As discussed in the previous chapters, there are compelling reasons for university engineering programs to educate students in a broad set of personal and interpersonal skills, and product, process, and system building skills, as well as to instruct them in the technical disciplines. We argued that the best way to accomplish this is to stress the fundamentals, and to set the education in the context of conceiving-designing-implementing-operating products, processes, and systems (the essence of CDIO Standard 1); that students are expected to achieve a comprehensive set of learning outcomes, as defined by the CDIO Syllabus; and that learning outcomes should be comprehensive, be consistent with program goals, and be validated by program stakeholders (the essence of Standard 2). The first three chapters have laid out a process to answer the first of the two central questions.
Keywords
- Learning Outcome
- Interpersonal Skill
- Master Plan
- Disciplinary Knowledge
- Curriculum Structure
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Edström, K., Gunnarsson, S., Gustafsson, G. (2007). Integrated Curriculum Design. In: Rethinking Engineering Education. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-38290-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-38290-6_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-38287-6
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-38290-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)
