A Creative Development in Environment Engineering Education with Mind Mapping

Abstract:

The purpose of this paper is to exploit student preference and propose, discuss and experimentally validate a strategy that aims to reduce time necessary to introduce tutoring of mind mapping to environment engineering students. A survey instrument was designed and used to collect student preferences about mind mapping. Preferences were linked to alternative scenarios of mind mapping deployment. Survey responses from a 60 second-year students from the Department of Environment Engineering and Management were analyzed using conjoint analysis. The findings of this paper provide a well documented framework in addressing mind mapping technique to engineering students. The proposed framework tries to make the best use of the available time for creativity development programs, in environment engineering departments. This framework may also be applied to other creativity enhancing techniques, providing solutions for incorporating creativity in environment engineering curricula.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 1006-1007)
• Pages: 1135-1138
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1006-1007.1135
• Online since: August 2014
• Authors: Chia Chia Lin, Huan Ming Chuang*
• Keywords: Education Introduction, Environment Engineering and Management, Mind Mapping

References

[1] Cattin, P. and Wittink, D.R. Commercial use of conjoint analysis: a survey, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 46 (1982), pp.44-53.

DOI: 10.1177/002224298204600308

[2] Clapham, M.M. and Schuster, D.H. Can engineering students be trained to think more creatively?, Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 26 (1992), pp.156-62.

DOI: 10.1002/j.2162-6057.1992.tb01171.x

[3] Craft, A. The limits to creativity in education: dilemmas for the educator, British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 51 No. 2 (2003), pp.113-27.

DOI: 10.1111/1467-8527.t01-1-00229

[4] Ghosh, S. An exercise in inducing creativity in undergraduate engineering students through challenging examinations and open-ended design problems, IEEE Transactions in Education, Vol. 36 No. 1 (1966), pp.113-9.

DOI: 10.1109/13.204828

[5] Grimson, J. Re-engineering the curriculum for the 21st century, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 27(2002), pp.31-7.

[6] Gustafsson, A., Herrmann, A. and Huber, F. Conjoint analysis as an instrument of Market research practice, in Gustafsson, A., Herrmann, A. and Huber, F. (Eds), Conjoint Measurement. Methods and Applications, Springer, Berlin (2003), pp.5-44.

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-24713-5_1

[7] Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. Multivariate Data Analysis, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. (1998).

[8] Kao, J., Jamming: The Art and Discipline of Business Creativity, Harper Business, New York, NY. (1997).

[9] Mento, A.J.P., Matinelli, P. and Jones, R.M. Mind mapping in executive education: applications and outcomes, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 18 No. 4(1999), pp.390-407.

DOI: 10.1108/02621719910265577

[10] Moogan, Y.J., Baron, S. and Bainbridge, S. Timings and trade-offs in the marketing of higher education courses: a conjoint approach, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 19 No. 3 (2001), pp.179-87.

DOI: 10.1108/02634500110391726

[11] North, V. Mind maps chart the way to business efficiency, Education + Training, Vol. 40 No. 4 (1998), pp.173-4.

[12] Osborn, A. The creative trend in education, in Parnes, S.J. (Ed. ), Source Book for Creative Problem Solving, Creative Education Foundation Press, New York, NY (1992), pp.39-62.

[13] Proctor, R.A. The importance of creativity in the management field, British Journal of Management, Vol. 2 (1991), pp.223-30.