ROBOTICS PROJECT FOR FIRST-YEAR ENGINEERING DEGREE STUDENTS

The acquisiton of both transversal and specifc competences cannot be achieved using conventonal methodologies. New methodologies must be applied that promote the necessary competences for proper professional development. Interdisciplinary projects can be a suitable tool for competence-based learning. A priori, this might be complicated, as subjects are traditonally studied at the university level in isolated compartments, with a fragmented structure. Taking advantage of the creaton of new degree programs in Mechanical Engineering and Electronic Engineering and Industrial Automaton, in the 2010-11 academic year we decided to add an interdisciplinary project (IP) to our teaching methodology. The importance of this project lies in the fact that it requires the partcipaton of all the courses in all the academic years in the degree program. The present artcle explains the methodology used in the interdisciplinary project and how it was implemented in the frst year of the Mechanical Engineering and Electronic Engineering and Industrial Automaton degree programs. Furthermore, an evaluaton is conducted of all four years of the interdisciplinary project, revealing the main problems with its executon and how they have been addressed.


INTRODUCTION
The European Higher Educaton Area (Bologna Declaraton, 1999) establishes the need for competence-based training.As a result, traditonal methodologies focused on knowledge transfer have become obsolete for this purpose.The term "competence" implies the integraton of knowledge with capacites (know-how) and with attudes and values (behavioral competence) (Le Boterf, 2001;Rychen & Salganik, 2003;Becket, 2008).Knowledge acquisiton must be linked to their applicaton.In the feld of engineering, students must analyze the technological, social and environmental impact of their actons, and transversal competences must be developed, such as initatve, autonomy, leadership, etc.This objectve can only be reached by changing our teaching methodology (Poblete, et al., 2007;De Miguel et al., 2006;González & Wagenaar, 2003).
However, curricula parcel knowledge out into diferent course areas.This leads students to draw the conclusion that the purpose is the contents themselves, rather than the competences.It is necessary to coordinate actvites and methodologies not only in the courses themselves, but also throughout the entre degree program.It is for this reason that there are increasingly more experiences in which the students are faced with an interdisciplinary problem involving several courses (Hans-Jörg & Alabart, 2006;Pérez, Serrano, Pérez & Peñarrocha, 2010).
Another crucial point in project-based learning is its collaboratve aspect; team work is fundamental, as it enables students to develop a set of competences that are key to their employability.Management and organizaton, critcal analysis, problem solving, decision making, proactvity, autonomy, initatve and creatvity become the natural mode in which students carry out the diferent assigned tasks that make up the project (McNair, Newswander, Boden & Borrego, 2011;Aznar, Martnez, Zacarés, Ortega, González-Espín & López-Sánchez, 2012).
The objectve of the interdisciplinary project at our university is twofold: on the one hand, for the students to understand the concept of a project in terms of what it means and how it is implemented, and on the other hand, to demonstrate the applicability of the contents in the diferent knowledge areas for solving specifc problems.As a result, once the project is fnished, the students will have developed both specifc and transversal competences.
The present artcle explains the methodology of the interdisciplinary project, which is evaluated over the four years that the degree programs in Mechanical Engineering (ME) and Electronic Engineering and Industrial Automaton (EE) have been in place.The main problems encountered during its implementaton are reviewed, along with a summary of the solutons.

METHODOLOGY
The interdisciplinary project (IP) consists of carrying out a project in a real context, integratng in an applied manner the knowledge imparted in the diferent frst-year courses in the ME and EE degree programs.Diferent specifc competences of the courses of that partcular year of study were developed through the IP, as well as the transversal competences associated with the project: team work (Aznar et al., 2012), confict resoluton, oral and writen communicaton, autonomy, initatve, leadership, ethical commitment, creatvity, search for and management of informaton, confict resoluton, critcal thinking, decision making and the capacity for analysis and synthesis.
During the 2010-11 academic year, we began the ME and EE degree programs.The IP was conducted for 4 academic years, as part of the teaching methodology in all courses.On average, the ME degree had 40 students per year, while the EE degree had 20 students.Based on these numbers, 7 and 3 work groups were set up, respectvely.In order for the students to understand the importance of each of the courses in relaton to the professional feld of engineering, all actvites were designed with a specifc applicaton in mind.In this sense, it was agreed that all courses would be required to include actvites related to the design of an industrial robotc arm.The IP is coordinated by year and degree.All the courses in a given year have the same credit load and dedicate 25% of their workload to work on the IP; also, the actvites they include must strengthen problem-based learning (PBL).In total, 10 courses per degree were involved in the IP, for a total of 12 courses.Each course dedicates approximately one hour per week to actvites related to the IP, for a total of 5.In additon, 2 hours per week are dedicated to student in-class work on the IP, with the assistance of the coordinator and the leader of each group (Table 1).

Course Mechanical Engineering (IP h/week) Electronic Engineering (IP h/week) YEAR-LONG
A total of 10 professors from the EE degree program and 9 from the ME degree program partcipated in the IP.
To help the project run smoothly, students and faculty were assigned the following roles in terms of their partcipaton: student, student leader, course professor, project coordinator and the Interdisciplinary Project Management Unit.
The students are required to solve a problem in a real-life context, integratng the specifc competences of the courses in an academic year.Completon of the IP is mandatory for all students registered for the frst year of studies and its fnal grade is refected in the grade of each course as part of the student's individual grade.In a general sense, the work process can be described as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. IP work process
Students are a fundamental part of the IP.Groups consist of 5 to 7 students from the same degree, heterogeneously selected according to the results of a Belbin test (Belbin Associates, 1988).The intent of this test is to discover diferent roles that, when properly balanced on a work team, facilitate the smooth functoning of the team: creatvity, resource investgator, driver, team worker, implementer, monitor-evaluator and completer/fnisher.Students must work as a team, carrying out the actvites planned by the professors in order to reach the IP objectve.Prior to this, they will have actvely partcipated in seminars on: team work, oral communicaton, preparaton of documents, organizaton and accessing and using documentaton (Moursund, 2002).The result is that, as the protagonists of the actve teaching-learning process, the students take responsibility for the tasks, presentng them on tme, in the correct format and with acceptable levels of quality.
Students also partcipate in the assessment of the work and the functoning of the team to develop their capacity for critcal thinking.At the beginning, students must submit an IP planning report and at the end, a technical report on the work carried out; they are also required to deliver an oral presentaton of the project.
The leader is a student in the fnal year of the degree program, who already has prior experience, since he/she has partcipated in the IP since the frst year of the program, and who has also demonstrated skills as a work team catalyst.During this later stage, the student partcipates in leadership seminars, receiving training in a series of skills such as motvaton, the division of responsibilites and leading the team's progress on a group and individual level; this individual is also a confict mediator and maintains a degree of empathy with the group.The leader's functons range from supervising the planning to monitoring the work, preparing for and arranging meetngs (ensuring that minutes are writen), and reviewing any incidents and the overall progress of the work team with the coordinator.He/she also ensures that the deliverables (planning and results reports and presentatons) meet a minimum level of quality and is responsible for the fnal assessment of the team work competence of each team member.
The course professor determines the learning objectves to be targeted by the IP and incorporates them into the course guide.He/she also plans and schedules actvites inside and outside the classroom to achieve the objectves of the IP.At the start of the semester, one classroom work session is set aside to ensure that the students understand the course objectves in the IP and identfy the necessary tasks, integratng them into the planning report.During this process, the professor tutors and advises the students so that they reach the objectves, maintaining an open line of communicaton with the IP coordinator in the event of any incident afectng the progress of the project.The professor also contnuously evaluates the progress of each IP from the point of view of his/her course.Professors have the opportunity to give their impressions of the performance and results of the IP, along with the rest of the professors for that academic year, in order to identfy areas for improvement.
The project coordinator is responsible for writng the project course guide, which includes the plan for the actvites to be carried out and the learning objectves of the courses involved.He/she also coordinates the faculty and student work teams, with their respectve leaders.The coordinator periodically records the progress made on the project and is also a basic part of the assessment process, partcipatng on the panels evaluatng each project.Finally, he/she analyzes and assesses the performance and results of the IP, along with the professors for that academic year, in order to identfy areas for improvement.
The professors of each year and the project coordinator decide on the topic of the IP and review the proposed schedule of actvites.They also agree on the competences to be developed in the diferent courses and their assessment procedures in order to adequately distribute the volume of student work and avoid overload between the courses and the project.Each professor adds a descripton of the project to his/her course guide.Evaluaton matrices designed by the Project Management Unit are used for assessment purposes.
The Interdisciplinary Project Management Unit is composed of all the IP coordinators from all the degree programs and years.It is responsible for establishing the academic foundatons of the IP with regard to its approaches to competences, methodologies, assessments and organizaton.Evaluaton was contnuous, based on the monitoring of the progress of the project by the professors and the coordinator.In additon, the planning report, fnal technical report and oral presentaton are also considered in the evaluaton.

CRITERIA
Each student receives a single project grade, which is the same for each of the courses involved, accountng for 25% of the fnal grade for each course.This grade refects the level at which the specifc and transversal competences associated with the project have been acquired; it consists of the sum of the grade obtained by the team and the individual grade.The grade is calculated each semester, based on the following indicators: planning report (10%), fnal report (40%), project presentaton (15%), individual oral defense (15%) and individual process evaluaton (20%).According to these percentages, students receive a team grade with a weight of 65% and an individual grade worth 35%.

35% DRAFTING OF THE CONCLUSIONS
The work ends with a well-supported fnal conclusion that shows the depth of the students' refecton.

Conclusions are writen and accompanied by a brief refecton. The work ends with a brief conclusion, but it provides litle added value to what has already been commented.
No conclusions have been included, or they are very poor and do not evidence any fnal refecton by the students.

35% Table 3. Evaluaton matrix for the fnal report on the sectons assessed by the professors
The planning report must include the purpose of the work, a descripton of the general and specifc objectves that are to be achieved and the planning of the work in terms of deadlines and the division of tasks.The professors assess whether the project objectves, tasks and planning are adequate and the coordinator evaluates the organizaton of the work and the formal presentaton.Table 2 shows the evaluaton matrix used.Special care must be taken with both the partal and fnal technical reports to ensure that they follow the format specifed in the style guide established at our university.These reports must include a descripton of the interdisciplinary work carried out, the results and the conclusions that justfy having reached the overall or partal objectves defned in the diferent IP actvites.The professors assess the search for and management of informaton, the content and the conclusions, while the coordinator once again assesses tme management and the formal presentaton (Table 3).

CRITERIA
The students orally present and defend the work that has been carried out.All team members must partcipate in the oral presentaton, which is to be supported with visual aids.During the presentaton, the preliminary preparaton, development of the content, graphic elements, oral language and non-verbal communicaton are assessed.In additon, the students are asked questons to obtain an individual assessment of the defence of their work.The project coordinator and at least two professors partcipate in this assessment.Table 4 shows the evaluaton matrix used to assess the oral presentaton.
Finally, the students, the coordinator and the professors partcipate in an individual evaluaton of the process, based on all of the evidence gathered during the process of carrying out the project (atendance at training seminars, the minutes of meetngs, peer assessment and class atendance and partcipaton, as well as the coordinator's and professors' monitoring reports).

Important dates Descripton Week 1 Presentaton of the project Week 2 Comments on the planning report Week 3 Submission of the planning report Weeks 4-6
Writen communicaton workshops Week 8 Peer assessment (qualitatve) Week 11 Oral communicaton workshop Week 12 Comments on the fnal report Week 13 Submission of the fnal report Week 14 Peer assessment Week 15 Oral presentaton and defense Table 5.Sequence of the important dates in the integrated project At the start of the academic year, the students have all the informaton available that will help them carry out the IP: guide for writng the planning report, model for writng minutes of the meetngs, guide for managing the meetngs, instructons for combining documents with PDFCreator, guide for presentng work, guide to the fnal report and instructons on peer assessment.In additon, they have a calendar that indicates the most important dates for completng the project (Table 5).
In order to evaluate the students' percepton of the IP, a survey was administered, divided into fve basic areas: objectve, methodology, assessment, student assistance and overall evaluaton.The objectve secton contains fve questons: does it improve your educaton?, does it develop competences and attudes for your professional future?, does it promote the connecton with the present socioeconomic environment?, does it complement your personal development and does it make your learning process more atractve?.The methodology secton refers to the presentaton session, the course guide, the training seminars, the correct use of contact tme in the classroom, the volume of work and study materials.The assessment secton addresses knowledge of the assessment criteria, the relatonship between assessment and the degree to which the competences are acquired and monitoring by the coordinator and the professors.The student assistance secton focuses on the assistance provided by the coordinator.Finally, a queston was asked aimed at the overall evaluaton of the IP.

RESULTS
The IP was intended to promote transversal competences in students and to motvate them in their engineering studies.However, during the frst year in which the project was implemented, the evaluatons from the students were quite low in the Mechanical Engineering degree (Table 6).The overall score of 3.9 out of 10 and several comments indicatng that the IP should be eliminated as a teaching methodology caused a great deal of concern among the faculty members partcipatng in the project.The reasons for the poor acceptance of the IP among the frst year Mechanical Engineering students were analyzed: • Interdisciplinary projects had previously been conducted among some of the courses in the Electronic Engineering and Automaton degree program, and therefore the faculty had a certain level of experience with them (López et al., 2008).On the contrary, in the ME degree program, this was the frst tme that a project of this scale had been undertaken.Furthermore, the number of students enrolled in ME is twice that of those in EE.
• The work proposed involved carrying out several actvites focused on a common theme, but this was not a project that involved several or all of the courses.
• In some courses, the IP actvites began at the end of the semester, thus resultng in an overload of work at the end.Students were required to carry out the IP actvites, write the technical report and prepare for the writen exams during the last weeks of the course.
• Depending on the involvement of the professor in the IP, the project limit of 25% of the course workload was not always followed.
• In some cases, the contents studied in the IP were repeated in other areas, through other types of actvites, creatng an excessive volume of work for the students.
• The work was not divided evenly by the students, and those who were more responsible failed to see this refected in their fnal project grade.
Due to the novelty of the IP, the leader was a student in the last year of the Industrial Engineering program who had no experience in projects on this scale.There is litle doubt that a misconcepton existed on the part of the project coordinator, who believed that since these students were about to fnish the degree and were therefore prepared and experienced in both the content and team work, they would be perfectly capable of playing a leadership role with frst-year students.This led to a certain relaxaton in the monitoring and follow up of the work performed by these leaders, and as a result, negatve results in terms of the inital expectatons.
Thanks to the experience gained during these frst few years, a series of improvements have been implemented in how the project is conducted.Consequently, progress has been made as compared to the start of the project in terms of the students' evaluatons in the ME degree, as well as a progressive improvement in the evaluatons from the students in the EE degree (Table 6).
Table 7. Actvites and tasks proposed for the entre integrated project "Kinematc analysis of a cylindrical robot arm"

Week Educatonal actvites Student tasks
1 Presentaton of the project Presentaton on how the project is related to the course.
Brainstorming (creatvity).Informaton search and exchange in class groups.Aferwards, each group writes a memorandum (guidelines, recommendatons, etc. for how to approach the chemistry plan).Each group hands in the memorandum to the professor.
The correct response to a power outage to prevent computer memory loss of informaton.The power needed to operate a computer.Identfying and interpretng the components of a redox reacton and how to adjust it.Determining an ordered sequence of the concepts applied.
Proposing a batery model and building it in a chemistry laboratory session, writng a fnal report at the end.
How the diferent batery components should be recycled, developing a study of them.Conductng a study of their environmental impact and how to reduce it, establishing an acton plan.

Table 1 .
Hours per week dedicated to the IP per course in the ME and EE degrees

Table 6 .
Evaluaton of the integrated project in the frst year of Mechanical Engineering

Table 8 .
Example of the assignment of actvites and tasks in the Chemistry course as part of the IP, as it would appear in the course guide