# Engineering and technology learning projects

This is an overview of engineering and technology learning projects instructor/student interactions and grading. A list of the projects can be found here.

## Problem

Engineers are hidden from the public like precious jewelry whether working on military projects or commercial projects. Sometimes the engineering work is kept secret. Documentation is unique to the company and exists only for internal purposes.
This is a wiki. Everything on it is public. Everything here can be used for commercial purposes. The goal is to capture engineering project documentation and provide a method for grading it. The transparency and public nature of this documentation is unique. The goals of this engineering project documentation are:
* Repeat success or failure by reading this documentation (not talking)
* Others can jump in, find a starting point and push the project forward
* Set starting point expectations, capture next steps and assume projects never end
* Trust future people working on these project to join the wikiversity community and leverage/polish existing documentation
* Evolve the documentation tools and organization so that it is attracts a growing community of people wanting to experience engineering projects
Below are issues associated with designing an environment for engineering projects within an educational organization.

## Implement

The grading system should be set up so that a student that shows up to every class, participates in every group meeting, attempts to write in their notebook but contributes nothing gets a C. Here is a 2000 point grade system:
    100 class attendance
    400 seminar
    400 assignments
    250 weekly
    250 notebook
    200 presentations
    400 projects
Assignments are graded by instructors after the due dates. Weekly memos are graded outside of class time at the beginning of each week before the first class. Notebooks are graded once a week, at any time, upon the initiative of the student during class. Experiments will begin fall 2014 with students grading presentations through clickers and cell phone apps. Projects are graded by instructors looking at proposed project documentation at three or four intervals during the semester.
Individual weekly memo :
Instructors grade weekly individual memos at the beginning of the week. Instructors look for a narrative that describes what the assigned task was and what actually happened written from the "I" perspective. They look for words, pictures and videos that can be cut and pasted onto the projects page.
The goals of individual weekly memos are:
documenting projects as one works on them
reward constant, sustained, reasonable amount of work each week rather than burst at end of semester
focus on individual work, team documentation rather than looking over another's shoulder doing nothing
create an opportunity for the discussion "Is this good enough to get into the team documentation?"
Grading individual weekly memos outside of class is fun. It sets the stage for conversations with in the classroom for the entire week. The grading rubric is form/task/push.
Form
Form means using user space of the instructor and themselves appropriately, linking documents
appropriately, using wiki mark up, uploading pictures to wiki commons and video to youtube. A student that merely writes "I did nothing" receives 10 points .. as long as they write in the right place before the due date.
Tasking
Tasking means three things:
filling out negotiated task before it is done on instructors wikiversity user page
doing what was negotiated or explaining why something else was chosen in the weekly memo
proposed next steps that could become the next task
maintaining transparency, putting stuff away, following safety rules, checking stuff in and out of inventory with the instructor, etc.
Task points come from doing (or justifying why not) what was negotiated the previous week. This is judged by reading the weekly memo. It is not influenced by clarifying conversations in class afterwards. Task points range from 0 to 25. 5 points are given if the task negotiated up front was "doing nothing".
This means that a student doing nothing can earn up to 225=(10+5)*15 points during a 15 week semester. Getting 25 tasking points per week means the instructor and student have negotiated tasks without hardly any conversation and the project is being pushed forward. It usually takes half the semester to get this going with some students.
Individual Tasks
Students have been trained to think "Teams" working on projects do everything together and thus start of with one task for everyone. They will automatically try to negotiate meeting times outside of class where they all get together. Invariably this kind of team work involves one person working, and everyone else watching. Students don't understand that most of the time, engineers work by themselves. Meetings only occur when there is a very clear need.
Individual tasks should be negotiated with the instructor. Ideally these meetings are very short. Ideally the team meets before the instructor and figures out what their tasks are going to be, and then tells the instructor. The instructor ideally accepts these tasks and moves onto the next team.
This falls apart when the teams come up with "we" tasks. It fails apart when students do nothing, trivialize the task or try to spam the process by cut and pasting into the weekly memo from the internet.
Task grading rubric
The tasking grading rubric has to parts: before and after. The before part of the rubric is:
time to negotiate (smaller amount of time, higher the score)
instructor brainstorming (less required higher the score)
team consensus (more consensus, higher the score)
realistic (higher score)
eight hours of work (higher score)
The after part of the rubric is:
task actually attempted in non-trivial way
acknowledge that the task was changed, the change rationalized and then work performed
proposal of new tasks and/or continuation of current task
Some students will confuse the task itself with negotiating the task and merely turn in a written version of the task negotiation. Other students will just list off new task ideas rather than do anything. Not doing a negotiated task will result in no task points.
Ideally students can take equipment home and work on tasks individually. Tasks can also be completed in an engineering lab open for working on projects outside of class time. Students working together should be a last resort. Students working together should be a exception rather than the rule. Students working one on oone with a lab aid, instructor or mentor from outside the school should be encouraged.
Push
Push Weekly push is the subjective part of project grading. Describing this as "Work" creates the expectation that "hard work" even though unsuccessful, will be rewarded. In fact engineers are rewarded for success that can result from a flash of inspiration or years of perspiration. Describing this as "project work" isn't focused enough. Push points can be associated with documentation and links to deliverables.
Typically the deliverables start with pictures, videos, software, and drawings. Push points are not given for fruitless work such as driving to every hardware store in the area searching for a part. Push points are not given for spending 8 hours learning how to edit video ... unless a youtube playlist is created that defines "need to know" for this project, or shoot a video of the spots where they got stuck while learning. Push points are not given unless the students learning curve is turned into a problem of the world that is fixed.
Push points are not given for a weekly narrative that is a litany of what happened. A description of what worked and what didn't work results in no push points. Push points are given for the following reasons:
From what video, pictures and words, another student could repeat the success or failure.
Clear starting point, ending point, next steps.
Cut and paste ready into team documentation
Is within the project problem description context, scope and requirements
The project has moved forwards towards completion
Push points typically start of 0. They can be bunched up. Three weeks of push can be earned in one week. 5 points means you are on the right track. 10 points means there may be something valuable. 20 points means there is something worth putting in the team documentation. A 30 point weekly average is needed to get close to the 400 project grading points. At 40 points, the push should be obvious to any engineer. Above 50 points, the success should cause a re-evaluation of the project's problem statement and requirements.
250 weekly grading points can be accumulated way before the end of class. This is to be celebrated. It signifies is that the student has matured to the point that conversations with the instructor about tasks are all that are necessary to produce good engineering activity. This does not mean engineering activity stops. It merely means the instructor can stop grading weekly memos.
Ideally students write their weekly memos in their own user space. The instructor creates a "section" or "course" page in their own user space that points to the individual student's weekly memos. The instructor gives feed back on the student's weekly memo and encourages students to look at this part of each other's feedback. This is pure fun from an instructors point of view. It sets the stage for the discussions in class in the team context.
Class time prioritizes team meetings, presentations and wiki documentation. Actual work on projects should only occur if there is time left. Instructors should also work at pushing projects forward in class. Students that begin idle, non-engineering talk should be focused first by example and then by re-tasking if they can not always find something to push a project forward. :

## Demo

Typical Syllabus

## Next Steps

* Increase number of schools/instructors using this
* Get this published through NSEE
* NSF Grants to spread this documentation format
* Leverage to build projects in all engineering classes
* Promote use by PLTW
* Propose as high school/college freshman best practice to ABET and CDIO
* Promote to wikiversity editors as best practice project documentation

## See Also

* Engineering Projects