This study investigates the implementation of project-based learning (PBL) in electro-mechanical engineering education, emphasizing the modeling and application of an innovation process to enhance student engagement, motivation, and employability. Initially, the innovation process was systematically modeled using Structured Analysis and Design Technique (SADT) to manage and organize skills, knowledge, and resources effectively. This model was subsequently applied in an educational experience focused on highly technical aspects such as energy conversion modeling, mechanical improvements, material science, and efficiency analysis. These aspects were primarily applied in the context of permanent magnet synchronous machines employed in electric vehicle (EV) axles. The SADT modeling allowed for a clear delineation of the innovation phases, ensuring a structured approach to project execution. Statistical analysis of the PBL approach indicated significant improvements in student performance, with a 25% increase in problem-solving skills and a 30% enhancement in critical thinking abilities. The case study demonstrated that industry-oriented projects significantly boost student satisfaction, particularly in problem definition and solution identification, leading to a more engaging and effective learning experience.
PérezMAyerdiVArroyoZ. Students engagement and learning through the development of didactic models for mechanical engineering. Univers J Educ Res2018; 6: 2300–2309.
2.
LiHÖchsnerAHallW. Application of experiential learning to improve student engagement and experience in a mechanical engineering course. Eur J Eng Educ2019; 44: 283–293.
3.
ABET. Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2024–2025. ABET website; 2024.
4.
KanelopoulosJPapanikolaouKZalimidisP. Flipping the classroom to increase students’ engagement and interaction in a mechanical engineering course on machine design. 2017:19–34.
5.
YanJLiLYinJ, et al.A comparison of flipped and traditional classroom learning: A case study in mechanical engineering. Int J Eng Educ2018; 34: 1876–1887.
6.
ChoHJZhaoKLeeCR, et al.Active learning through flipped classroom in mechanical engineering: Improving students’ perception of learning and performance. Int J STEM Educ2021; 8: 1–13.
7.
WrightK. Collaborative projects with simulation assignments in mechanical engineering thermodynamics courses. Int J Mech Eng Educ2020; 48: 140–161.
8.
BlancoMGonzalezCSanchez-LiteA, et al.A practical evaluation of a collaborative learning method for engineering project subjects. IEEE Access2017; 5: 19363–19372.
9.
TanOS. Problem-based learning innovation: Using problems to power learning in the 21st century. Singapore: Gale Cengage Learning, 2021.
10.
WalkerALearyH. A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdiscip J Probl-Based Learn2009; 3: 6.
11.
MannLChangRChandrasekaranS, et al.From problem-based learning to practice-based education: A framework for shaping future engineers. Eur J Eng Educ2021; 46: 27–47.
12.
RazzoukRShuteV. What is design thinking and why is it important?Rev Educ Res2012; 82: 330–348.
13.
HenriMJohnsonMDNepalB. A review of competency-based learning: Tools, assessments, and recommendations. J Eng Educ2017; 106: 607–638.
14.
CruzMLSaunders-SmitsGNGroenP. Evaluation of competency methods in engineering education: A systematic review. Eur J Eng Educ2020; 45: 729–757.
15.
YadavAVinhMShaverGM, et al.Case-based instruction: Improving students’ conceptual understanding through cases in a mechanical engineering course. J Res Sci Teach2014; 51: 659–677.
16.
BedekarVNNasabASBolesWW. Improvement in learning experiences by adopting student centered teaching practices. 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2015.
17.
CollerBDShernoffDJ. Video game-based education in mechanical engineering: A look at student engagement. Int J Eng Educ2009; 25: 308.
18.
CollerBDScottMJ. Effectiveness of using a video game to teach a course in mechanical engineering. Comput Educ2009; 53: 900–912.
19.
McCaslinSEYoungM. Increasing student motivation and knowledge in mechanical engineering by using action cameras and video productions. Adv Prod Eng Manag2015; 10: 87–96.
20.
PletzCZinnB. Evaluation of an immersive virtual learning environment for operator training in mechanical and plant engineering using video analysis. Br J Educ Technol2020; 51: 2159–2179.
21.
AfkarMKarimiPGavagsaz-GhoachaniR, et al.Revolutionizing engineering education: Exploring experimental video-on-demand for learning. Int J Eng Pedag2023; 13: 96–115.
22.
SharmaGVSSS. Spatial visualization for development of visual thinking and cognitive abilities among mechanical engineering students through tool design ideation. Int J Mech Eng Educ2023; 51: 227–242.
23.
MarkopoulosAPFragkouAKasidiarisPD, et al.Gamification in engineering education and professional training.Int J Mech Eng Educ2015; 43: 118–131.
24.
SharunovaAEadARobsonC, et al.Blended learning by gamification in a second-year introductory engineering design course. ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition. Vol. 52064. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2018.
25.
LimantaraNNizar HidayantoAPrabowoH. The elements of gamification learning in higher education: A systematic literature review. Int J Mech Eng Technol2019; 10: 982–991.
26.
Moliner-HerediaRAbellán-NebotJV. Evaluation of the impact of gamification on students’ performance and engagement in manufacturing engineering courses. Int J Mech Eng Educ2023; 51: 174–193.
27.
Pàmies VilàRFabregat SanjuanAPuig OrtizJ, et al.Impact of a gamification learning system on the academic performance of mechanical engineering students.Int J Eng Educ2022; 5: 1434–1442.
28.
MavromihalesMHolmesV. Activity Based Learning (ABL) Using Gamification (GBL) in mechanical engineering design education: A studio-based case study. Gamification-Analysis, Design, Development and Ludification. IntechOpen, 2022.
29.
MavromihalesMHolmesVRacasanR. Game-based learning in mechanical engineering education: Case study of games-based learning application in computer aided design assembly. Int J Mech Eng Educ2019; 47: 156–179.
30.
BarbosaFVLobarinhasPAMTeixeiraSFCF, et al.Project-Based learning in a mechanical engineering course: A new proposal based on student's views. Int J Mech Eng Educ2022; 50: 767–804.
31.
Sanchez-GomezCA. Implementing a joint learning method (PBL and EBL) to innovate the development of mechanical engineering technical and non-technical skills. Int J Mech Eng Educ2022; 50: 176–196.
32.
LuntAJGCayzerSMooreY, et al.Team-based learning in large cohorts: Successes and challenges in first year mechanical engineering. Int J Mech Eng Educ2024: 03064190241259305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03064190241259305.
33.
Lino AlvesJDuarteT. Teaching ceramic materials in mechanical engineering: An active learning experience. Int J Mech Eng Educ2023; 51: 23–46.
34.
MahdiONassarIAlmuslamaniH. The role of using case studies method in improving students’ critical thinking skills in higher education. Int J Higher Educ2020; 9: 97.
35.
MarosMKorenkovaMFilaM, et al.Project-based learning and its effectiveness: Evidence from Slovakia. Inter Learn Environ2023; 31: 4147–4155.
36.
ChenJKolmosADuX. Forms of implementation and challenges of PBL in engineering education: A review of literature. Eur J Eng Educ2021; 46: 90–115.
37.
GuoPSaabNPostLS, et al.A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures. Int J Educ Res2020; 102: 101586.
38.
ParyantoPMunadiSPurnomoW, et al.Implementation of project-based learning model to improve employability skills and student achievement. AIP conference proceedings. Vol. 2671. No. 1. AIP Publishing; 2023.
39.
HartJ. Interdisciplinary project-based learning as a means of developing employability skills in undergraduate science degree programs. J Teach Learn Grad Employab2019; 10: 50–66.
40.
ChanCKFongETYLukLYY, et al.A review of literature on challenges in the development and implementation of generic competencies in higher education curriculum. Int J Educ Dev2017; 57: 1–10.
41.
GaultFArundelAKraemer-MbulaE (eds). Handbook of innovation indicators and measurement. Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2023.
42.
ChristensenCMEyringHJ. The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco, CA, USA: Jossey-Bass, 2011.
43.
OliverB. Graduate attributes as a focus for institution-wide curriculum renewal: Innovations and challenges. High Educ Res Dev2013; 32: 450–463.
44.
KhathriAMDaudCHR. Relationship between motivation, learning habit and overall results of polytechnic mechanical engineering student in semester two. Technology2018; 1: 41–49.
45.
SiddiqueZHardréPLAltanD. Effects of a mechanical engineering design course on students’ motivational features. Int J Mech Eng Educ2015; 43: 44–74.
46.
O'ConnorGCRiceMP. A comprehensive model of uncertainty associated with radical innovation. J Prod Innov Manage2013; 30: 2–18.
47.
Mendoza-SilvaA. Innovation capability: A systematic literature review. Eur J Innov Manage2021; 24: 707–734.
48.
ISO 9001 standard.
49.
DurugboCTiwariAAlcockJR. A review of information flow diagrammatic models for product–service systems. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2011; 52: 1193–1208.
50.
AhmedF. Using structured analysis and design technique (SADT) for simulation conceptual modelling. Diss, Loughborough University, 2016.
51.
KumarMSRevankarST. Development scheme and key technology of an electric vehicle: An overview. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev2017; 70: 1266–1285.
52.
WangAJiaYSoongWL. Comparison of five topologies for an interior permanent-magnet machine for a hybrid electric vehicle. IEEE Trans Magn2011; 47: 3606–3609.
53.
NikamSPRallabandiVFernandesBG. A high-torque-density permanent-magnet free motor for in-wheel electric vehicle application. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2012; 48: 2287–2295.
54.
MaierMParspourN. Operation of an electrical excited synchronous machine by contactless energy transfer to the rotor. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2018; 54: 3217–3225.
55.
RaminosoaTWilesR. Contactless rotor excitation for traction motors. 2018 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE). IEEE, 2018.
56.
ChaiFLiYLiangP, et al.Calculation of the maximum mechanical stress on the rotor of interior permanent-magnet synchronous motors. IEEE Trans Ind Electron2016; 63: 3420–3432.
57.
GüemesJAIraolagoitiaAMDel HoyoJI, et al.Torque analysis in permanent-magnet synchronous motors: A comparative study. IEEE Trans Energy Convers2011; 26: 55–63.
58.
JungJWLeeB-HKimD-J, et al.Mechanical stress reduction of rotor core of interior permanent magnet synchronous motor. IEEE Trans Magn2012; 48: 911–914.
59.
O’DonnellDBartosSTjongJ, et al.Utilization of innovative materials toward permanent magnet synchronous e-motors for traction application: A review. 2020 2nd International Conference on Smart Power & Internet Energy Systems (SPIES). IEEE, 2020.
60.
LeeKHChaHRKimYB. Development of an interior permanent magnet motor through rotor cooling for electric vehicles. Appl Therm Eng2016; 95: 348–356.
61.
ChenWJuYYanD, et al.Design and optimization of dual-cycled cooling structure for fully-enclosed permanent magnet motor. Appl Therm Eng2019; 152: 338–349.
62.
BiYChaiFChenL. The study of cooling enhancement in axial flux permanent magnet motors for electric vehicles. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2021; 57: 4831–4839.
ChaiFLiangPPeiY, et al.Analytical method for iron losses reduction in interior permanent magnet synchronous motor. IEEE Trans Magn2015; 51: 1–4.
65.
YamazakiKKumagaiMIkemiT, et al.A novel rotor design of interior permanent-magnet synchronous motors to cope with both maximum torque and iron-loss reduction. IEEE Trans Ind Appl2013; 49: 2478–2486.
66.
YamazakiKKatoY. Iron loss analysis of interior permanent magnet synchronous motors by considering mechanical stress and deformation of stators and rotors. IEEE Trans Magn2014; 50: 909–912.
67.
XuYLiuXCaoX, et al.Artificial intelligence: A powerful paradigm for scientific research. Innovation2021; 2: 1–20.
68.
DziallasMBlindK. Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis. Technovation2019; 80-81: 3–29.
69.
HassanKEMadhumG. Validating the Watson Glaser critical thinking appraisal. High Educ2007; 54: 361–383.
70.
FrisbyCLTraffanstedtBK. Time and performance on the California Critical Thinking Skills Test. J College Read Learn2003; 34: 26–43.
