Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology

Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Creative Education, 2009, 1-8

Published Online September 2009 in SciRes (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/ce)

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of

Technology*

ABSTRACT

Basic educational principles and detailed curriculum of creativity education that the author introduced in the Depart-

ment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering of Tokyo Institute of Technology are discussed. The basic educational

principle is to give students as much hands-on experience as possible, and challenge them with assignments to design

original mechanical systems. The curriculum includes the following: a course focused on the hands-on exercise of tak-

ing many types of machines apart, a course for groups of students to design and manufacture a ‘street performer robot’

consisting of mechanical and electrical components using computer control, and a course to design and draft original

machines that satisfy pre-assigned objectives.

Keywords: Creativity Education, TITech, Mechatronics, Machine Creation

1. Introduction

AT TOKYO INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (TITech),

a number of initiatives in creative education have oc-

curred in recent years. In this article, I will outline an

initiative taken at the Department of Mechanical and

Aerospace Engineering, in which I have taken an active

role. In this initiative, we are working on design training

through the experience of manufacturing, with the goal of

nurturing students’ creativity. I will also summarize rea-

sons for the introduction of this method and its imple-

mentation.

2. Why Creative Education was Introduced

My active involvement in creative education dates back

to around the fall of 1990, when the faculty meeting of

the Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department

asked me to teach the Design and Drawing Course start-

ing in the next academic year. I was an associate profes-

sor then, booked up with a number of research projects,

so was not very eager to take this assignment. However, I

accepted it anyway, convincing myself that it was a part

of the job.

When I took a design and drawing course at the Me-

chanical Engineering Department at Yokohama National

University nearly 30 years ago, there was a requirement

for students to carry out design calculations for a diesel

engine with given specifications that produced project

books about 10cm (est. 4 inches) thick. From these cal-

culations, we then drafted over 20 A0 drawings, (which

required enormous patience). Although we could feel a

sense of accomplishment on its completion, and we ac-

quired knowledge and skills along the way, it lacked the

touch of reality, and it could not be called ‘creative’ ac-

tivity.

I studied the syllabus of the conventional Design and

Drawing Course held at our Department of TITech, and

found that the course was similar to the one I took in my

college days. As a matter of fact, as the time allocated to

the Design and Drawing Course was shorter, it could not

even cover the things that should have been covered in

this course, much less include elements to nurture crea-

tivity.

After discovering this, I started an in-depth examina-

tion, looking at how to reform the series of design and

drawing courses so that we could address these problems,

and focus on nurturing as much creativity as possible. I

concluded that we cannot incorporate creative education

into the educational system of design and drawing by just

changing what we taught in the course, we needed to

provide students with a manufacturing experience. To do

this, we had to start by preparing the appropriate envi-

*Acce

ted 27 November 2000.

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology

ronment. In short, I was facing a very tough challenge,

and at one point felt intimidated by the task. However,

thanks to the support of fellow faculty members, I suc-

ceeded in introducing a new educational system and new

facilities as shown below.

3. A New Design and Drawing Education

System Aimed at Nurturing Creativity

I implemented the following changes to replace the tradi-

tional method of teaching design and drawing with a new

method aimed at nurturing creativity.

In the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace En-

gineering, we focussed on so called ‘Engineering Sci-

ence,’ and the time allocated to design and drawing was

significantly shorter than courses offered in other me-

chanical engineering departments of TITech. Design and

Drawing Courses only ran during the first and final se-

mesters of the third year. However, under the new

scheme, we further cut the time for design and drawing

practically in half, only teaching it during the final se-

mester of the third year. Then we replaced the design and

drawing course of the first half of the third year with a

new course called ‘Machine Creation’. During this course,

students make hands-on machine creations including the

construction of a robot that can carry out street perform-

ances.

In Japan, due to the fierce competition to get into the

better colleges, most students do nothing but study from

grade school to pass the entrance examinations. Conse-

quently, it is practically impossible to have these students

create machines without adequate preparation. So we also

introduced new courses to provide the students with

greater opportunity to become accustomed to making

things by themselves. One of these courses is called ‘An

introduction to Machine Creation,’ where students re-

peatedly dismantle and look inside various machines.

This class replaced a conventional lecture course on the

principles of mechanisms.

In the Robotics Course that I teach during the first se-

mester of the second year, we decided to allocate exten-

sive time to studying robotic hardware using real hard-

ware, not just theories such as the vector analysis of robot

manipulators. There is also a requirement for students to

assemble linkage mechanisms with cardboard at home,

and check their movement. In addition, the Mechatronics

Course, which is taught in the final semester of the sec-

ond year, shifted its focus from lecture to practice.

When you look at the composition of this educational

system, please note that we first ask students to create

machines, and then teach design and drawing. Under

conventional teaching methods, the usual procedure is to

introduce design and drawing courses first, then intro-

duce hands-on courses, because then students can utilize

the knowledge and skills of drafting in making something.

When I gave a presentation on our new kind of teaching

method in a conference related to education, attendees

that included professors of overseas universities ques-

tioned our reasoning. In their opinion, drafting is a lan-

guage, and you cannot teach design properly unless you

teach the language first.

However, I believe it is preferable to start by teaching

about making things and then teach design and drawing,

based on the following reasons.

·To acquire a real sense of design, it is crucial to gain

an instinctive sense about objects. Before students

acquire this sense, they cannot work out adequate

designs. As children, we could find various objects

around us that we could dismantle. We dismantled

these objects for fun, and through this experience,

acquired an instinctive sense about objects. However,

modern-day children rarely have this kind of oppor-

tunity. Even children who are serious about studying

play video games after they finish their work. If you

teach traditional design and drawing courses to the

students with childhood like this, all they can do is

modify the sample in the textbook. I do not think we

can give students a real sense of design in this way.

·While it is certainly important to draft correct draw-

ings, the knowledge of drawing is not an essential

part of design. There were numerous excellent de-

signs even before drafting rules were established.

We can discuss design issues with simple freehand

drawings. In my opinion, we can make drafting

courses more interesting for students by giving them

experience of discussing designs with rough sketches;

that way, students can more easily understand the

importance of drafting as a common language.

·Frankly speaking, I do not think drafting classes are

very interesting to students. Speaking from my col-

lege experience, while we had various courses

where we needed to exercise logical thought fully to

understand the lecture, drafting classes were dull.

We spent long periods of time just memorizing nu-

merous simple rules. I felt that these rules could be

learnt independently, when necessary. Instead, I

wanted more essential knowledge. Because of my

personal experience, when I reformed the educa-

tional system, I tried to compact the drafting course

as much as possible, so that we could utilize the sur-

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology3

plus time to let students handle actual objects. By

doing so, we hope that students can design with an

actual sense of the objects. As for teaching drafting

skills, we first give students basic drafting knowl-

edge, then have them draft a drawing based on a

specific design example, so that they can learn the

skill on their own.

4. Establishment of the Machine Creation

Center

To implement design and drawing education with hands-

on practice, we first needed to find workspace, then pre-

pare the necessary machines and tools. It is a serious is-

sue, and I could not handle it by myself, so I brought up

this issue at the faculty meeting of our Department. We

reached an agreement that Mechanical and Aerospace

Engineering Department, as a unit, would advocate to

companies the importance of the practical exercise we

wanted to implement. We then sought to raise funds to

establish a workshop called ‘the Machine Creation Cen-

ter’ on campus. Each of us contacted companies where

we had connections, and at the same time visited other

companies in an effort to raise funds. Eventually, the

fund reached nearly 100 million yen. With this we re-

formed our old and warehouse-like space into a work-

shop, installed air conditioning equipment, 13 sets of

control computers, machines, and tools.

For about 50 students, the equipment that we pre-

pared included 4 small lathes, 4 small milling ma-

chines, 6 drilling machine, 2 band saws, a belt sander,

a cutting machine, etc. When we give a course with

practical experience, the primary issue is to ensure

student safety. I sometimes felt depressed thinking

about the numerous accident possibilities; whenever

teaching staff discussed safety issues, the argument

often took up the logic of ‘to prevent accidents,

grade-scholars shall not use a knife to sharpen pen-

cils.’ In other words, they tended to suggest dropping

the idea of incorporating practice into the curricu-

lum.

However, we drive cars in spite of the risk of car acci-

dents, and we take airplanes in spite of the risk of plane

crashes. I persisted with the idea that, though the risk of

accidents will never be zero, we could do our best to

minimize the risk, and managed successfully to persuade

the faculty. We paid maximum attention to safety, in-

cluding sufficient guidance and supervision of machine

operation and careful arrangement of the machine layout

and lighting. We also installed a special emergency brake

on the small lathes. Fortunately, we have never had any

serious accidents.

5. Course Description

A description of the course content and key issues fol-

lows:

5.1. Introduction to Machine Creation (2 Credits

3 Classes Per Week; 1 Class.45 Minutes, 1

Course.15 Weeks)

The intention of this course is to give students the oppor-

tunity to handle actual machinery as much as possible

when they start studying mechanical engineering in the

first semester of the second year. In this course, we pro-

vide various machines, donated by private companies, to

groups of 4±5 students. Then an engineer from the donor

company explains the outline of the machine. After that,

students dismantle the machine with tools provided be-

forehand. The instructor explains the internal mechanisms,

functions, the materials used to make the machine and the

process methods, and then students reassemble the ma-

chine. Table 1 shows the machines and donor companies

we used in the year 2000. In this course, we provide a

toolbox to each of the groups for their exclusive use.

5.2. Mechatronics (2 Credits, 2 Classes Per

Week)

In this course, we teach the basics of analog electronic

circuits through to digital electronic circuits, operation

of sensor information, motor control, and so on. Stu-

dents are provided with small power units and TITech

Robot Drivers [5], which are power amplifiers devel-

oped for motors and commercialized in our laboratory.

They use these components to fabricate a servo unit and

learn computer control. At the same time, there is a

requirement for students to go to Akihabara, an area in

Tokyo where there are numerous electrical and elec-

tronic parts shops, to purchase electronic parts for

themselves.

Students keep the power unit and the servo unit,

(made from a DC motor and amplifier), after the course,

so that they can use these units as the basic drive unit

for the robot street performer we ask them to construct

in the Machine Creation Course during the first semes-

ter of the third year. At the beginning of the curriculum

change, students made the motor amplifiers for them-

selves, using analog power amplifiers. However, when

they used them to drive their street artist robots, the

amplifiers frequently caused trouble. This was largely

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology

because of the students insufficient manufacturing

skills. Therefore, we now provide the students with

ready-made TITech Robot Drivers.

5.3. Machine Creation (3 Credits, 5 Classes Per

Week)

In this course, students have to fabricate the robot. At the

end of this course, we hold the Street Artist Robot Con-

test, as you can see in Figure 1. Described below are the

key points of this course.

5.4. Deciding on the Competition

In the Machine Creation Course, we decided to ask the

students to construct a robot so that they can acquire a

knowledge of mechanisms, electronics, and software.

Since there would be a number of robots at the end of

each course, we decided to hold a robot contest and dis-

cussed what kind of contest we could run. Other de-

partments of TITech hold competition events with MIT

(U. S.) and others, so one solution was to join that

competition. The competition consists of manually

tele-operated hand made robots, competition rules are

set beforehand, and students have to make the robot for

the competition with the materials provided. It is an

extremely good course. However, we finally decided not

to join that competition, agreeing instead to create a new

performance-type contest of our own called the ‘Street

Artist Contest.’ In this competition, the robots have to

present street performances to the audience, and we give

ratings according to their performance. We chose this

kind of performance robot contest for the following

reasons.

1) The challenge to students is fuzzy. If you give clear

rules for the competition, students can concentrate on

technical challenges. However, all we can expect from

this type of competition is an engineer who only has the

skill to make things he is told to make. There is now an

expectation for engineers to be able to create something

original, something that has not existed before. In this

sense, a competition with fuzzy rules demands that stu-

dents exercise their creativity fully from the planning

phase. I believe it will stimulate their creativity.

2) It appeals to the audience. Since we tell students to

make something that is fun to look at, it is not possible to

predict what will come out, so the audience can maintain

their interest throughout the contest. I believe it solves

the only problem with traditional competition events;

namely, while the people who made the robots are enthu-

siastic about the competition, other people become bored

by looking at series of similar acts. It also creates another

problem: how to give an objective rating based on inter-

est and appeal. To overcome this, we combine mutual

rating among students, the direct reaction from the audi-

ence and general opinions of the judges in the final

evaluation.

Table 1. The machines used (disassembled) in machine creation basic and the donor companies (2000).

Gasoline engine Yamaha Motor Co., Ltd.

Visit to Technical Research Center Ishikawajima Harima Industry Co., Ltd.

Turbo charger Komatsu Ltd.

Ice dispenser Hoshizaki Electric Co., Ltd.

Fishing reel Daiwa Seiko, Inc.

Model helicopter Hirobo Corp.

Vending machine Fuji Electric Co., Ltd.

Copy machine Fuji Xerox Corp.

Hydraulic piston pump Kayaba Industry Co., Ltd.

Precise positioning system NSK Ltd.

Pneumatic driven screw driver Hitachi Machining, Ltd.

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology5

Figure 1. 1997 street artist robot competition (frog-like machine blowing soap bubbles).

3) It is easy to hold the contest on a continual basis.

When robots compete in performances, we can use the

same rules every year, greatly reducing the burden on

organizers; unlike other competition events where or-

ganizers often need to work out new rules every time. If

there are any doubts whether it is all right to use the

same rules every year, a fancy dress contest broadcast

by a Japanese TV station for a long time is a good ex-

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology

ample. This contest has just one very simple rule:

competitors put on fancy costumes, then perform; yet

this contest maintained its popularity for long time. The

same idea seems to work for the robot street artist

competition.

5.5. The Framework for Practical Exercise

Four or five students form a group to make the robots and

the group is provided with a toolbox containing screw-

drivers, pliers, nippers and other tools at the beginning of

the course. Students keep the toolbox themselves; to

make sure that they handle these tools with care, and we

give a penalty if they damage these tools by incorrect

handling.

As for the materials used to construct the robots, we

maintain secure storage for these in the Machine Creation

Center. There, we keep materials useful to make small

structural units and mechanisms, such as ball bearings,

gears, rudder chains and sprockets, aluminum sheets and

bars, angle bars, axle components, acrylic boards, and

plywood, along with the components necessary to make

mechatronic systems, such as resistors, condensers, tran-

sistors, micro switches and electric motors.

For these materials, we put a price tag to each item.

Engineering is the activity of pursuing the optimum de-

sign under restrictions such as cost and development time.

Cost is an important consideration in design, but it seems

that there is little attention given to this aspect in tradi-

tional design courses. In this course, in order to introduce

the economic aspects of design and manufacture, we re-

quire students to report on the material cost of making the

robot on the last day of the course. In addition, putting a

price tag to components is a very effective way of pre-

venting wasteful use of these components.

As for money, each group has a budget of 20,000 yen

and they can use the stock materials within this budget,

although they can also take abandoned machines apart to

find useful parts. The first class of each new school year

dismantles the robots made during the previous year and

identifies what parts they can use, so that they learn to

recycle useful parts.

6. Notes on Implementation

Described below are the points we need to consider when

we give this kind of courses.

1) Some students tend to spend too much time plan-

ning. Until this course, students have had little experience

with classes where they receive no clear instructions.

Accordingly, they stop at the initial planning stage. When

we find such students, we try to work with them to define

the basic concepts as soon as possible. We do not make

any special effort to let students know about the robots

made by their senior students or guide them to make

something different, so we sometimes see robots similar

to the ones made in the past. We accept them as they are,

unless they have intentionally copied robots made by

other students.

2) Even when students start making their own robot,

they often misunderstand the overall plan and find them-

selves stuck with details. As a result, their project does

not progress. In this case, we try to encourage the stu-

dents to look at the overall project, so that they can con-

sider which technology is key to developing their concept.

Then we urge them to make a prototype as early as pos-

sible to check the technical viability of the technology.

When they have confirmed the design, we ask the stu-

dents to adjust details and check the actual motions of the

prototype.

EQUIPMENT FOR MATERIAL HANDLING

Required performance:

Pick up a plate on the stand, then turn it inside out, and place it on the conveyer within six seconds.

Required accuracy:

Position: .0.1 mm, angle: .0.5 deg.

Conditions:

Size of plate: 120mm square, 10mm thick

Weight of plate: 1 kg

Material of plate: non-magnetic

Transportation path: not regulated

Friction coefficient: 0.3, every surface

Others:

Direction of plate is not regulated ,but should be placed parallel to conveyer.

Minimum clearance between equipment and work is 40mm.

Width and height of equipment is notrestricted.

Figure 2. An example of assignments in machine creation.

Current Distortion Evaluation in Traction 4Q Constant Switching Frequency Converters 7

3) When we talk to students who are working on their

robots, we try to use rough sketches to facilitate commu-

nication. I believe this experience is useful for them in

understanding the meaning of design and drawing, which

they will study later.

4) During the course, we try to set more than one

checkpoint to look at the students’ progress. If we do

not make any effort to check their progress before the

contest, we cannot always expect satisfactory quality

even though students may stay up all night working on

the robots for a couple of days preceding the contest.

By checking their progress at multiple points, we can

solve this problem to a certain extent. In the case of the

Machine Creation Course (15 weeks), students present

their concept using overhead projectors in the 3rd week,

and discuss their concepts with other students. In the

7th week, we have a meeting to examine the mecha-

nisms. We request that students have working mecha-

nisms ready by that time to check the functionality,

though they do not have to deco rate the robots for this.

In the 11th week, we have a total technology examina-

tion meeting to check the workmanship of the mecha-

nism and its computer control system. After this meet-

ing, students have to do the final tuning and finishing

for the competition.

5) Documentation is also important in engineering

education. We ask students to produce posters to exhibit

in the corridor of the Machine Creation Center and de-

tailed reports of their robot.

6) We use instructors who can teach practical ex-

perience. In courses that contain practical work, it is

important to secure sufficient teaching staff so that we

can check on each student. We are dealing with this

challenge with full assistance from part-time instructors

and 3 engineering staff members, along with graduate

student TAs (teaching assistants) who supervise the

after-school activities. In the future, we shall also work

out a scheme where we can ask assistance from senior

volunteers.

6.1. Design and Drawing (2 Credits, 4 Classes

Per Week)

This class takes place during the final semester of the

third year. In the first 4 weeks or so, we repeat lec-

tures and quizzes, organizing the lectures so that stu-

dents can learn the essence of drawing in the shortest

possible time. Then, we give 3 specific assignments to

the 54 students, so that they can work out the ma-

chines that can meet the challenge then present their

ideas in drawings. Currently, Mr. Shoichi Iikura from

Toshiba Co. and others teach this course, and they

prepare projects for their assignments that one might

come across in actual business. Figure 2 shows one of

these assignments. Students often submit more than a

dozen different designs with different concepts for

one assignment, so we examine each design separately

and provide appropriate guidance. Though students

have to submit the assembly drawing only, they are

also required to state why they selected the motor that

they did, and to check the strength and vibration fre-

quencies. This enables students to recognize the ap-

plicability of what they have learned in a practical

setting. To assist students in researching the parts

needed to complete their project, we provide numer-

ous catalogues at the Machine Creation Center. Stu-

dents can use these catalogues to work out their design.

Figure 2. An example of assignments in machine

creation.

7. Conclusions

What is the ideal teaching method to nurture creativity?

Unfortunately, I do not have a clear answer to this ques-

tion. However, I believe that we can nurture creativity if

we provide as much firsthand experience as possible that

contributes to creative thinking, prepare an environment

where one needs to be creative, and properly evaluate the

achievement of creativity. This belief establishes a foun-

dation for the principles described in this article. How-

ever, it would be too late to start nurturing creativity in

college. I strongly feel that we should introduce the as-

pects of creativity in elementary school and junior high

school. For this purpose I am now proposing to introduce

‘intelligent sports’.

8. Acknowledgements

To implement this creativity education in TITech, we

received a great deal of support from everywhere, and I

would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge their

contributions. I am particularly grateful to Mr. Hideaki

Suzuki for his extensive assistance.

REFERENCES

[1] Shigeo Hirose, Attempts to introduce practice, feeling and

creativity in education, J. Japanese Soc. Mechanical En-

gineers, 94(875) pp. 874±879 (1991) in Japanese.

[2] Shigeo Hirose, Creative education and street artist robot

competition, J. Japan Engineering Education Association,

42(6) pp. 31±35 (1994) in Japanese.

Creative Education at Tokyo Institute of Technology

[3] Shigeo Hirose, Culture of manufacturing in the robotized

society, J. Japan Soc. Mechanical Engineers, 99(926) pp.

24±28 (1996) in Japanese.

[4] Shigeo Hirose, Private view about creativity education,

Examples of Creative Education in Engineering, Techni-

cal Education Division, Higher Education Bureau, Minis-

try of Education, pp. 44±45 (1997) in Japanese.

[5] Fumihiko E. Fukushima, Toshimichi Tsumaki, and Shi-

geo Hirose, Development of PWM-controlled DC servo

motor drive circuit, Proc. 13th Conf. Robotics Society of

Japan, pp. 1153±1154 (1995) In Japanese.

[6] Shigeo Hirose, Introduction of `intelligent sports', J. Ro-

botics and Mechatronics, 10(1), pp. 2±6, (1997).