Rochester Institute of Technology
Senior Design I - Peer Review
Date: Pre-read Document(s) October 8th
Time: 9:00. Handout to Peer Teams during class.
Date: Peer Preview October 15th
Time 9:00 to 12:00
Location: CIMMS Blding – Rms TBD
9:00 – 10:30 / Coodinator * / Rm # / 10:30 – 12:00 / Coordinator * / Rm #05417, 05508, 05910 / Slack / CIMS
Rm 2120 / 05300, 05903, 05911 / Slack / CIMS
Rm 2120
05008, 05106, 05422 / Nye / CIMS
Rm 2140 / 05100, 05413 / Nye / CIMS
Rm 2140
05408, 05504, 05512 / Phillips / CIMS Rm 2150 / 05107, 05204 / Phillips / CIMS Rm 2150
05005, 05201, 05511 / Stiebitz / Xerox Auditorium / Open to all for teams meetings / Xerox Auditorium
Peer Review Background:
- Based on The Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), Software Engineering Institute (SEI), Carnegie Mellon University, Six Sigma has partnered with CMMI. Also ISO 9000/9001 values this.
- http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmm/
Who Participates: Engineering Teams, Coordinators, Mentors, (Corporate Engineers).
Mission of Peer Review:
- Gain technical insight from others.
Objective of Peer Review:
- Remove design defects from the project work early and efficiently. An important corollary effect is to develop a better understanding of the project and of defects that might be prevented.
- To share concept knowledge and vision of the project.
- Make the most of sketches, rough drawings, summary documents, verbal and so on.
Roles and Responsibilities:
Facilitator: Coordinator’s Role
Purpose: Manage Time and process.
Presenting Team/ Engineer’s Role
- 10 min Introduction: Share purpose and description of the project in talking to the Sponsor and team development.
- 5 min Specifications
- 10 min Concept (i.e. group drawing and various methods presented in the Concept Development lecture on 9/24/04 by Dr. Nye.)
- 5 min Feasibility and any concerns.
- Agreement to summarize meeting and send out conclusions.
Evaluating Engineer’s Role
- Open and honest two way communications
- Interruptions are expected and encouraged.
Team Leader’s Role:
- Organize the content, delegate as much as possible
- Organize a pre-read package (no more than 2 pages). Make 15 copies (or send email) and arrange that the evaluating engineers and faculty members get copies.
- Participate in the same role and the other engineers
Team Note Taker’s Role (usually not the Team Manager’s Role):
- Written log of all conversations.
Content of Pre-read:
- Information which may be a snap shot in time. Given that each team is at different point of project (which is development which is normal and expected), the package should include anything that would help the Evaluation Engineers prepare for the review.
- No more than 5 pages, as a rule of thumb.
What (and when) needs to be done before the peer review.
- Presenting Team prepares and distributes pre-read package (to the other two teams managers or directly to other team engineers). (10/8/04)
- Team Manager will distribute pre-read, if necessary.
- Evaluating Engineers – Must read and markup a copy of the “Pre-read Package” before the meeting and be prepared to participate in a critical manner.
General Rules:
- Criticism of ideas and concepts are expected and encouraged but NOT to criticize any one individual or Team for that idea. (Bungee cord thinking).
- Prior to the Peer Review, all evaluating engineerings have pre-read the handouts .
- Three Teams will be assigned to one 90 minute session. Each of the three teams get 30 minutes.
- Peer review processs is an informal approach in order to maximize free and open thinking and discussions. There is no Letter Grade impact but rather an opportunity to improve your design …. which may lead to better grade. Perhaps similar to having dinner at Gracies and your table is discussing their Senior Design (the good, the bad and the ugly).
2004 Senior Design I
Meeting Minutes
Date: ______
Team Name: ______
Team Members ______, ______, ______, ______, ______, ______, ______, ______, ______
Discussion Highlights, Proposal, New Thoughts, Potential area to investiagate:
Team Summary:
1