2026 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

This work-in-progress study investigates the effectiveness of the System Architecture-Function-Outcome (SAFO) framework as a pedagogical tool for facilitating cross-disciplinary collaboration and systems thinking among undergraduate engineering students.

Motivated by increasing demands for engineers capable of addressing complex, interdisciplinary challenges, the study builds on prior research demonstrating SAFO’s utility in teaching systems thinking in discipline-agnostic contexts. Here, the framework is applied within a collaborative, case-based learning setting to evaluate its role in bridging disciplinary boundaries and supporting structured problem-solving.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of applying SAFO in a collaborative problem-solving setting with undergraduate students from different engineering disciplines. The research questions (RQs) of this study are as follows -

When applying SAFO to describe and address real-world challenges in a collaborative problem-solving learning setting with undergraduate students from different engineering majors:

● RQ1: How well do the challenge and proposed solution descriptions adhere to SAFO?
● RQ2: How correct are the challenge descriptions?
● RQ3: How viable are the proposed solutions?

A case study methodology was employed in the context of a competition organized under the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s New Engineering Education Transformation (MIT NEET) program. Ten undergraduate students from diverse engineering majors (including aerospace, biological, electrical, and nuclear engineering) were organized into interdisciplinary teams and tasked with addressing real-world challenges related to the MIT campus food system.

Using SAFO, teams developed system diagrams and outcome descriptions for both problem identification and solution design. Data sources included student-generated artifacts, expert evaluations, and post-activity survey responses.

Results indicate high levels of adherence across most teams, with the majority of submissions scoring at or above moderate levels. Survey responses corroborated these findings, with participants reporting strong understanding of the framework and its application.

Expert evaluations of correctness and viability yielded moderate scores, suggesting that while students could effectively structure problems and solutions using SAFO, their depth of domain understanding and practical feasibility remained limited.

The findings suggest that SAFO is a promising tool for structuring interdisciplinary collaboration and fostering systems thinking in undergraduate settings, particularly due to its simplicity and adaptability. Notably, teams composed of more advanced students demonstrated stronger adherence, indicating a potential relationship between academic maturity and effective framework use.

Limitations include the small sample size and lack of formative feedback during the activity. Future work will expand participant numbers, incorporate iterative feedback mechanisms, and explore automated assessment tools to enhance learning outcomes.

Overall, this study contributes a practical, scalable approach to integrating systems thinking and interdisciplinary collaboration into engineering education, demonstrating that such competencies can be cultivated early and effectively using structured yet accessible frameworks like SAFO.