Experiences With Inter-Year Capstone Design Teams

Mann, Danny; Petkau, D. S.; Dick, Kris J.; Ingram, Sandra

doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3798

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that the set up of the course into multiyear teams, as described by Mann [7], was to the detriment of the students. We saw less delegation than expected and a corresponding greater workload for the Trilogy III students.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Evaluating Student Design Activity in Engineering Design Projects

Petkau

Mann²

2011

PCEEA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 86%

Evaluating Student Design Activity in Engineering Design Projects

Petkau

Mann²

2011

PCEEA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A paper describing the student reaction and instructor observation was presented at the CDEN conference in 2007 [7]. Briefly, there were four issues that prevented the experience from being successful.…”

Section: Experiences With Inter-year Design Teamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recent Enhancements to the Biosystems Engineering Design Trilogy at the University of Manitoba

Mann

Dick

Ingram

2012

PCEEA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sharing Best Practices in Teaching Biomedical Engineering Design

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an effort to share best practices in undergraduate engineering design education, we describe the origin, evolution and the current status of the undergraduate biomedical engineering design team program at Johns Hopkins University. Specifically, we describe the program and judge the quality of the pedagogy by relating it to sponsor feedback, project outcomes, external recognition and student satisfaction. The general pedagogic practices, some of which are unique to Hopkins, that have worked best include: (1) having a hierarchical team structure, selecting team leaders the Spring semester prior to the academic year, and empowering them to develop and manage their teams, (2) incorporating a longitudinal component that incudes freshmen as part of the team, (3) having each team choose from among pre-screened clinical problems, (4) developing relationships and fostering medical faculty, industry and government to allow students access to engineers, clinicians and clinical environments as needed, (5) providing didactic sessions on topics related to requirements for the next presentation, (6) employing judges from engineering, medicine, industry and government to evaluate designs and provide constructive criticisms approximately once every 3-4 weeks and (7) requiring students to test the efficacy of their designs. Institutional support and resources are crucial for the design program to flourish. Most importantly, our willingness and flexibility to change the program each year based on feedback from students, sponsors, outcomes and judges provides a mechanism for us to test new approaches and continue or modify those that work well, and eliminate those that did not.

show abstract

Experiences With Inter-Year Capstone Design Teams

Cited by 3 publications

References 5 publications

Evaluating Student Design Activity in Engineering Design Projects

Evaluating Student Design Activity in Engineering Design Projects

Recent Enhancements to the Biosystems Engineering Design Trilogy at the University of Manitoba

Sharing Best Practices in Teaching Biomedical Engineering Design

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About