IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i11p5768-d558982.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design Framework Based on TEC21 Educational Model and Education 4.0 Implemented in a Capstone Project: A Case Study of an Electric Vehicle Suspension System

Author

Listed:
  • Hugo A López

    (School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, CDMX 14380, Mexico)

  • Pedro Ponce

    (School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, CDMX 14380, Mexico)

  • Arturo Molina

    (School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, CDMX 14380, Mexico)

  • María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya

    (School of Humanities and Education, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey 64849, Mexico)

  • Edgar Lopez-Caudana

    (School of Engineering and Sciences, Tecnologico de Monterrey, CDMX 14380, Mexico)

Abstract

Nowadays, engineering students have to improve specific competencies to tackle the challenges of 21st-century-industry, referred to as Industry 4.0. Hence, this article describes the integration and implementation of Education 4.0 strategies with the new educational model of our university to respond to the needs of Industry 4.0 and society. The TEC21 Educational Model implemented at Tecnologico de Monterrey in Mexico aims to develop disciplinary and transversal competencies for creative and strategic problem-solving of present and future challenges. Education 4.0, as opposed to traditional education, seeks to provide solutions to these challenges through innovative pedagogies supported by emerging technologies. This article presents a case study of a Capstone project developed with undergraduate engineering students. The proposed structure integrates the TEC21 model and Education 4.0 through new strategies and laboratories, all linked to industry. The results of a multidisciplinary project focused on an electric vehicle racing team are presented, composed of Education 4.0 elements and competencies development in leadership, innovation, and entrepreneurship. The project was a collaboration between academia and the productive sector. The results verified the students’ success in acquiring the necessary competencies and skills to become technological leaders in today’s modern industry. One of the main contributions shown is a suitable education framework for bringing together the characteristics established by Education 4.0 and achieved by our educational experience based on Education 4.0.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugo A López & Pedro Ponce & Arturo Molina & María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya & Edgar Lopez-Caudana, 2021. "Design Framework Based on TEC21 Educational Model and Education 4.0 Implemented in a Capstone Project: A Case Study of an Electric Vehicle Suspension System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:5768-:d:558982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/5768/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/11/5768/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emma Puerari & Jotte I. J. C. De Koning & Timo Von Wirth & Philip M. Karré & Ingrid J. Mulder & Derk A. Loorbach, 2018. "Co-Creation Dynamics in Urban Living Labs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carla Victoria Ramirez-Lopez & Leticia Castano & Patricia Aldape & Santa Tejeda, 2021. "Telepresence with Hologram Effect: Technological Ecosystem for Distance Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Kiomi Matsumoto-Royo & Maria Soledad Ramírez-Montoya & Paulette Conget, 2021. "Opportunities to Develop Lifelong Learning Tendencies in Practice-Based Teacher Education: Getting Ready for Education 4.0," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, November.
    3. Guillermo M. Chans & Mireille E. Bravo-Gutiérrez & Angelica Orona-Navar & Elvia P. Sánchez-Rodríguez, 2022. "Compilation of Chemistry Experiments for an Online Laboratory Course: Student’s Perception and Learning Outcomes in the Context of COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-26, February.
    4. Celia Paola Sarango-Lapo & Juanjo Mena & María Soledad Ramírez-Montoya, 2021. "Evidence-Based Educational Innovation Model Linked to Digital Information Competence in the Framework of Education 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-17, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lindsay P. Galway & Charles Z. Levkoe & Rachel L. W. Portinga & Kathryn Milun, 2021. "A Scoping Review Examining Governance, Co-Creation, and Social and Ecological Justice in Living Labs Literature," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Darren Sierhuis & Luca Bertolini & Willem Van Winden, 2024. "“Recovering†the political: Unpacking the implications of (de)politicization for the transformative capacities of urban experiments," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 42(2), pages 303-321, March.
    3. Darren Sharp & Rob Raven, 2021. "Urban Planning by Experiment at Precinct Scale: Embracing Complexity, Ambiguity, and Multiplicity," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 195-207.
    4. Buijs, Arjen & Kamphorst, Dana & Mattijssen, Thomas & van Dam, Rosalie & Kuindersma, Wiebren & Bouwma, Irene, 2022. "Policy discourses for reconnecting nature with society: The search for societal engagement in Dutch nature conservation policies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. Pereira, Guillermo Ivan & Specht, Jan Martin & Silva, Patrícia Pereira & Madlener, Reinhard, 2018. "Technology, business model, and market design adaptation toward smart electricity distribution: Insights for policy making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 426-440.
    6. Batara Surya & Haeruddin Saleh & Seri Suriani & Harry Hardian Sakti & Hadijah Hadijah & Muhammad Idris, 2020. "Environmental Pollution Control and Sustainability Management of Slum Settlements in Makassar City, South Sulawesi, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-34, August.
    7. Sujeetha Selvakkumaran & Erik O. Ahlgren, 2018. "Model-Based Exploration of Co-Creation Efforts: The Case of Solar Photovoltaics (PV) in Skåne, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, October.
    8. Sabine van Rooij & Wim Timmermans & Onno Roosenschoon & Saskia Keesstra & Marjolein Sterk & Bas Pedroli, 2020. "Landscape-Based Visions as Powerful Boundary Objects in Spatial Planning: Lessons from Three Dutch Projects," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, December.
    9. Annuska Rantanen & Juho Rajaniemi, 2020. "Urban planning in the post-zoning era: From hierarchy to self-organisation in the reform of the Finnish Land Use and Building Act," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(2), pages 321-335, February.
    10. Peter Brokking & Ulla Mörtberg & Berit Balfors, 2021. "Municipal Practices for Integrated Planning of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Development in the Stockholm Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-20, September.
    11. Lummina G. Horlings & Christian Lamker & Emma Puerari & Ward Rauws & Gwenda van der Vaart, 2021. "Citizen Engagement in Spatial Planning, Shaping Places Together," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    12. Clara Medina-García & Rosa de la Fuente & Pieter Van den Broeck, 2021. "Exploring the Emergence of Innovative Multi-Actor Collaborations toward a Progressive Urban Regime in Madrid (2015–2019)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-29, January.
    13. Soini, Katriina & Anderson, Carl Cyrus & Polderman, Annemarie & Teresa, Carlone & Sisay, Debele & Kumar, Prashant & Mannocchi, Matteo & Mickovski, Slobodan & Panga, Depy & Pilla, Francesco & Preuschma, 2023. "Context matters: Co-creating nature-based solutions in rural living labs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    14. Inés Aquilué & Angélica Caicedo & Joan Moreno & Miquel Estrada & Laia Pagès, 2021. "A Methodology for Assessing the Impact of Living Labs on Urban Design: The Case of the Furnish Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-29, April.
    15. Candel, Melissa & Paulsson, Jenny, 2023. "Enhancing public value with co-creation in public land development: The role of municipalities," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    16. Miguel Lopes & Fernando Alves, 2021. "Digital Tools to Foster Inclusiveness: Porto’s System of Accessible Itineraries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    17. Maria Alina Rădulescu & Wim Leendertse & Jos Arts, 2020. "Conditions for Co-Creation in Infrastructure Projects: Experiences from the Overdiepse Polder Project (The Netherlands)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-21, September.
    18. Marina Van Geenhuizen, 2019. "Applying an RRI Filter in Key Learning on Urban Living Labs’ Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-16, July.
    19. Eva van Genuchten & Alicia Calderón González & Ingrid Mulder, 2019. "Open Innovation Strategies for Sustainable Urban Living," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, June.
    20. Eghbal Akhlaghi, Vahid & Campbell, Ann Melissa & de Matta, Renato E., 2021. "Fuel distribution planning for disasters: Models and case study for Puerto Rico," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:11:p:5768-:d:558982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.