CDIO. CAN WE CONTINUE THE WAY WE ARE?

CDIO. CAN WE CONTINUE THE WAY WE ARE?

A. Kamp (2021).  CDIO. CAN WE CONTINUE THE WAY WE ARE?. 19.

In 10 workshops all over the globe, about 150 CDIO community members discussed the status quo, explored the fit between the current CDIO organisation and the changing environment, set goals, and substantiated arguments for a roadmap for CDIO 2030. They formulated new mission and vision statements for the CDIO Initiative and conceived ideas for the advancement of the CDIO framework. The goal setting and strategic thinking has culminated in a proposal for more structure to consolidate the community of practice with durable engagement and stronger involvement in orchestrated experimentation and sharing of practice. A broad consensus amongst the members exists about the urgency and importance to advance the CDIO framework beyond updating the syllabus or growing in numbers. Many members expect guidance for new developments in engineering education. The lack in evidence of the impact of the CDIO Initiative is an important issue. A major concern is the risk that the holistic nature of the CDIO framework is diluted. Whilst the landscape of engineering education has changed significantly over the past 20 years, in the outside world CDIO has almost become a synonym for conceive-design-build-operate projects. The initiative is at a crossroads of proceeding as before, or turning the tide and lead change in the next decades. The paper addresses the status quo as perceived by the members, the shift in engagement by newcomers and retirements from the community and the reformulation of the mission and vision statements for the CDIO Initiative. The paper gives an inventory of breakthroughs that are necessary to move CDIO back into a leadership position of innovative engineering education, if that is what we want.

Authors (New): 
Aldert Kamp
Pages: 
19
Affiliations: 
Aldert Kamp Advies, The Netherlands
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Keywords: 
Organisation
community
framework
Roadmap 2030
Mission
vision
CDIO Standard 12
Year: 
2021
Reference: 
Bryson, J.M. (2018), Strategic Planning for Public and Non-profit Organisations: a Guide to Strengthening and Sustaining Organizational Achievement, 5th edition. Wiley, New York.: 
Crawley, E. F., Malmqvist, J., Östlund, S., Brodeur, D. R., & Edström, K. (2014). Rethinking Engineering Education: The CDIO Approach, (2nd ed), Springer International Publishing.: 
Graham, R.(2018), The global state-of-the-art in engineering education; MIT School of Engineering; Cambridge.: 
Kamp, A. (2016), Engineering Education in a Rapidly Changing World: Rethinking the Vision for Higher Engineering Education, Second Revised Edition, TU Delft, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, Delft.: 
Kamp, A. (2020), Navigating the Landscape of Higher Engineering Education: Coping with Decades of Accelerating Change Ahead, 4TU.Centre for Engineering Education, Delft.: 
Locke, E.A. & Latham, G.P. (2002), Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-Year Odyssey. American Psychologist 57(9):705-717.: 
Meikleham, A., Hugo, R., Kamp, A., Malmqvist, J., (2018). Visualizing 17 Years of CDIO Influence via Bibliometric Data Analysis, in Proceedings of the 14th International CDIO Conference, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Kanazawa, Japan: 
Surowiecki, J., (2004), The Wisdom of Crowds. Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economics, Societies and Nations, Little, Brown Book Group, London.: 
Twenge, J.M., (2018). iGen, Why Today's Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy--and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood--and What That Means for the Rest of Us, Atria Books, New York.: 
Wenger, E., (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press.: 
Go to top
randomness