Critical analysis of a six-month PdP course for bachelor’s degree students

Introduction

In the context of higher education, practical and hands-on learning experiences play a critical role in preparing students for the demands of the professional world (Schwab & Zahidi, 2020; Bhardwaj et al., 2025; Novalia et al., 2025). These types of learning experiences can be delivered through approaches such as the Product Development Projects (PdP) implemented at Design Factory contexts (Lahdenperä et al., 2023). Originally, when these project courses have been organized at HAMK Design Factory (HDF), they have often been structured to fit within a standard three-month-long academic period or even shorter time periods, depending on the available schedule (Järvenpää ym., 2024; Jussila & Järvenpää, 2022; Jussila ym., 2022). However, reflecting on the original Aalto Design Factory (ADF) implementation of PdP, which is nine months in duration, and on the experiences from the past PdP course iterations at HDF, sparked the idea of extending the course to six months. This extended format raises the need to examine its effectiveness, relevance, and educational value for applied science level students. At this discussion, it must also be taken into account that ADF’s original nine-month version is mainly marketed for master’s degree level students, whereas our version focuses on the bachelor’s degree level. Because of this, our study begins the work of exploring the outcomes of a six-month product development project course, as compared to our usual three-month model. In this article, we discuss the student team experiences from the six-month model, as they engaged in their interdisciplinary projects that were conducted for industry and research organizations. This study seeks to increase understanding on ways to facilitate interdisciplinary learning projects for industry. Such knowledge can benefit the over 40 Design Factories that are involved in the Design Factory Global Network, but also other higher education institutions that apply design-based or challenge-based education in their teaching, or that are interested in organizing interdisciplinary student projects. These types of projects may involve, for example, solving authentic challenges of industry and research organizations. During these types of implementations, a student team may be engaged in co-creation for a longer duration through collaborative learning environment (Mikkonen, 2021). 

Origin of the Product Development Project course

In addition to the original Aalto Design Factory product development projects, and since the opening ceremony in 2019 of HAMK Design Factory (HDF), multiple PdPs for different durations have been organised. These have ranged from a few hours to two-week long workshops and multiple month-long iterations. These different versions have been designed based on the type of audience and the required level of learning. So far, the three-month model has been used the most. It has also gained a lot of attention and open feedback from interested and participated students, which has led to the discussion of further developing this course.

Three-month vs. six-month duration

Based on past observations, we concluded that HAMK Design Factory (HDF) three-month Product Development Project (PdP) model would be suitable for bachelor’s degree students at the university of applied sciences. At the time, this model also suited our international collaborators from the inno.space Mannheim Design Factory who worked with us for several years (BASE – ATTRACT Project Phase 2, 2025). The three-month model also provided us with plenty of time to modify the course as needed for new iterations. However, this model also came with its own drawbacks. For example, the students found it difficult to adjust to the design thinking process within product development in a way that they would not base project development on assumptions or get personally too attached to their ideas. They also found it hard to question the project sponsors even if the conducted user research said otherwise. These considerations got us started on thinking about the maximum duration for a PdP for bachelor’s degree level students at HAMK, considering that the Aalto Design Factory model is nine months for master’s degree level students.

This discussion led to the six-month model, which should allow enrolled students more time to develop into project experts within their own projects and put their learned design thinking knowledge and skills into practice. This would also provide HDF with enough time to develop the course between iterations while finding new sponsors and students for the next course.

Initial reflections on the six-month duration

To get started with analysing our six-month model for the bachelor’s-level Product Development Project (PdP) course, after the first iteration we started research through survey questions to the enrolled students. This focused on gathering understanding about the students’ motivations, and overall experience. It also helped to review student recognition of the subjects taught and to gather overall feedback for the course. The research data was gathered by sending an MS Forms questionnaire to the students who participated in the PdP course. In total, seven students replied to the questionnaire. The results were examined using thematic analysis, which enables making conclusive statements on the gathered qualitative and quantitative student response data. Using thematic analysis was seen as useful for our purpose because of its flexibility in terms of, for example, the size and structure of samples, the method of data collection and the creation of meaning based on this. Overall, thematic analysis aims to understand what the participants think, feel, and do (Clarke & Braun, 2014, p. 297). The following section discusses the analysed results.

Students were generally pleased with the length of the course

The results from the survey show that the participants mostly think the current six-month-long course duration is good as it is. The majority of the respondents said that the course duration worked well, even as one said that the course should be longer and one that it should be shorter. When asked about the reasoning behind the answers, the positive and open learning atmosphere during this course arose as a main theme. The learning atmosphere at the course was felt to be fun, comfortable and encouraging in a way that helps with learning new skills. One student, for example, said that they especially appreciated “the freedom to express my ideas and the access to facilities that helped me turn those ideas into reality” when it was combined with support and guidance by the lecturers – which enabled detailed exploration of the ideas in a way they had not seen on any previous course. This highlights the effect of fostering an open learning atmosphere. The longer duration was seen by many of the students as a positive also because it made it possible to “complete the course without any rush.”

Suggestions for further development included, for example, bringing the course closer to “the complexities of real-world business environment,” as one of the students noted in a response where they also wished for an even longer course duration. Another student focused in their feedback on the positive effect of the practical physical environment where the project was organised, but they also wished this aspect of the working environment was better marketed to everyone. In their view, this would help with gettin more people to come there in person so that it would “feel a bit more like a school space open to everyone” and in this way further support the collaborative aspect of the course. These are valuable insights to further develop all aspects of the open learning atmosphere that these PdP courses seek to foster.

Conclusions

The initial experiences from the six-month course model discussed here show a generally positive reception from the participating bachelor-level students. Most students found the length appropriate for the 15-credit workload, appreciating the fact that this duration allowed them to complete the course without feeling rushed. The responses also show that the lecturers have managed to create a supportive and open learning environment. This is highlighted as a key factor in the students’ positive experiences which emphasize the importance of promoting creativity and skill development through comfortable and engaging learning settings. Particularly the supportive atmosphere was valued by the students, as it helped them express their ideas freely and made it possible to receive timely assistance throughout their projects, allowing them to become experts in their own projects.

While opinions about the ideal course duration varied slightly, majority of the results indicate that the current structure and duration is beneficial for the course. The feedback also emphasized the importance of both the quality of support and the open, collaborative environment as essential elements for the course’s success. Overall, these initial reflections provide a nuanced understanding of how the course duration meets student needs. It also points towards potential areas for further development, which becomes possible as we gather further experience on this six-month model.

These results show initial signs that bachelor-level students respond positively to a six-month-long version of an interdisciplinary product development project course. As all higher education institutions operate in their specific contexts and offer various levels of degrees (for example, master’s and bachelor’s degrees), critical evaluation is needed when applying similar interdisciplinary learning models to their curriculum. From the perspective of HAMK Design Factory PdP course development, this means that the following perspectives need to be considered more thoroughly to ensure efficient course progression for the longer course duration: who is the course organiser, who grades the course and awards the credits for it, which students can apply, and what is the educational content timeframe for their assignments? As such, HDF provides optional studies for all HAMK students, and it is not restricted by any specific module guidelines that would require fitting the course into a certain timeframe or specific degree curriculum criteria which would restrict the amount of credits that can be given to different degree students. Students can apply to these courses if they fit into their curriculum, but as this allows HDF teaching staff to organise these courses independently, it also leaves more room for future development.

Authors