Cultivating creative thinking in engineering student teams: Can a computer‐mediated virtual laboratory help?

In engineering design, engineers must be able to think creatively, effectively toggling between divergent thinking (developing multiple novel ideas) and convergent thinking (pursuing an appropriate idea using engineering analyses). However, creative thinking is not emphasized in many undergraduate engineering programs. In this empirical study, we analyze the divergent thinking of teams working on a virtual laboratory project. Fifteen student teams' solution paths–as represented by Model Maps–were analyzed to characterize and compare the various elements of divergent thinking: fluency, flexibility, and originality. The solution paths of these teams were compared in two physical laboratory projects and to experts completing the same virtual laboratory project. We found that students demonstrated more divergent thinking in the virtual laboratory project than in the physical laboratory projects; yet, divergent thinking and quality of solution did not correlate. There was little difference between measured elements of divergent thinking between student teams and experts. Lay Description: What is currently known about the subject matter: Creative thinking is an essential skill for engineers to develop innovative products and processes.Creative thinking involves toggling between divergent thinking (coming up with many different original ideas) and convergent thinking (executing an appropriate idea based on engineering analyses).Despite its importance, creative thinking is not often encouraged nor taught in undergraduate engineering curricula, and, similarly, is not well‐researched in that context.The development of creative thinking is supported by students working in Problem‐Based Learning (PBL), in which students work in teams on an open‐ended, "real world" problem. What our paper adds to this: We developed an innovative methodology to analyze aspects of divergent thinking in an open‐ended, computer‐based virtual laboratory project.Students engaged in divergent thinking significantly more in the virtual laboratory project as compared to two physical laboratory projects in the same course.The degree of divergent thinking did not correlate to the quality of solution in the virtual laboratory project.The degree of divergent thinking of student teams was about the same as that of experts. The implications of study findings for practitioners: Findings support the use of open‐ended, computer‐based virtual laboratory projects to provide students opportunities to practice divergent thinking.The aspects of student teams' divergent thinking in this context is similar to experts.The relationship between divergent thinking and quality of solution is complex.More work needs to be done to understand how to encourage broader creative thinking where student teams toggle between divergent and convergent thinking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]