Multidisciplinary frameworks are needed to develop products that fit the human. Ergonomics is a multifaceted field that encompasses physical, cognitive and organizational aspects, and it is therefore a suitable subject to be taught to design engineering students.

The objective of this paper was to describe and reflect upon how a systems perspective on Ergonomics is developed and conveyed in a course in Product Ergonomics to engineering students at the Design and Product Development (DPD) programme at Linköping University, Sweden. The paper is based on the authors’ experiences from teaching the course in Product Ergonomicsas well ason 52 students’ written reflections about their view on Ergonomics before and after taking the course.

Means and ideas for teaching Ergonomics with a systems perspective included organizing a theoretical introduction into weekly themes and thereafter integrating and applying these themes in a product concept project under supervision of a multidisciplinary teacher team.

The paper also reflects on how the systems perspective of Ergonomics is planned for and realized in the intended, implemented and attained curriculum.

One fundamental challenge in choosing an examination form to assess student achievements is to find an examination which, both encourages students to continuously elaborate the course content and constitutes a learning process itself. The objective of this paper is to share and reflect on the development and implementation of a new theme-based examination in a six credit course in Product Ergonomics given in the engineering programme Design and Product Development at Linköping University, Sweden. The course runs during four months and has two parts: one theoretical and one applied. The former focuses on theoretical ergonomic topics, models and methods while the latter is a project aiming at consolidating the students’ understanding of the theory by implementing the knowledge in a product development case. To encourage the students to adapt a deep learning approach, the traditional written mid-term exam for the theoretical part was abandoned and another concept developed. In the new concept, the theoretical part was split onto six weekly themes. Each theme was introduced at the beginning of the week by high-lighting main theories and models followed by a group-work assignment to be elaborated on by the students during the week. The theme was examined at the end of the week through a short written exam and a seminar to discuss and reflect upon the theme. From a student perspective, the positive outcome of the theme-based examination was peer learning and a more active learning style. The students appreciated the theme-based structure of the course. Occasionally, some students commented that weekly examinations could be perceived as stressful. The teachers perceived the students to be more acquainted with ergonomics theory and methods which increased the quality of the course project. The reported theme-based assessment is one example of implementing among others the CDIO syllabus parts 2.2 and 3.1and CDIO standards 8 and 11.

This paper details an exploratory study of a design brief exchange method, using freshmen students in the beginner course Introduction to Design and Product Development at Linkoping University as a case. In design projects for clients, the design brief, irrespective of whether it is an explicit document or not, is generally seen as a critical step towards successful outcomes. From a design didactical perspective, it is a relevant question how to empower design students to engage with client-drafted briefs. In the proposed design brief exchange method, a student group drafts a design brief which they hand to a second group, while receiving a brief from a third. Every group thus performs both a client and designer role. A study was conducted on twelve student groups of 6-7 students each to investigate if and how the proposed method supports teaching students to cope with ambiguity. The students were, at several times during the course, prompted by staff to reflect on the brief they drafted in the role of clients as well as the brief received in their role as designers. Reflections were based on a set of questions and written in their project journal used for documentation in the course. Students and examiners reflections suggests that this is a promising approach to engage students in questioning client-drafted briefs and handle the ambiguity of design challenges.