Mid-Capstone Course Assessment
1. For each of the following course activities, identify the greatest strength that should be
retained and the greatest area for more added-value.
Web Page Workshop
S: No prior participant knowledge necessary.
S: Informative handouts and templates provided to participants.
S: Archive of past projects on web used to illustrate website expectations.
S: Expand hands-on component in computer lab.
I: Some of the complexities of html not necessary for routine webmaster usage.
I: Reduce lecture component to bare essentials.
SoildWorks Refresher
S: Good overview of best practices.
S: Introduced a number of shortcuts that we wished we learned early in our engineering career.
S: Focused drawing for drawing package management and for manufacturability.
I: Could be supported by on-line Powerpoint presentation that could be accessed anytime.
I: Very similar to workshop given in Lean Manufacturing course; could have been optional.
I: Divide into smaller chunks that go even deeper into software features necessary for design.
I: Develop a follow-up session on Cosmos. We didn’t do enough with this in ME 301.
I: Add a hands-on component in computer lab.
Instructor/Team Meetings
S: Provided regular feedback to team on their design process and their design products.
S: Emphasis on agenda with specific outcomes kept meetings efficient & effective.
S: Reinforced expectations for project/course deliverables.
I: While it is valuable to have a designated timeslot for conducting these meetings, there
should be a decision whether each week’s meeting will be a good investment of time.
I: Schedule more time between meetings so that when one team goes over it doesn’t
keep other teams waiting.
I: Provide guidelines on meeting protocol, but encourage teams more to develop their own style.
I: Students need to be better prepared to get full advantage of this opportunity for making design
decisions and receiving timely feedback.
Engineering Logbooks
S: Valuable to compile notes and thoughts for future reference in individual/team work.
S: Prompts for making different types of entries given in handout.
S: Enjoyed seeing what other students had done in their logbooks over the duration of their projects.
I: Perceived pressure to make weekly goal of set number of pages, regardless of whether
this fits one’s personal style or whether this number is justified by weekly activity.
I: Schedule a collection/review each month during semester (every two weeks in summer)
so students know if they are on track.
I: Teams could benefit by informal review of each other’s logbooks before meeting each week.
Web Page Review
S: Set culture of giving and receiving feedback from peers, instructors, and staff.
S: Consulting help available on making structural changes to web site.
S: Focused on refining web site interface—changes easy to implement because minimal
content was available for uploading at this early date.
I: Too early in design cycle to provide meaningful feedback on needs and specs; would
be better one week further into project.
I: Create a more detailed review form that provides feedback on project organization,
project learning, and problem definition in addition to web site organization.
I: Correlate web reviews with major project milestones.
Preliminary Design Review
S: Lots of new ideas generated from diverse set of reviewers.
S: Teams benefited by having instructors review Powerpoint slides ahead of time.
S: Illustrated things we should and should not do in subsequent design reviews.
S: Synthesis of audience scores and comments useful in measuring progress to date and
prioritizing next steps.
I: Not emphasized until one week before this was to occur. Make expectations more explicit.
Interim Design Report
S: Forced us to synthesize and summarize progress to date, generating some new discoveries,
developing awareness across team about major challenges that remain.
S: Many helpful instructor suggestions for customizing outlines for different projects.
S: Valuable reference for moving forward next semester.
S: Forced us to look at project as a big picture rather than a collection of details.
S: Will reduce time needed for report preparation next semester.
I: Required substantial time investment that took away from making more project progress.
I: Clearly communicate the ‘draft’ nature of this report; it will be updated next term, therefore
it only needs to be good enough, not honed to perfection.
I: Align formats used in design review and design report.
I: Consider first draft of opening sections earlier in the semester to alleviate crunch at end.
2. Identify the top three topics in priority order that you would like to see addressed in future
classes. What venue would be most effective venue for each (i.e. required classes, workshops,
consulting sessions, tutorials)?
Design for Manufacturability / 1,1,2,2,3 / Initially addressed in lecturer format and followed up by workshop focused around drawing package analysis
Advanced SolidWorks Features / 2,2,2,3 / Optional hands-on tutorials
MasterCAM / 1,2,3,3,3 / Tutorial along with consulting
Project Management / 1,3,3 / Lecture focused on tools and best practices, not on theory; opportunity for team leaders to receiving consulting help
Data Acquisition / 1,1 / Optional workshop
Peer Review of Logbooks / 2 / Share best practices and insights before regular collection points
3. How well did student performance meet course expectations? What practices and
behaviors added greatest value to your projects and your professional growth?
What changes would you like to see adopted next term?
S: Professional work ethic—focusing on results that matter to customers and wise use of resources.
S: Open communication within and between teams evident in CAD lab—class spirit.
S: On the whole, respectful use of mentor, instructor, and staff consulting time.
S: Separation into FSAS sub-teams dramatically accelerated cross-training and project progress.
S: Enjoyed independence offered by course and demonstrated responsibility/accountability
similar to engineers in industry.
I: Informal team meetings could be more focused and tightly organized, modeled after
instructor/team meetings.
I: More students could benefit from using their logbooks more to take stock of what they’ve
learned about their project and their team as well as what needs to be done next.
I: Don’t be afraid to hold each other accountable for higher levels of quality and timeliness.
4. How well did the instructional staff performance meet course expectations? What mentoring
and leadership practices added greatest value to the course? What changes would you
like to see adopted next term?
S: Instructors/staff were regular and active participants in weekly team meetings.
S: Instructors, staff, and mentors readily available for project consultation that accelerated
decision making and added value to design solutions.
S: Mentors have a wealth of design experience and are effectively an extra team member.
S: Russ Porter and Edwin Odom provided valuable input on machine design & manufacturing.
S: Outside evaluation of design integrity and connection with resources/local expertise
enriched the design process.
I: Officially assign a mentor to each team at the start of each project. Some teams didn’t have
mentors this summer and performance of these teams would have been higher through this interaction.
I: Clearly separate performance expectations for individuals/teams from project deliverables.
I: Offer individualized performance reviews at mid-semester for those who request them,
giving feedback on course performance and areas for improvement.
I: In addition to assigned mentors for teams, provide dedicated shop mentors during specific hours.
I: Don’t schedule class during hours when shop is officially closed.
I: Clearly separate instructor and client roles on competition projects (FSAE and CSC) so that
these are more like industry projects. Edwin and Karen are the clients whose needs must be
satisfied; Steve should intervene more to facilitate achievement of these goals within the
framework of the capstone course.
I: Revisit what grades are based on and how grading is done.