The Supporting Role of CAD/CAM Tools in ... - IEEE Xplore

Session S3C

The Supporting Role of CAD/CAM Tools in Undergraduate Research Education in Electrical and Computer Engineering Manuel Jiménez, and Nayda G. Santiago Electrical and Computer Engineering Department University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez; Mayagüez, PR, 00681-9042 [email protected], [email protected] Abstract - Undergraduate research has long been recognized as one of the pillars of a well rounded education in engineering disciplines. One factor that has however received little attention in undergraduate research is the increasingly supporting role played by information technology in the form of computer-aided design and modeling tools (CAD/CAM) in the overall experience of students. This paper analyzes the authors’ experiences in engaging undergraduate students in CAD related research activities in the ECE Department of the UPRM, working in diverse projects spanning from fundamental to applied research. The analysis provides a framework for outlining successful and not so successful practices with undergraduates in these types of activities, including guidelines to increase the likelihood of providing students a meaningful experience through CAD related undergraduate research. Index Terms – Undergraduate research, Role of CAD Tools in student learning, Engineering education. INTRODUCTION

students [3], [4]. One factor that has however received little attention is the increasingly supporting role played by computer-aided modeling and design tools (CAD) in the overall experience of students in undergraduate research. It results common now-a-days to find undergraduates engaged in large research projects where their major task is to provide supporting information for the project through the usage of CAD tools. This because, for activities related to a vast number of engineering subjects, especially in Electrical and Computer Engineering, CAD tools frequently provide time and cost efficient ways of evaluating and understanding the effect of different scenarios in systems and processes through virtual experimentation. When used for this purpose, CAD tools provide the students a radically different experience than when the same tools are employed as teachings aids in a regular course. Students typically gain an in-depth expertise in using powerful, cutting edge software tools that give them an edge either when continuing to graduate school or joining the job market. However, the impact of CAD is not always positive on the overall experience gained by students in undergraduate research. One common pitfall is engaging students in CAD activities which do not involve critical thinking. This paper analyzes the authors’ experiences in engaging undergraduate students in CAD related research activities in the ECE Department of the UPRM, working in diverse projects spanning from fundamental to applied research. The analysis provides a framework for outlining successful and not so successful practices with undergraduates in these types of activities, including guidelines to increase the likelihood of providing students a meaningful experience through CAD related undergraduate research. In the next section we provide information on the setting for the reported experience in undergraduate research. Next, a summary of the advantages of using CAD/CAM tools in undergraduate research is provided, followed by a discussion of common pitfalls and recommendations for their avoidance. The last section summarizes the major ideas discussed through the document.

Undergraduate research has been defined, in a broad sense, as an inquire or investigation conducted by an undergraduate that makes an original intellectual or creative contribution to the discipline [1]. Its practice has long been recognized as one of the pillars of a well rounded education in engineering disciplines. Several factors have been identified to contribute to the added value provided by these activities to the education of undergraduates. Exposure to subjects not normally covered in conventional classroom experiences, enhancements to the student’s ability to perform independent work, structured skills to carry formal studies on subjects within a research project, and ability to contribute with their individual work to the objectives of a larger team are only a few of the most commonly recognized traits gained by undergraduate research assistants. In addition, undergraduate research fellows have been found to be more motivated to continue graduate research in a discipline related to their undergraduate experience, creating awareness to graduate school and helping increase the retention indices of qualified individual in study programs [2]. Multiple studies can be found aimed at quantifying the impact of these factors on undergraduate 0-7803-9141-1/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE July 7 – 9, 2005, Juan Dolio, Dominican Republic ITHET 6th Annual International Conference S3C-23

Session S3C UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH IN ECE AND CAD TOOLS For over fifteen years, the Electrical and Computer Engineering programs at the UPRM have offered research opportunities for undergraduate students. Professors in areas such as Power Systems, Power Electronics, Control Systems, Remote Sensing, Signal Processing, Analog/Digital/Mixedsignal Electronics, Scientific Computing and Software Systems, routinely provide undergraduates research opportunities. The types of projects vary in nature, size, and scope. Over one third of all graduates from the BS in EE and CE programs participate in research projects sponsored by government agencies such as NSF, NASA, DoD, NOAA, and others, and internationally recognized companies such as IBM, Texas Instruments, Hewlett Packard, Boeing, and others. State government and local companies have also served as sponsors for projects where undergraduates participate. Palomera et. al and Vélez et. al have reported descriptions of representative programs and projects dealing with industry sponsored undergraduate research at the UPRM [5], [6]. O’Neill et. al have illustrated the level of impact of undergraduate research in the students’ education in programs at the UPRM [7]. Innovative practices for undergraduate research have also emerged from the activity at UPRM through educational models combining the traditional research experience with co-op practice [8]. Despite the multiplicity and diversity of fields where undergraduate research practices have enhanced the formation of ECE student, a common denominator in almost all of them is the usage of computer aided design and analysis tools by the students. Tools such as MATLAB, PSPICE, LabView, AutoCAD, CADENCE, among others, have played a central role in the activities developed by the students. The background level of students joining for first time a project is varied. While most students achieve an acceptable level of proficiency with tools widely used in the classroom, projects requiring specialized tools receive untrained students who need to be initiated in their usage. Irrespective of the level of background, students have to go through a learning process to reach the level of knowledge required to become productive in their projects, which is typically deeper than that achieved in regular courses. Considering these particularities, the traditionally recognized stages of mentoring in undergraduate research need to be adjusted accordingly to the level of CAD/CAM usage in the project and the student background. TRAITS IN CAD USAGE IN UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH The advantages of using CAD tools in undergraduate research become increasingly evident as their capabilities grow and their usage becomes more widespread. In general, most advantages converge to the ability of providing a means to perform virtual experimentation on a simulated environment. This includes the ability of considering and evaluating multiple design alternatives in complex problems, simulating systems’ behavior, visualizing results, and performing parametric analyses. Many tools also provide means for 0-7803-9141-1/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE

coordinating the work performed by members of a team, making it easier for undergraduate students to engage in collaborative projects. Adherence to design guidelines, avoidance of common errors, and standardization in procedures are added advantages derived from the usage of CAD tools. PITFALLS AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE USAGE OF ADVANCED CAD/CAM TOOLS Despite all the advantages of using CAD/CAM tools in undergraduate research, their usage do not prevent exercising inappropriate research habits in a project. On the contrary, if not properly used, these tools might promote them, hampering the experience gained by the students. The usage of advanced software tools in undergraduate research should, as with any other type of research practice, adhere to strict scientific methods, highlighting the educational nature of the student involvement and fomenting critical thinking in participants. Malachowski has outlined four stages in the mentoring process of undergraduate research: Initiation, Cultivation, Transformation, and Separation [9]. Each stage should address the usage of advanced tools to make their usage contribute to the general formation of the student. Our discussion below addresses common practices that typically hamper the experience gained by the students. These are then used as a prelude to introduce recommendations applicable in different stages of the relationship that, based on our perceptions and experience, could help improve undergraduate research experiences that involve CAD/CAM tools. Exploiting Students’ Capabilities One common situation with undergraduate research mentors is to underestimate the capabilities of the students because of their lack of previous research experience. As a consequence, assignments dealing with CAD/CAM tools are sometimes too specific, limiting the student involvement to that of a mere program operator. The true nature of undergraduate research requires a process where students have the opportunity of growing in his or her skills to perform research, and the usage of CAD/CAM tools is not the exception to the rule. Studies have shown that students engaging in undergraduate research usually expect to make a significant contribution to the project they work on. This expectation should be present in the mentor’s mind in every stage of the student involvement in the project. During the initiation stage, the mentor must assess the student background not only in the subject of study, but also in the software tools he or she will be using as part of their work. Accordingly, the direction given to the students should contain the necessary elements to train them in the tools allowing them explore how they could best exploit the tool’s capabilities for advancing the project goals. Inducing Analytical Skills Mature CAD/CAM tools usually provide highly usable interfaces for problem specification. Sometimes, the tools

July 7 – 9, 2005, Juan Dolio, Dominican Republic ITHET 6th Annual International Conference S3C-24

Session S3C provide mechanisms to complete a design, problem, or system specification while having little understanding of the problem itself. Despite the apparent advantage of these mechanisms, they promote poor analytical skills, making possible to use the tools to provide results of problems without grasping the concepts or without a thorough understanding of the problem at hand. Examples of situations like these are the use of SPICE to analyze circuit designs without guidance on the reasons behind the behavior of the circuit. Another example we have observed is the use of tools such as MATLAB for filter design without fully understanding the type of filter under study or the underlying cause of the filter behavior. Similar experiences have been reported in other areas where the use of CAD/CAM tools is central [10]. As the mentor-student relationship moves into the cultivation stage, students should be given the knowledge to infer on the impact of his or her decisions by helping them understand the underlying concepts that will enable them to interpret the results of the application of the tools. Rigorousness of Experimentation Undergraduate research provides students with their first exposure to the rigorousness of validating results from experimentation to test theories or methods. Although there exist at least four formal methods for experimenting, namely the Scientific, Engineering, Empirical, and Analytical methods; it is common to find engineering undergraduate research reports and publications lacking basic experimentation concepts such as replication, randomization, and blocking [11]. Although no formal studies have been found, informal observations point to an aggravation of this problem in projects relying on results obtained from advanced design and modeling tools. The subject of rigorous experimentation in undergraduate research projects based on CAD/CAM tools can be, up to a certain point, compared to that found in computing disciplines, where many analysts agree that a concise taxonomy of methods for demonstrating the validity of new techniques has not been developed [11]. One reason for establishing such an analogy is that the usage of CAD/CAM tools in research activities shares with software development the characteristic that both infer results from virtual experimentation through computer runs. Numerous arguments have been raised in the software side to justify the lack of appropriate experimentation methodologies [12]. Many of these arguments are also “valid” for undergraduates and even mentors in CAD/CAM based research. The bottom line is that experimentation in most cases is limited to weak examples that favor the proposed methodology and pose the risk of leading to biased analyses. If during the initiation stage of the mentoring process students are not well trained in at least one formal method for experimentation, loose or no experimental validation are presented, leading to biased conclusions about results provided by the CAD tools.

0-7803-9141-1/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE

Appropriate Modeling Techniques The concept of a model is of fundamental importance for electrical and computer engineering students since the study of most topics within these disciplines are explained through models. A model can be defined as a representation of a real object or system which allows to abstract characteristics of interest of the object or system behavior. There are different levels of abstraction where modeling can be considered. For instance, the architecture of a computer system can be modeled at the transistor, gate, subunits, instruction set architecture, or behavioral levels. As the level of abstraction goes higher, the details of the actual implementation are less important and the system behavior and characteristics become more relevant. Models can also be classified depending on the way the system’s characteristics are represented. According to this criterion, Gershenfeld identifies three different categories: analytical, numerical, and observational models [13]. The needs in a particular simulation determine the level of a model, and the available information about the real system typically defines the category. Simulation tools, which are integral part of CAD/CAM software, rely heavily on models. We have observed that undergraduate students tend to confuse a model with its implementation and the tasks of modeling and simulation. It is important to assess the knowledge students have about these topics early in the initiation stage of the mentoring relation. At this level, good tutorials can be used to convey in a concise and brief way definitions and examples of all these concepts [14]. Another common pitfall is the lack of a clear objective for a simulation or confusion about the type of model to use for a particular objective. In undergraduate research it is all too common as students to validate a system using models, simulators, and CAD/CAM tools. However, the lack of understanding by the students of the concept model sometimes prevents them from fully grasping the information provided by the simulation results. It is of great importance to instruct undergraduates in the basis of systems modeling early during the mentoring and cultivation stages. Ethical Implications One sensitive aspect of the use of CAD/CAM tools in research is the effortlessness of forging fraudulent results. In the report "Professional Misconduct Involving Research," the Health and Human Services Commission on Research Integrity identifies three basic examples of research misconduct: misappropriation, interference, and misrepresentation [15]. CAD tools may be manipulated with relative ease to provide false results, a behavior categorized under the misrepresentation category. According to studies, undergraduates tend to have a more relaxed view for academic misconduct in what regards to data manipulation and might even be unaware that this behavior represents a serious unethical conduct [16]. Moreover, the study adds that despite the apparent reduction of unethical conduct in graduate school, those acknowledged participation in misconduct as graduates also did it as undergraduates.


Session S3C We, as mentors, should provide education to our undergraduate research students on the ethical aspects of research work. Early in the mentoring relation we must provide them with a solid formation about the ethical behavior in research. Although fraudulent results can be avoided by good supervision, once the mentor-student relation enters the stages of transformation or separation the students work more independently and supervision becomes less tight. Nevertheless, during discussions, questions should be asked about the methods used in obtaining results and data should be studied and analyzed. SUMMARY Several aspects concerning the usage of advanced CAD/CAM tools in undergraduate research have been considered in this paper. Aspects concerning student capabilities, analytical skills, modeling, experimentation, and ethical implications were discussed, providing the authors insight from the perspective of their experiences. General guidelines for healthy use of these type of tools in research activities with the participation of undergraduates can be summarized as follows: • Good mentoring practices are essential to the success of students. Assess the level of proficiency in tools an train students as required by the level of use and depth of expected knowledge. • Provide the students with a background on the problem they will be working on. This will allow understanding and opening opportunities for critical thinking by the student. Original ideas might flourish. • Provide a problem specification rather than a ready-made fully-specified simulation to run. • Verify ability to apply concepts without CAD. Stress on verification. Encourage results analysis and interpretation. • Provide clear experimental design guidelines. Objectives, methods, validation, and error measurements should be unambiguously specified. • Make students know the proper ethical conduct and always analyze data and inquire on results. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work was sponsored in part by Texas Instruments through the UPRM-TI Collaborative program and by the following NSF grants: EEC 9986821, EEC 9731677, EEC 9986866, and MII 0424546.

0-7803-9141-1/05/$20.00 © 2005 IEEE

REFERENCES [1]

Wenzel, T. J., "What is Undergraduate Research?", Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly”, Vol. 17, Dec. 1997, pp. 163

[2]

Flores, B.; Della-Piana, C., “Undergraduate Student Retention Strategies for Urban Engineering Colleges”, In Proc. Of the 2000 Frontiers In Education Conference (FIE 2000), Oct. 2000, pp. F1F/7-F1F/10

[3]

Della-Piana, C. Bernat, A., ´Evaluating the Undergraduate Experience in Computer Science: Developing a Framework for Gathering Information About Effectiveness and Impact”, In Proc. Of the 1999 Frontiers In Education Conference (FIE 1999), Nov. 1999, pp. 13C7/6-13C7/10

[4]

Rueckert, L.., "Assessment of Research", Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly”, Vol. 22, Sep. 2002, pp. 10

[5]

Palomera, R.; Toledo-Quiñones, M.; Jiménez, M; Salamina, N., “Industry Sponsored Undergraduate Research at UPRM”, In Proc. Of the2004 International Conference in Engineering Education (ICEE2004), Gainesville, FL, Oct. 2004

[6]

Velez-Reyes, M.; Perez-Quiñones, M.; Cruz-Rivera, J., “The Industrial Affiliates Program at the University of Puerto Rico – Mayagüez”, In Proc. Of the 1999 Frontiers In Education Conference (FIE 1999), Nov. 1999, pp. 13C5/13-13C5/18

[7]

O’Neill-Carrillo, E.; Velez-Reyes, M., Irizarry-Rivera, A.; Marrero, E., “The Power of Undergraduate Research”, Power and Energy Magazine, Vol. 1 No. 4, 2003, pp. 29-36

[8]

Jimenez, M., Palomera, R., Toledo, M., “Undergraduate Research and Co-op Education: A Winning Combination”, In Proc. Of the 2002 Frontiers In Education Conference (FIE 2002), Nov. 2002, pp. 291-295

[9]

Malachowski, M., "The Mentoring Role in Undergraduate Research Projects", Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, Vol, 16, Dec. 1996, pp. 91-106

[10] Hutchinson, J., “Re-thinking the CAD Course: Design, Not Drafting”, Ties Magazine, December 2002, pp. 8 - 12 [11] Zelkowitz, M. V. and Wallace, D. R., “Experimental Models for Validating Technology”, Computer Magazine , Vol. 31, No. 5, May 1998, pp. 23-31 [12] Tichy, W. F., “Should Computer Scientists Experiment More?”, Computer Magazine, May 1998, pp. 32 – 40 [13] Gershenfeld, N., “The Nature of Mathematical Modeling”, Cambridge University Press, 1998 [14] Maria, A., “Introduction to Modeling and Simulation”, In Proc. Of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, Dec. 1997, pp. 7 – 13 [15] Health and Human Services Commission on Research Integrity, "Professional Misconduct Involving Research," Professional Ethics Report, Vol. VIII, No. 3, Summer 1995, Office of Research Integrity [16] Turrents, J. F.; Davidson, E., “Data Manipulation by Undergraduates and the Risk of Future Academic Misconduct”, Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, Vol, 21, Dec. 1996, pp. 64 - 65
