Center for e-Design Publications Center for e-Design

2010

ROXIE: Real Outreach eXperiences InEngineering First-Year Engineering StudentsDesigning for Community PartnersRichard M. GoffVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Christopher WilliamsVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Janis P. TerpennyVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, terpenny@iastate.edu

Karen GilbertVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Tamara KnottVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

See next page for additional authors

Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/edesign_pubs

Part of the Educational Methods Commons, Engineering Education Commons, and theMechanical Engineering Commons

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for e-Design at Digital Repository @ Iowa State University. It has been accepted forinclusion in Center for e-Design Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital Repository @ Iowa State University. For more information,please contact digirep@iastate.edu.

Recommended CitationGoff, Richard M.; Williams, Christopher; Terpenny, Janis P.; Gilbert, Karen; Knott, Tamara; and Lo, Jenny, "ROXIE: Real OutreacheXperiences In Engineering First-Year Engineering Students Designing for Community Partners" (2010). Center for e-DesignPublications. Paper 5.http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/edesign_pubs/5

AuthorsRichard M. Goff, Christopher Williams, Janis P. Terpenny, Karen Gilbert, Tamara Knott, and Jenny Lo

This article is available at Digital Repository @ Iowa State University: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/edesign_pubs/5

ROXIE: Real Outreach eXperiences InEngineering First-Year EngineeringStudents Designing for CommunityPartners*

RICHARD M. GOFF,1 CHRISTOPHER WILLIAMS,1,2 JANIS P. TERPENNY,1,2

KAREN GILBERT,3 TAMARA KNOTT1 and JENNY LO1

1Department of Engineering Education (0218), Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061, USA.

E-mail: richgoff@vt.edu, cbwilliams@vt.edu, terpenny@vt.edu, knott@vt.edu, jlo@vt.edu2Department of Mechanical Engineering (0238), Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061,USA.3Center for Student Engagement and Community Partnerships (0168), Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA

2406, USA. E-mail: karenise@vt.edu

This paper reports on the major undertaking of providing real problems with actual communitypartners as the basis of design projects for approximately 900 first-year engineering students. Theinitiative was dubbed the ROXIE project, ‘Real Outreach eXperiences In Engineering’. The goalwas to have engineering students work on real projects with actual clients rather than contrived lessmeaningful projects. Sustainability is a key element in three primary aspects of the ROXIE project.First, numerous projects for the community were directed at finding sustainable solutions toproblems around their operation or economic viability. The second sustainability aspect for theROXIE project involves identifying hands-on activities and associated materials for the once perweek workshop sessions associated with the large lecture course. The third aspect of sustainabilityfor the ROXIE project addresses issues of how to sustain and maintain the partnerships andinstructional infrastructure of such a large undertaking for the long-term. This paper provides themotivation and greater detail of the background of ROXIE and then expands upon the three aspectsof sustaining sustainable design highlighted above. Early results of integrating an area of socialsignificance into design education have been very positive. Reflections from students, communitypartners and the instructional team are shared. Summary and future plans are also included.

Keywords: design education; first year design; service learning; student engagement; sustainabledesign; large engineering class

1. INTRODUCTION

EACH YEAR the instructors of the first-yearcourse for engineering students, ENGE 1114:Exploration of Engineering Design, are facedwith the challenge of providing a meaningful andvaluable project experience that supports learningand fosters interest about engineering design.While past projects have been suitable for achiev-ing basic learning outcomes, the contrived natureof these projects does not adequately provide anopportunity for students to learn about or gainexperience with important design topics such asworking with a customer, identifying customerrequirements, framing an open-ended design prob-lem, and most importantly, identifying their role asa responsible contributing engineer in the world atlarge. In the spring semester of 2008, all fiveinstructors of ENGE 1114, who are also co-authors of this paper, looked to service-learningas a means of achieving these broader learning

objectives while still meeting the course learningoutcomes for engineering design.This paper reports on the major undertaking of

providing real problems with actual communitypartners as the basis of design projects for approxi-mately 900 first-year engineering students. Theinitiative was dubbed the ROXIE project, whereROXIE is derived from ‘Real Outreach eXperi-ences In Engineering’. The mascot is a fish namedRoxie. Our goal was to put the fish back into thewater. This being our analogy of having engineer-ing students work on real projects with actualclients rather than contrived less meaningfulprojects. As shown in the photo of Roxie (Fig.1), there are treasures to be discovered with realproblems and partners.Initially, ROXIE was created to engage students

and contribute to the community. Very quickly itbecame evident that sustainability was a criticalcentral consideration for the long term viability ofthe ROXIE design projects, support activities, andinfrastructure. Sustainability has been a keyelement in three primary aspects of the ROXIE* Accepted 10 November 2009.

349

Int. J. Engng Ed. Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 349–358, 2010 0949-149X/91 $3.00+0.00Printed in Great Britain. # 2010 TEMPUS Publications.

project almost from the beginning. First, numer-ous projects for the community were directed atfinding solutions to problems around their opera-tion or economic viability that involve workingwith limited resources, conserving the earth’sresources, and minimizing environmental impactsuch as: living quarters for girl scout camps, waterrun-off control, outdoor amphitheater, landscaperedesign, program for collection, refurbish andredistribution to the needy of retired computers,church kitchen redesign, wind diversion, studentfood pantry, dog shelters for humane society,alternative energy, and water pump system.The second sustainability aspect for the ROXIE

project involves identifying hands-on activities andassociated materials for the once per week work-shop sessions associated with the large lecturecourse. The approximately 900 students, who areenrolled in one of three 300-seat lecture sections(Fig. 2), are further divided into weekly 30-seatworkshop sections. In the workshops, studentsapply concepts introduced in the lecture, readingand/or assignments to hands-on activities aroundlearning engineering design process andmethods, aswell as teaming and project management skills. Asone would imagine with large numbers, the chal-lenge here was to identify activities that are enga-

ging, accomplish the learning objectives and makeuse of materials that are inexpensive, reusable, andin cases of disposal, are decomposable. These activ-ities exposed students to sustainability throughexample rather than teaching or assessing studentsustainability knowledge as this teaching andassessment was done in the preceding first semestercourse where the central theme is sustainability.The third aspect of sustainability for the ROXIE

project involves addressing issues of how to sustainand maintain the partnerships and instructionalinfrastructure of such a large undertaking for thelong-term. We were all committed to the ROXIEproject, knowing the growing body of researchthat supports the benefits of service-learning byhaving real projects and actual partners for studentlearning and engagement [1–3]. How would wedesign, implement and sustain the continuedoperation of this program with consideration oflimited budget and reasonable time commitment ofteaching faculty, graduate teaching assistants andour community partners?This paper will provide the motivation and

greater detail of the background to ROXIE andthen expand upon the three aspects of sustainingsustainable design highlighted above: designprojects focused on sustainability; sustainabilityand hands-on learning activities for large numbers;and sustaining community partnerships andinstructional infrastructure for large-scale servicelearning focused design projects. Early results ofintegrating an area of social significance intodesign education have been very positive. Theassertion that these projects are more meaningfulfor students is the subject of future research.However, students have welcomed both thehands-on and personal contribution aspects oftheir projects. Community partners have sharedthe significance of the results of the ROXIE projectfor their organizations and their continuedcommitment to participate. Reflections fromstudents, community partners and the instruc-tional team are shared. Conclusions and futureplans are also included.

2. BACKGROUND AND RELATEDLITERATURE

Important questions and statements about thepreparation of students to think globally andabout sustainability have been raised in a growingnumber of national publications. The Engineer of2020 published by the National Academy of En-gineering (NAE) [4], questions: ‘Do U.S. engineersunderstand enough culturally, for example, torespond to the needs of the multiple niches in aglobal market? Can we continue to expect every-one else to speak English?’ A follow up report ofthe NAE [5] states the following about the U.S.Engineer of 2020 and beyond: ‘It is expected thatU.S. engineers will be based abroad, will have totravel (physically or virtually) around the world to

Fig. 1. Roxie—putting the fish back in the water.

Fig. 2. Large 300 seat lecture section.

R. M. Goff et al.350

meet customers, and will have to converse profi-ciently in more than one language. Flexibility andrespect for ways to life different from ours will becritical to professional success.’ Further, numerousother quotes by respected academicians and CEOshighlight the importance of global education. Forexample: Frank Rhodes, President Emeritus,Cornell University states: ‘The [New AmericanUniversity] .. will be international in its orientationand cosmopolitan in its character; study abroadwill become a norm.’ [6].Equally concerning, is the preparation of the

Engineer of 2020 to be socially conscious. This isclearly important preparation for engineers whoare poised to apply their knowledge and skills forthe betterment of humankind. At the same time,we also believe that opportunities for students toengage in projects and learning activities, such ashuman centered design projects, may also have asignificant impact on the interest and learning of amore diverse student body, particularly for womenstudents [7]. There is a growing body of researchthat suggests that by addressing gender differencesin learning style and perceptions of technology andinterests, a more equitable environment in engin-eering classes could be created by changing theprimary activities used to introduce or reinforceconcepts [8–13]. For instance, traditionally classprojects in engineering/technology often focus onthe artifacts of design such as engines, gears,robots, etc. rather than the motivation behindsuch devices such as the benefits to humankind.While their male counterparts may find the arti-facts alone exciting, females often require a moreholistic approach.For students to think more holistically, there are

three major skills that engineering students need todevelop: 1. global/cultural competencies; 2.socially conscious/human-centered design; and 3.design for sustainability. Clearly, there is signifi-cant motivation and need for preparing holisticengineers. The sections that follow provide detailson how Virginia Tech begins to address these needsthrough service-learning and human-centereddesign projects and activities for first-year engin-eering students.

3. SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITYPROJECTS

With the aid of VT ENGAGE and the VirginiaTech Service Learning Center, 185 teamscomposed of nominally five students each werepaired with dozens of non-profit communityorganizations. The student teams acted as ‘SystemsDesign Consultants’ and were instructed to ‘serveand improve’ the community through engineeringdesign. Specifically, the teams were tasked with (i)performing an act of service for the communityorganization, (ii) meeting with the communityorganization’s leader to identify a design problem

that needed to be solved, and (iii) proposing asolution to the identified problem by following thedesign method taught in class. As expected,projects were quite varied and included tacklingproblems such as the redesign of recreationalrooms for the volunteer Fire Department, design-ing the landscaping for local churches, and design-ing tip-proof feed bowls for the animal shelter. Atthe conclusion of the project, each team submitteda design solution to the community partner as wellas a proposal for its implementation—the bestproposals were considered for future funding[14]. Many of these projects dealt with sustain-ability issues that were discovered and negotiatedwith community partners in the course of carryingout the design project.As participants in the ROXIE project, students

serve as design consultants for non-profit commu-nity organizations. As such, they are not given aproblem description; they are to visit the commu-nity partner and identify a need. To complete thistask, the students proceed through the followingfive phases:

. Perform service. In order to identify opportu-nities for improvement, the students must firstget first-hand experience with the communitypartner. In this first phase of the project whichtook a couple of days, students perform a smallvolunteer activity so they may better understandthe needs and the mission of the organizationwith which they are partnered.

. Identify a need. Once the volunteer activity iscomplete, the students are asked to reflect ontheir experience and meet with the communitypartner liaison in order to identify an opportu-nity within the organization for improvement.

. Propose a design project. With a need identified,the student teams propose a formal design pro-ject for the course. This proposal is guided bythree questions: ‘is there an opportunity forimprovement?’, ‘are there multiple objectivesand constraints that must be met for a satisfac-tory solution?’, and ‘are there multiple alterna-tives for a successful solution to the problem?’The students are required to submit a writtenproject proposal in which they describe why theyare able to answer each question in the affirma-tive.

. Propose a solution by following a systematicdesign process. Once the problem is appropri-ately defined, the students begin to search for adesign solution through the application of thesystematic design process presented in thecourse.

. Document and present their solutions to theirclass as well as their community partners.

In Table 1, the design phases, deliverables, andproject deadlines are shown in detail.To provide a service-learning design experience

on such a large scale, the instructional teamimplemented the ROXIE project in four primarysteps:

ROXIE: First-Year Engineering Students Designing for Community Partners 351

. Establishing community partners. Connectionswith community partners were establishedthrough the VT ENGAGE program of theCenter for Student Engagement and Commu-nity Partnerships. An emerging trend acrossmany campuses nationwide, campus/communityoutreach offices provide support for on-campusservice-learning programs. A memo announcingthe ROXIE project and its objectives was sent tocommunity organizations as a means of solicit-ing potential partnerships. Ultimately 87 com-munity partners were matched with 185 studentdesign teams. Some partners had multiple teamsworking with them on a variety of projects.

. Connecting students to the community organ-izations. Students were given a choice as towhich organization they would work with fortheir design project. An online signup methodwas used to provide students their choice ofpartner on a first-come, first-served basis. Con-tact information for the organization was pro-vided upon a successful match. Multiple teamswere assigned to some partners, with no morethan four teams per partner. Each team focusedon different projects.

. Presenting design methodology content.With stu-dents and community organizations paired, theinstructional team presented four lectures on thestructured design process. These lectures includedproject management, identifying design require-ments, identifying functions, and generating,evaluating, and selecting design alternatives.

. Assessment. Students’ design projects wereassessed primarily through a written designreport and formal oral presentations. In addi-tion to faculty assessment, the oral presentationswere peer reviewed. Students were also requiredto submit a personal essay with reflections ontheir project learning experience—a critical com-ponent of any service-learning effort. Finally, inaddition to the design project deliverables, stu-dents’ understanding of design process contentwas supported and evaluated by workshopquizzes, homework, and activities.

As one would expect, the details and extent offaculty and graduate student involvement havedirect impact on the long term sustainability ofthe project. This will be discussed in Section 5 ofthis paper.A small sampling of the 185 projects completed

during the initial ROXIE implementation isprovided in Table 2. As can be seen in the table,the projects are not centered in a single discipline.All of these however, had an aspect of sustain-ability. The projects are varied in that they requirethe students to use the design process to realizeboth products and processes, and solve a widerange of community needs.Figure 3 is a photo of two students, reading a

thank you note from the director of Beans & Rice,Inc. The students were part of the team thatparticipated in the refurbishing of recycled compu-ters for Beans & Rice, Inc. These refurbishedcomputers assisted ten students completing theirGEDs. The students are at their poster during theOutreach Expo which was an Expo of all theoutreach and service-learning projects at VirginiaTech. As an indication of the contribution of theROXIE design project to the outreach mission ofVirginia Tech and the community, the ROXIEproject had 40 of the 80 posters presented at theExpo.

4. SUSTAINABLE HANDS-ON ACTIVITIESAND MATERIALS

In addition to considerations of the sustainabil-ity of the ROXIE project, the authors have alsoinvestigated sustainability issues pertaining to theproject’s related in-class activities. Due to the largeenrollment, the class workshop sections’ hands-onactivities must be carefully designed so that theirrequired resources have a minimal environmentalimpact. Specifically, the instructors create activ-ities that feature reusable materials, recyclablematerials, and materials that are derived fromsustainable resources.

Table 1. Design phases, deliverables and deadlines for the ROXIE projects

Design phase Deliverable Deadline (week of)

Phase 1: Identify problem � Submit preference list of community service groups � February 4th� Notes from meeting with community service group leaders(s) � February 18th

Phase 2: Clarification of task � Project proposal and problem description � February 18th� Team code of cooperation� Work breadown structure � February 25th� Project plan, including Gantt Chart, roles etc.� List of design requirements � March 10th

Phase 3: Conceptual design � Function structure � March 10th� Alternatives� Selection of principal solution

Phase 4: Preliminary design � May include a variety of models

Phase 5: Documentation � Project report � March 17th� Project presentation� Individual log book� Reflection-based learning essay

R. M. Goff et al.352

One example of how sustainability issues haveshaped instructional design is in the creation of amechanical dissection activity. Used as a means forproviding students a physical context for theconcepts of functional decomposition, mechanicaldissection activities [15, 16] can be especiallyresource intensive for large enrollments. In thefirst implementation of a mechanical dissectionactivity in ENGE 1114, students dissected dispo-sable toothbrushes. While the toothbrushesprovided an appropriate mechanism for functionalanalysis, they were not reusable because of theirsealed casings. In an effort to make the activitymore sustainable, the authors have recentlychanged the activity to feature See-N-Say toys asthe subject of dissection. These toys providestudents a basis for understanding functionaldecomposition and, through comparison with

older models of the toy, provide a means forstudents to observe how different means canachieve the same function. Since the act of dissect-ing a See-N-Say requires the removal of a total ofonly eight screws, these toys can be repeatedlydissected without fear of students damaging thecomponents or of students being unable to reas-semble the devices in working order.Another example of the authors’ incorporation

of sustainability objectives into the design of in-class activities can be found in their design of ateam-building activity. As ROXIE is a team-baseddesign project, the instructors desired to create anactivity that provided a structured opportunity forthe student teams to form and that also providedthem a time for reflection on their initial teaminteractions. As discussed in detail in [17], fourdifferent team-building activities were ideated andtested within the workshop sections as a means ofinvestigating the potential tradeoffs between cost,environmental impact, engagement, and designand teaming learning objectives. These alternativesfeatured various levels of resource commitment:balloons and tape were used for a balloon tower-building activity; paper and tape were used for apaper tower-building activity (Fig. 4); Tinker-ToyTM kits were used for a TinkerToyTM towerbuilding activity, and, finally, no resources wereused for a discussion-based speculative survivalscenario activity. Using Likert scale survey dataand a systematic selection procedure, the instruc-tional team was able to select an activity alter-native which provided the best compromise to themultiple, conflicting objectives. The Paper towerprovided the best compromise with the balloonand TinkerToyTM close behind.Fig. 3. Beans & rice ROXIE team at outreach expo.

Table 2. A sample of ROXIE design projects dealing with sustainability

Community organization Design project description and impact

Beans & Rice, Inc. Students designed a systematic process for volunteers to follow when refurbishing and recyclingcomputers for this organization which provides students needing a computer for successfullycompleting their GEDs.

Boy Scouts Redesign of an existing outdoor amphitheater. This included considerations of layout to preventerosion, sustainable construction materials, and a means of anchoring seating to the hillside forlong term use.

Food Bank Design of a device that would assist volunteers with transporting canned food from the basementof the building to its distribution floor. This reduced physical stress and allowed elderly tovolunteer.

Humane Society Design of feeding bowls that could not be tipped by dogs thereby saving maintenance, water andcleanup as well as sustaining the health of the animals.

March of Dimes Instructional materials and methods for the organizations’ clients for future fundraising weredesigned.

Faith-based Organization Design of a system to control water runoff from the building site; thereby reducing future erosion,maintenance, and aesthetic appeal of the landscaping.

Campus Rescue Squad Students designed a custom workbench for the ambulance maintenance crew; thus reducingbending and fatigue for these critical and highly stressed workers. The bench would be built fromsustainable and recycled materials.

Community Transit System A team designed an efficient route and method for volunteers to follow when cleaning a largenumber of bus stops spread around the area after large events in town. This plan savedconsiderable consulting dollars by creating a plan to be used for all future cleanups.

Nursing Home Students designed a flower/vegetable planting bed that was wheelchair accessible. In addition tothe assistive technology value of this project to the residents, the ability of residents to plant andgrow food to sustain themselves was greatly enhanced.

ROXIE: First-Year Engineering Students Designing for Community Partners 353

5. SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE

As mentioned above, faculty and graduatestudent time and commitment are major factorsin the sustainability of such a large and variedservice learning project. The community partners’time and commitment are also critical to sustainsuch a project. Given that there are approximately900 first-year engineering students participating inthis project and only five faculty members and 10graduate teaching assistants, the time for faculty tomentor graduate students who in turn mentor the185 design teams is significant. While the value ofthe resulting design solutions and design reportsfor the community partners could be significant,the time commitments of community partners inplanning, meeting with students to clarify theirdesign requirements, and attend the studentpresentations is also significant. Hence, creatingan environment to support these partnerships wasalso imperative to long term success. Truly, thesuccesses of this initial project semester would nothave been possible had it not been for the tirelessefforts of the coordinator and co-author KarenGilbert and staff of the VT ENGAGE program[18], committed student teams, GTAs, and faculty.For the ROXIE Project to be sustainable, it

required reflection and examination of the manyaspects of the project. An initial idea that was notexercised in the spring 2008 offering was to havemultiple teams working on the same project for asingle client thereby reducing the number of differ-ent projects. The spring of 2009 saw an increase ofenrollment to 1,064 students and a reduction ofcommunity partners. As a result, the instructionalteam (now expanded to six) chose to divide the1,064 students into two groups. One group ofroughly half of the students would work onROXIE projects with actual clients and the otherhalf of the students would work on assistivetechnology projects called HELP (Human-centered Engineering Learning Projects) thetwenty projects available to students for HELPcame from projects two of the authors had devel-oped in the past [19–21]. The major difference for

these projects is that they did not have actualclients for students to interact with (althoughthey may have had in the initial generation ofthese projects). This approach along with multipleteams working somewhat competitively on thesame project moved the ROXIE project in amore sustainable direction (with 500 rather thanroughly 1,000 students). This change has alsoprovided the means of further research into thepros and cons of working with real projects withactual clients. This will be discussed further in theFuture Work Section 7.

6. RESULTS

As mentioned in Section 3, each student mustcomplete an individual reflection essay at thecompletion of the semester design project. Theauthors use excerpts from essays from the inaugu-ral implementation of the ROXIE project asanecdotal support for, or counterpoints to, twoimportant aspects of the ROXIE Project; DesignLearning and Service-Learning. Excerpts arethematically presented in this section.

6.1 Design learningSeveral students reflected on the manner in

which the ROXIE project experience positivelyaffected their understanding of the design process.

The ROXIE project . . . has greatly helped instill theprinciples of the design process in my mind. I havelearned that there is a lot more to it than just writingdown the problem, brainstorming, and experimenting.

Before this class, I would have probably been biasedand chosen the coolest looking design. However, Ilearned to methodically progress through the stepsand choose the best plan of action.

Many students discussed how their understandingof the engineering discipline had been shaped bythe ROXIE project experience.

The ROXIE project was a unique experience thathelped me to improve on my design abilities andalso showed me what the future as an engineerwould be like.

Before entering the ENG program at VT I was asubmarine mechanic for the US Navy . . . Lookingback at this period in my life I wish that I had some ofthe problem definition skills that I was taught duringthese beginning engineering courses.

Some students articulated their preference forROXIE projects over other project types.

I fully believe that what we did was infinitely timesmore effective and educational than the ‘pumpkinlauncher’ projects. I believe that the project madewhat we learned in the classroom more practicaland easy to understand contrary to what I believewas meant to happen, where the classroom learningmade the project easier to accomplish.

I thought I was going to design an object within agroup and have competition with other groups. How-

Fig. 4. Team building paper tower in 30 seat workshop.

R. M. Goff et al.354

ever (through ROXIE) I recognized design is morethan that and it is a process of finding and solvingthese problems.

Of course, not all students’ responses were posi-tive. Some students expressed frustration in therequirement to use design methods, and ques-tioned their general applicability.

I doubt that big engineering firms like LockheedMartin would dedicate so much time trying tocreate graphs and charts—they would dedicate theirtime on brainstorming ideas and proposing solutionsto their problems.

The process is not important. It is the solution that isthe result of any process that is important. (Ourpartner) doesn’t care if we (used) a Gantt Chart oreven the way in which we analyzed different designsolutions, all they care about is the final solution.

Other students were troubled by the course’s focusin the design process, and desired projects thatwere more closely related to their perception of theengineering career.

(ROXIE) was not the best medium for learning aboutthe design process . . . something more technicalwould have appealed to (students’) interests in thefield of engineering.

6.2 Service-LearningIn general, the large majority of students

responded positively to the service-learningaspect of the ROXIE experience.

It is easy for students to struggle in finding a purposefor studying engineering during their freshmen year.ROXIE was an experience that allowed students tomake their studies worthwhile, share their hard workwith the community, and develop their engineeringdesign skills and communication skills.

I really enjoyed being able to work with a communitypartner . . . I believe that the overall process was apositive experience.

Working with the community was very gratifyingexperience and helped me to realize how muchpeople appreciate volunteering work.

I found it rather fulfilling. I have learned that doingwhat we did for the ROXIE project is something that Ithink I would enjoy doing for a living. . . . It reallyallows us to see what it is actually like to work as anengineer in the real world, and that experience ispriceless.

The students’ commitment to satisfying the needsof their community partner was strong, asevidenced by some students’ concerns that theabsence of actual realization made ROXIE lacktrue value.

The only thing that I think is wrong with this projectis the fact that we are not able to deliver our design toour community partners. It feels like we are tauntingthem with a solution to a major problem of theirswithout delivering the solution to them.

In addition to student reflections, the instructionalteam received considerable unsolicited positivefeedback from the community partners through

e-mail and letters. Some community partner feed-back included:

Just a quick note to say Thank You for developing theROXIE project. We always enjoy exposing students,particularly Freshmen, to community service andhelping them understand how their expertise andtime can make a difference in the community. It wasenjoyable, and impressive, listening to their presenta-tions.

Executive Director, YMCA at Virginia Tech

I just wanted to express my thanks for the opportu-nity to work with your Engineering students. It was apleasure to work with this group as they handledthemselves in a very professional manner.

The plans that were submitted as part of their finalreport will most likely be implemented as soon as weare able to work out the logistics of the move. We hadhoped to find a ‘better’ use of our space but withlimited time and staff had not been able to look atwhat our options might be. What a great benefit tothe museum this assignment was!

It is so good to see the University helping the commu-nity in these ways. Rest assured that as you send yourstudents out, they are representing you well!’

Executive Director, Montgomery Museumand Lewis Miller Regional Art Center

Thanks to the hard work of our ROXIE team, 28young people working on their GED’s already have acomputer to help them with their studies, which willhelp ensure their success with passing this test.

Executive Director, Beans and Rice

We plan to implement as many projects as possibledeveloped by our ROXIE teams. We are lookingforward to a continued relationship with engineeringstudents at Virginia Tech—possibly even working onmore advanced projects as seniors.

Director, Girl Scouts of Virginia,Skyline Council

The instructional team also offered these reflec-tions on the ROXIE Project via e-mail.

It has been a challenge having so many studentsenrolled in projects that are real problems for com-munity partners. Yet, students are so much moredevoted to doing a good job for their client than forjust themselves. It’s rewarding to see them dedicatedand learning the many lessons that so often don’tcome until capstone design for seniors.

and

The ROXIE project was born from a desire to createmore meaningful, realistic, and engaging design pro-jects for our first-year students. The aspects of givingback to the community, working with actual clientsand on real, ill defined problems were truly valuableand eye opening for many students.

and

In general, I was pleased with the ROXIE project. Theservice learning component fits perfectly under theVirginia Tech motto: Ut Prosim (‘That I may serve’). Ienjoyed seeing student presentations in class and atthe university-wide service learning expo. It was clearthat students were challenged by real world issues:differences in client and student expectations, limited

ROXIE: First-Year Engineering Students Designing for Community Partners 355

resources, open-ended problems, etc.; students seemedto understand that they were representing the engin-eering profession and the university and acted inaccordance. I think three things that helped someteams be more successful were: (1) being paired witha responsive community partner that was easilyaccessible to the team through the project (2) under-standing the links to engineering design even if aproject did not seem engineering related on the sur-face and (3) understanding the limitations of theproject deliverables to the community partner.

and

Initially, the ROXIE project was focused on engagingdesign projects for students, while contributing andgiving back to the community, most of the projectsdealt with sustainability issues. However, it becamequickly evident that if sustainability was not a keyconsideration in all aspects of this program, then theROXIE project would have a very short life.

7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

This paper presented the motivation and back-ground for the Real Outreach eXperiences In

Engineering (ROXIE) projects at Virginia Techwhere first-year engineering students take on realproblems with actual community partners. Threeaspects of sustaining sustainable design aredescribed. Reflections from students, communitypartners and the instructional team are shared. Inaddition to the continued improvement of theimplementation of the ROXIE project, futurework will focus on researching the effects ofproviding students with direct customer inter-action. Specifically the authors will assess howfirst-year student interaction with a real customercan affect their motivation, self-efficacy, anddesign learning. In addition, the hypothesis thatreal projects with actual partners are more mean-ingful will be investigated. It is clear watchingstudent presentations that the ROXIE Projectpresenters exhibit much more passion and owner-ship than the presenters of other projects. In thefuture, the authors will compare responses fromstudents involved in the ROXIE project with thoseinvolved in the HELP projects (Human-centeredEngineering Learning Projects without communitypartners) as a means of completing this research.

REFERENCES

1. E. J. Coyle, L. H. Jamieson, et al., EPICS: Engineering Projects in Community Service,International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 2005, pp. 139–150.

2. H. M. Matusovich, D. Follman and W. Oakes, Work in progress: a student perspective why womenchoose service-learning. Proceedings—ASEE-IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, San Diego,CA, USA, 2006.

3. W. Astin and L. J. Sax, How Undergraduates Are Affected by Service Participation, Journal ofCollege Student Development, 39(3), 1998, pp. 251–263.

4. NAE, The Engineer of 2020, National Academy of Engineering Publication, Web site:www.nae.edu, 2004.

5. NAE, Educating the Engineer of 2020, National Academy of Engineering Publication, Web site:www.nae.edu, 2005.

6. American Council on Education, Internationalizing the Campus—A User’s Guide, WashingtonD.C., 2003.

7. T. Gralinski and J. P. Terpenny, K-12 and University Collaboration: A Vehicle to ImproveCurriculum and Female Enrollment in Engineering and Technology, ASEE Annual Conferenceand Exposition, Nashville, Tennessee, June 22–25, 2003, CD-Rom Session 2692, 2003, pp. 1–9.

8. K. Welty and B. Puck, Modeling Athena: Preparing Young Women for Citizenship and Work in aTechnological Society, University of Wisconsin-Stout, 2001.

9. Wisconsin Dept. of Public Instruction, Power Point Presentation Regarding: Recruiting andRetaining Young Women in Technology Education, http://www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dlsis/cte/tbad-dres.html.

10. M. Thom, Balancing the Equation: Where Are Women & Girls in Science, Engineering &Technology? National Council for Research on Women, http://www.ncrw.org/research/sci-facts.htm, 2001.

11. W. Schwartz and K. Hanson, Equal Mathematics Education for Female Students, Number 78, EricClearinghouse of Urban Education, 1992.

12. M. R. Anderson-Rowland, Why Aren’t There More Women in Engineering: Can We Really DoAnything? ASEE SW Regional Conference, 2002.

13. S. Blaisdell, Factors in the Under Representation of Women in Science and Engineering: A Review ofthe Literature, Women in Engineering Program Advocates Network, Working Paper, pp. 95–1,Dec. 1995.

14. C. B. Williams, R. Goff, J. Terpenny, M. Knott, J. Lo and K. Gilbert, Real Outreach eXperiences.In: Engineering: Merging Service-Learning and Design in a First-Year Engineering Course, ASEEAnnual Conference and Exhibition, Austin, TX. 2009.

15. A. Hande, W. He, N. Barakat and M. Carroll, Product Dissection: An Important Tool for a FirstYear Introduction to Engineering Course Project, Proceedings of the ASEE North CentralConference, 2005.

16. T. Simpson, G. Kremer, K. Lewis, R. Stone and S. Shooter, A Hands-On Product DissectionWorkshop for Engineering Educators, 22–25 June, 2008 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition,Pittsburgh, PA, 2008.

R. M. Goff et al.356

17. C. B. Williams, L. D. McNair, E. Crede, M. C. Paretti and J. P. Terpenny, Designing Hands-OnTeaming Activities for Courses with Large Enrollments: Exploring Sustainability Tradeoffs, MuddDesign Workshop VII: Sustaining Sustainable Design, Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA.2009.

18. VT-ENGAGE Program at Virginia Tech. http://www.engage.vt.edu/19. J. P. Terpenny and R. M. Goff, Utilizing Assistive Technology Design Projects and Interdisciplinary

Teams to Foster Inquiry and Learning in Engineering Design, Harvey Mudd Design V Workshop,May 19–21, Claremont, CA also in Special Issue of the International Journal of EngineeringEducation, 2005.

20. R. M. Goff, J. P. Terpenny, M. R. Vernon and W. R. Green, Work in Progress—InterdisciplinaryDesign of Assistive Technology for the Third World, Proceedings of the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiersin Education Conference, October 19–22, 2005, Indianapolis, IN, 2005.

21. J. Terpenny, et al., Senior Design Projects to Aid the Disabled, Proceedings ASEE 2001 Conferenceand Exposition, Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 24–27, 2001, CD-Rom Session 2325, pp. 1–11,2001.

Richard M. Goff is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education. Hehas been teaching engineering for over 30 years and is currently assistant department headand co-director of the engineering first-year program in the Department of EngineeringEducation. He is the director of the Frith Freshman Engineering Design Laboratory inoperation since 1998. He is committed to creating interdisciplinary, innovative, sustainable,and engaging design projects in engineering education. His educational background is inAerospace Engineering and has worked in the aerospace and motorcycle industries. He isan active member of ASEE, ASME, and SAE. Dr. Goff teaches first-year, senior andgraduate design courses and is the faculty advisor of the VT Baja SAE Team. His researchareas are in curricular design and design education.

Christopher B. Williams is an Assistant Professor at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute &State University, where he directs the Design, Research, and Education for AdditiveManufacturing Systems (DREAMS) Laboratory. His joint appointment in the MechanicalEngineering and Engineering Education departments reflects his diverse research interestswhich include layered manufacturing, design methodology, and design education. Dr.Williams conducted his graduate studies at the Georgia Institute of Technology (Ph.D.,2008; M.S., 2003) where he was a National Science Foundation IGERT Graduate ResearchFellow and a Georgia Tech Presidential Fellow. He is a member of American Society ofMechanical Engineers (ASME), the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE),and The Minerals, Metals &Materials Society (TMS). Dr. Williams was the recipient of theBest Paper Award at the 2008 ASME Design for Manufacturing and the Life CycleConference. As a member of an instructional team that orchestrated a service-learningdesign project for the first-year engineering program, Professor Williams has been recentlyawarded the Virginia Tech College of Engineering Dean’s Outreach Excellence Award.

Janis P. Terpenny is a Professor in the Department of Engineering Education with a jointappointment in Mechanical Engineering with an affiliate faculty position in Industrial &Systems Engineering at Virginia Tech. Dr. Terpenny is the director of the NSF Center for e-Design. Her research goal is to revolutionize how engineered products and systems aredesigned, including: design process and methodology, knowledge representation and use,product families and platforms, and methods to predict and plan for obsolescence. Dr.Terpenny is devoted to improving design education and inspiring creativity and pride instudents. Prior to joining Virginia Tech in 2004, she was on the faculty at the University ofMassachusetts Amherst. She has several years of work experience with General Electric(GE) and completed the 2-year information systems management program (ISMP). She hasbeen the principal or co-principal investigator on over $5 million of research funded byNSF and industry, and has published several book chapters, and over 90 peer reviewedjournal and conference proceedings papers. She is a member of ASEE, ASME, IIE, andAlpha Pi Mu and currently serves as the Design Economics area editor for The EngineeringEconomist.

Karen Gilbert is the Assistant Director of the Center for Student Engagement andCommunity Partnerships and the Coordinator of VT-ENGAGE at Virginia Tech. TheCenter is devoted to being a hub for student engagement with non-profit organizations,civic groups, schools, and community agencies across the Commonwealth of Virginia andbeyond. VT-ENGAGE provides the resources and links for the Virginia Tech communityto find a place to volunteer their time, talents and energy and make a difference in thecommunity. ROXIE projects would not be possible if it were not for the extraordinaryefforts of Karen.

ROXIE: First-Year Engineering Students Designing for Community Partners 357

Tamara Knott is an Associate Professor in the Department of Engineering Education atVirginia Tech. She is the course coordinator for Exploration of Engineering Design, thesecond semester freshman course taken by the majority of freshman engineers at VirginiaTech. She is responsible adding formal coverage of design topics to the course. Hereducational background is in Engineering Mechanics and her research interests focus onpedagogy, assessment, and gender. She is a member of ASEE and SWE.

Jenny Lo is an advanced instructor in the Department of Engineering Education at VirginiaTech. Her educational background is in Chemical Engineering (B.S. from Tulane andPh.D. from Carnegie Mellon University). Jenny primarily teaches first-year courses withsignificant design content. Her research areas are in curriculum development, engineeringethics, and undergraduate education.

R. M. Goff et al.358