Dr Ji-Jon Sit is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering at Nanyang Technological University. With a PhD from MIT’s Analog VLSI and Biological Systems Group, Dr. Sit brings extensive industry experience to his teaching, having worked at Advanced Bionics in California as a Senior RF and Systems Engineer (2007-2015) and at Nalu Medical developing neuromodulation technologies (2015-2017). His background in neural stimulation technologies for cochlear implants and minimally invasive neuromodulation platforms informs his innovative approach to teaching circuit design. Dr Sit focuses on bridging the gap between theoretical understanding and practical design skills, preparing students for real-world engineering challenges through his design-centred teaching approach.
Electronics engineering education often focuses solely on circuit analysis, leaving graduates unprepared for design challenges in industry. By restructuring courses around meaningful design projects, we can better prepare students for real-world engineering problems and address critical skill shortages.
As an electronics educator, I’ve long been troubled by a fundamental disconnect in how we teach electrical engineering. While we meticulously teach students to analyse existing circuits, we rarely teach them to design new ones—yet design is precisely what industry demands of our graduates.
The analysis-design gap in engineering education
More than twenty years ago, I sat in my own Analog Electronics class watching my professor explain complex circuit diagrams like the 741 Op-Amp with statements like “when this point goes up, that point goes down, which pulls current through here.” These sessions filled me with awe about how a few transistors could transform into ubiquitous components that seemingly worked by magic.
Years later, as an instructor myself, I realised we were perpetuating a problematic approach. Arthur C. Clarke once observed that “any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from magic.” If we teach students only to analyse existing circuits without showing them how these circuits were conceived, we risk turning engineering education into something akin to teaching magic tricks rather than scientific principles.
This realisation became more urgent around 2020, when global semiconductor shortages highlighted an acute need for qualified integrated circuit designers. Despite comprehensive electrical engineering degrees, our students weren’t fully prepared for these roles because they lacked experience in the creative design process.
Reimagining electronics education through design challenges
To address this gap, I completely transformed my second-year Analog Electronics course at Nanyang Technological University. My goal was to shift from rote analysis to creative problem-solving, applying principles of Design Thinking to the curriculum itself. Instead of isolated, prescriptive lab exercises, the course now revolves around a series of interconnected design challenges that build toward a single, meaningful product: an analog stethoscope for electronically amplifying heart sounds.
This project serves as a powerful exercise in Authentic Learning. It moves students beyond abstract schematics to a tangible, real-world task with a clear purpose. The new approach consists of three progressive design problems:
- A microphone preamplifier using op-amps
- A two-stage Volume-Unit meter with diode rectifiers
- A Push-Pull audio power amplifier using transistors
To ensure individual accountability and prevent solution sharing, I personalised each student’s specifications using digits from their matriculation number—a simple technique that creates thousands of unique design problems while maintaining consistent learning objectives.
Supporting the design process with industry-standard tools
Introducing design challenges isn’t enough—students need appropriate tools to test their ideas. I incorporated LTSpice, an industry-standard circuit simulator, through targeted tutorial sessions. This crucial step creates a safe environment for what educators call Productive Failure. Students can experiment with their designs, see what doesn’t work, and refine their ideas in a low-stakes virtual environment. This iterative process of simulating, failing, and trying again is where some of the most profound learning occurs, building confidence long before a physical prototype is made.
This simulation step proved crucial for building confidence and understanding. When simulation results match laboratory measurements, students experience a powerful confirmation of their theoretical understanding—bridging the gap between abstract concepts and physical reality.
Creating meaningful assessment through tangible outcomes
The culmination of these design challenges provides immediate, visceral feedback on students’ success. When they place the microphone against their neck and hear their own heartbeat through their earpiece while simultaneously seeing the waveform on an oscilloscope, theory and practice unite in a moment of genuine understanding.
This stands in stark contrast to traditional assessments where students merely demonstrate that they’ve followed instructions correctly. The excitement I see when students create working circuits from their own designs confirms what I’ve long suspected: engineering education is at its most powerful when it empowers students not just to understand technology but to create it.
Practical steps for implementing design-centred teaching
Based on my experience, here are concrete steps for incorporating design-centred teaching in your own engineering courses:
- Identify meaningful end products that incorporate multiple course concepts and provide clear evidence of success when working properly
- Break down complex projects into modular challenges that build progressively toward the final product
- Personalise specifications to ensure individual accountability while maintaining consistent learning objectives
- Introduce appropriate simulation tools early and provide structured opportunities to develop proficiency
- Connect theoretical concepts explicitly to design decisions students must make
- Balance guidance with autonomy, providing sufficient support while leaving room for creative problem-solving
- Create authentic assessment based on design functionality and understanding rather than adherence to procedures
Engineering education for the real world
This design-centred approach represents more than a teaching innovation—it’s a fundamental recalibration of how we prepare engineering students for their careers. By shifting focus from analysis to design, we not only better align education with industry needs but also ignite students’ creativity and problem-solving capabilities.
When I first introduced this approach, I wondered if students would find the design challenges too difficult. Instead, they rose to the occasion, demonstrating that when given meaningful problems to solve, students will exceed our expectations. The pride they take in their working stethoscopes—devices they designed rather than merely assembled—speaks volumes about the power of design-centred learning.
Additional resources:
- MIT’s 6.012 Microelectronic Devices and Circuits (Open CourseWare initiative with design-focused approach)
- LTspice simulator (Free circuit simulation software used in industry and education)
