
130
22.
Chan
V. H.
,
2004
Learning CAD/CAM and CNC machining through minicar and catapult projects
,”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
20
, pp.
726
732
.
23.
Elata
D.
and
Garaway
I.
,
2002
A Creative Introduction to Mechanical Engineering
,”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
18
, pp.
566
575
.
24.
Ashby, M. F. and Jones, D. R. H., Engineering Materials I: An Introduction to their Properties and Applications. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1980.
25.
Beuth, J. I., 1997 “Integration of Seamless Design, Analysis and Manufacturing Concepts into Undergraduate Mechanics Courses.” Frontiers in Education Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, November 5–8, 1997.
26.
Hunkeler
D.
and
Sharp
J. E.
,
1997
Assigning Functional Groups: The Influence of Group Size, Academic Record, Practical Experience, and Learning Style
,”
Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
86
, pp.
321
332
.
27.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., and Smith, K. A., 1998 “Maximizing Instruction Through Cooperative Learning.” ASEE Prism.
28.
Delson
N. J.
,
2001
Increasing Team Motivation in Engineering Design Course
,”
International Journal of Engineering Education
, vol.
17
, pp.
359
366
.
29.
Felder
R. M.
and
Brent
R.
,
2001
Effective Strategies for Cooperative Learning
.”
Cooperation and Collaboration in College Teaching
, vol.
10
, pp.
69
75
.
30.
Anderson-Rowland, M. R., 1997 “Understanding Freshman Engineering Student Retention Through a Survey.” American Society of Engineering Education Conference, Milwaukee, WI.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.