The goal of this study is to advance the teaching and learning of uncertainty in conceptual design. The central research question is: Can a data-driven conceptual design course improve students’ ability to reason about aleatory and epistemic uncertainty? To investigate this, two aims were pursued: (1) constructing a data-driven conceptual design course with implementation and evaluation strategies, and (2) designing an educational flow that supports students’ engagement with uncertainty through structured tasks. Nine frameworks, grouped into five categories and supported by three discipline-based education research fields, were defined to ground the study and provide a foundation for addressing the research question. Using the backward design, a comprehensive conceptual design course was proposed, aligned with relevant ABET competencies and complemented by an educational flow and an educator's guide containing theoretical preparation materials, implementation tools, recommended programming libraries, and guidance for undergraduate and graduate-level instruction. A case study, based on bicycle frame design, demonstrated practical implementation through image preprocessing, dimensionality reduction, and clustering. The course was further contextualized to illustrate the applicability across multiple STEM fields, including mechanical, electrical/computer, and biomedical engineering. Overall, this study contributes a generalizable teaching-learning-assessment construct for supporting uncertainty reasoning in advanced engineering design courses.
BammerG.BrowneC. A.BallardC.LloydN.KevanA.NealesN.Nurmikko-FullerT.PereraS.SinghalI.van KerkhoffL. (2023). Setting parameters for developing undergraduate expertise in transdisciplinary problem solving at a university-wide scale: A case study. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 208. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01709-8
3.
BankD.KoenigsteinN.GiryesR. (2023). Autoencoders. In RokachL.MaimonO.ShmueliE. (Eds.), Machine learning for data science handbook (pp. 353–374). Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24628-9_16
BertoniA. (2023). Mitigating uncertainty in conceptual design using operational scenario simulations: A data-driven extension of the EVOKE approach. International Conference on Engineering Design, Bordeaux, France. https://doi.org/10.1017/pds.2023.267
6.
BiehlerR.PrattD. (2012). Research on the reasoning, teaching and learning of probability and uncertainty. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 44(7), 819–823. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0468-0
7.
ChandanaM. H.DorasanammaG.KiranS.KumarA. A. (2024). A review on feature extraction techniques using machine learning. Macaw International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science and Engineering, 10(1), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.70162/mijarcse//2024/v10/i1/v10i106
8.
ChenJ.KolmosA.DuX. (2021). Forms of implementation and challenges of PBL in engineering education: A review of literature. European Journal of Engineering Education, 46(1), 90–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2020.1718615
9.
ChlailyS.RathaD.LozouP.MarinoniA. (2023). On measures of uncertainty in classification. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 71, 3710–3725. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2023.3322843
10.
Cruz-LozanoR.AlemayehuF. M.Ekwaro-OsireS.EndeshawH. B. (2017). Determining probability of importance of features in a sketch. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems, Part B: Mechanical Engineering, 3(4), 041003. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4035867
11.
DiasJ. P.Ekwaro-OsireS.CunhaA.DabetwarS.NispelA.AlemayehuF. M.EndeshawH. B. (2019). Parametric probabilistic approach for cumulative fatigue damage using double linear damage rule considering limited data. International Journal of Fatigue, 127, 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.06.011
12.
DuX. (2014). Teaching uncertainty in design and analysis courses. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, 3, Buffalo, New York, United States. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2014-34182
13.
Ekwaro-OsireS.Cruz-LozanoR.EndeshawH. B.DiasJ. P. (2016). Uncertainty in communication with a sketch. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 20(4), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.3233/jid-2016-0022
14.
ElguebalyT.BouguilaN. (2012). Generalized Gaussian mixture models as a nonparametric Bayesian approach for clustering using class-specific visual features. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 23(8), 1199–1212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2012.08.003
15.
FazelpourM.JoshiS.MockoG. M.MorkosB.MozaffarF.MurphyA.PatelA.RamnathS.RenuR.RighterJ.SenC.GillA.SummersJ. (2025). Student learning throughout engineering design education: Review and recommendations. Journal of Mechanical Design, 47(11), 112301. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4069128
16.
FieldingJ.MakarK.Ben-ZviD. (2025). Developing students’ reasoning with data and data-ing. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 57(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01671-6
17.
GafnyR.Ben-ZviD. (2023). Students’ articulations of uncertainty about big data in an integrated modeling approach learning environment. Teaching Statistics, 45(S1), S67–S79. https://doi.org/10.1111/test.12330
18.
GafnyR.DvirM.Ben-ZviD. (2025). Novices’ reasoning with big data and data-ing through the lens of uncertainty. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 57(1), 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01646-z
19.
GrayA.WimbushA.de AngelisM.HristovP. O.CallejaD.Miralles-DolzE.RocchettaR. (2022). From inference to design: A comprehensive framework for uncertainty quantification in engineering with limited information. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 165, 108210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2021.108210
20.
HallB. M. (2010). Teaching uncertainty: The case of climate change [Doctoral dissertation, University of Gloucestershire]. University of Gloucestershire Research Repository. https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/id/eprint/3205
21.
HendersonT. S.CarreroA.MichelJ. O. (2025). Engineering students’ sustainability learning: Examining opportunities to learn about sustainability and their role in student outcomes. Journal of Engineering Education, 114(3), e70010. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.70010
22.
HuangK. L.LiuY. C.DongM. Q.LuC. C. (2024). Integrating AIGC into product design ideation teaching: An empirical study on self-efficacy and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 92, 101929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101929
23.
HüllermeierE.WaegemanW. (2021). Aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in machine learning: An introduction to concepts and methods. Machine Learning, 110(3), 457–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-021-05946-3
24.
JabiM.PedersoliM.MiticheA.AyedI. B. (2021). Deep clustering: On the link between discriminative models and k-means. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 43(6), 1887–1896. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2019.2962683
KokK. W. (2022). Certain about uncertainty: What students need to know about measurement uncertainties to compare data sets [Doctoral dissertation, Humboldt University of Berlin]. Publication Server of Humboldt University. https://doi.org/10.18452/24782
28.
LewisR.CarlsonD. G.RiesbeckS. E.GerberC. K.EasterdayE. M.WM. (2023). Encouraging engineering design teams to engage in expert iterative practices with tools to support coaching in problem-based learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 112(4), 1012–1031. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20554
29.
LiaoY. C.RinglerM. (2023). Backward design: Integrating active learning into undergraduate computer science courses. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2204055. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2204055
LiuX.ZhangY.LiuL.TangC.PengL.LanL.HuD. (2025). Sample adaptive localized simple multiple kernel k-means and its application in parcellation of human cerebral cortex. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 47(9), 8134–8147. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2025.3573613
32.
MacLeodM.van der VeenJ. T. (2020). Scaffolding interdisciplinary project-based learning: A case study. European Journal of Engineering Education, 45(3), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2019.1646210
33.
MaganaA. J. (2022). The role of frameworks in engineering education research. Journal of Engineering Education, 111(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20443
34.
MaganaA. J.ArigyeJ.UdosenA.LyonJ. A.JoshiP.PienaarE. (2024). Scaffolded team-based computational modeling and simulation projects for promoting representational competence and regulatory skills. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), Article 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00494-3
35.
MaganaA. J.KarabiyikT.ThomasP.JaiswalA.PereraV.DworkinJ. (2022). Teamwork facilitation and conflict resolution training in a HyFlex course during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Engineering Education, 111(2), 446–473. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20450
36.
MahmudM. S.HuangJ. Z.FuX. (2020). Variational autoencoder-based dimensionality reduction for high-dimensional small-sample data classification. International Journal of Computational Intelligence and Applications, 19(1), 2050002. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1469026820500029
37.
MatthewsP. C. (2011). Challenges to Bayesian decision support using morphological matrices for design: Empirical evidence. Research in Engineering Design, 22(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-010-0094-1
38.
MuellerP.MuellerS.MikelsonsL. (2024). GeoBiked: A dataset with geometric features and automated labeling techniques to enable deep generative models in engineering design. ArXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.17045.
39.
NobariA. H.RashadM. F.AhmedF. (2021). CreativeGAN: Editing generative adversarial networks for creative design synthesis. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Virtual. https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2021-68103
40.
NorthcuttC. G.AthalyeA.MuellerJ. (2021). Pervasive label errors in test sets destabilize machine learning benchmarks. 35th Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Sydney, Australia, http://arxiv.org/abs/2103.14749.
41.
OsmondJ.ToveyM. (2015). The threshold of uncertainty in teaching design. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 20(2), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.24377/DTEIJ.article1599
42.
PhillipsB. D.SchmidtJ. N.Aretskin-HaritonE. D.FalckR. D. (2025). Design under uncertainty for conceptual aircraft design leveraging analytical gradients. AIAA SCITECH 2025 Forum, Orlando, FL, United States. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2025-1956
43.
RasmussenC. E. (2004). Gaussian Processes in machine learning. In BousquetO.von LuxburgU.RätschG. (Eds.), Advanced lectures on machine learning (pp. 63–71). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-28650-9_4
RegenwetterL.CurryB.AhmedF. (2022). BIKED: A dataset for computational bicycle design with machine learning benchmarks. Journal of Mechanical Design, 144(3), 031706. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4052585
47.
RegenwetterL.NobariA. H.AhmedF. (2022). Deep generative models in engineering design: A review. Journal of Mechanical Design, 144(7), 071704. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4053859
48.
RegenwetterL.SrivastavaA.GutfreundD.AhmedF. (2023). Beyond statistical similarity: Rethinking metrics for deep generative models in engineering design. Computer-Aided Design, 165, 103609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2023.103609
49.
RodriguezJ. M. G.NardoJ. E.Finkenstaedt-QuinnS. A.WattsF. M. (2023). The use of frameworks in chemistry education research. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 24(4), 1109–1126. https://doi.org/10.1039/d3rp00149k
50.
Ruiz-PastorL.ChulviV.MuletE.RoyoM. (2022). A metric for evaluating novelty and circularity as a whole in conceptual design proposals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 337, 130495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130495
51.
SabelJ. L.DauerJ. T.ForbesC. T. (2017). Introductory biology students’ use of enhanced answer keys and reflection questions to engage in metacognition and enhance understanding. CBE Life Sciences Education, 16(3), ar40. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-10-0298
52.
Sánchez-RicoM.HoertelN.AlvaradoJ. M. (2023). Combination of cluster analysis with dimensionality reduction techniques for pattern recognition studies in healthcare data: Comparing PCA, t-SNE and UMAP. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/zxvf2
53.
SheikhW. (2024). An intuitive, application-based, simulation-driven approach to teaching probability and random processes. International Journal of Electrical Engineering and Education, 61(1), 17–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020720919866405
54.
SuM.MaL.ZhangD.Yunusa-KaltungoA.CheungC. (2025). Exploring benefits and concerns of incorporating digital tools into engineering education. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 6(1), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2025.6.1.909
55.
Valdenegro-ToroM.MoriD. S. (2022). A deeper look into aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty disentanglement. IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, New Orleans, LA, United States, https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPRW56347.2022.00157
56.
ZengY. (2016). One thing is certain in design: Design is uncertain. Journal of Integrated Design and Process Science, 20(4), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.3233/jid-2016-0029
57.
ZhangA. Y.LeeE.DinçE.BellandB. R. (2025). A systematic review of studies on scaffolding in statistics education. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 57(4), 763–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01697-w
58.
ZhouR.YuanC.PermenterF.ZhangY.ArechigaN.KlenkM.AhmedF. (2024). Bridging design gaps: A parametric data completion approach with graph-guided diffusion models. International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Washington, DC, United States. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2024-143359
