Developing creativity competency of engineers

Abstract

The complete agreement of all stakeholders on the importance of developing the creativity competency of engineering graduates motivated us to undertake this study. We chose a senior-level course in Software Testing and Quality Assurance which offered an excellent platform for the experiment as both testing and quality assurance activities can be executed using either routine or mechanical methods or highly creative ones. The earlier attempts reported in literature to develop the creativity competency do not appear to be systematic i.e. they do not follow the measurement ->action plan ->measurement cycle. The measurements, wherever done, are based on the Torrance Test of Critical Thinking (TTCT) and the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). We found these tests costly and decided to search for an appropriate alternative that led us to the Felder Solomon Index of Learning Style (ILS). The Sensing / Intuition dimension of the ILS, like MBTI, is originated in Carl Jung's Theory of Psychological Types. Since a number of MBTI studies have used the dimension for assessing creativity, we posited that the same ILS dimension could be used to measure the competency. We carried out pre-ILS assessment, designed and delivered the course with a variety of activities that could potentially enhance creativity, and carried out course-end post-ILS assessment. Although major changes would not normally be expected after a one-semester course, a hypothesis in the study was that a shift from sensing toward intuition on learning style profiles would be observed, and indeed it was. A paired t- Test indicated that the pre-post change in the average sensing/intuition preference score was statistically significant (p = 0.004). While more research and direct assessment of competency is needed to be able to draw definitive conclusions about both the use of the instrument for measuring creativity and the efficacy of the course structure and contents in developing the competency, the results suggest that the approach is worth exploring. © American Society for Engineering Education, 2014.