1 / 8

MSD Project Planning

MSD Project Planning. Faculty Learning Plan versus Student Teams’ Project Plan. The Problem…. MSD I Learning Modules A lot of material impacting early activity Examples include team bonding, customer interfacing, design skills, et al Teaching in class limited:

vabbott
Download Presentation

MSD Project Planning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MSD Project Planning Faculty Learning Plan versus Student Teams’ Project Plan Gary Werth

  2. The Problem… • MSD I Learning Modules • A lot of material impacting early activity • Examples include team bonding, customer interfacing, design skills, et al • Teaching in class limited: • 1 or 2 presentations per class • 20 – 30 minutes each • MSD I Project Plan Goals • Some deliverables take longer than the time between teaching & due date • The level of effort required is generally underestimated • Students assume that the learning schedule = work schedule = effort • Right the first time is seldom achieved Students do not understand the magnitude of the effort required to achieve goals Gary Werth

  3. Further complications… • Students generally view guides as traditional facility • Giver of grades… therefore cannot show weakness • Reluctant to share issues or concerns • Passive about seeking support • Greatly vary in applying guidance (usually need to fail at least once) • Students lack adequate project skills and experience • Planning/Critical Path • Task Resource Estimation • Technical Processes (task depth) • Time consuming but required non-technical activity Students generally don’t initially respond to guide suggested direction Gary Werth

  4. A technique that worked… • Have your assigned teams develop their 3 week detailed project plan • Tasks, dates & deliverables by individual • Do not have them share with you • AS A GROUP (all your teams together), Ask them to share the required deliverables • Most likely, they will be missing several key items or have miss judged the effort • Provide feedback in the form of what grade they would receive if that was what was provided (only the grade) • Continuing as a group, ask them what is missing to get a better grade…. • Let them struggle but do not let them fail • Prime the thought processes if required but do not give them the answers! • If appropriate, repeat until you get a full list of what constitutes an “A” • Be sure to include required non-technical activities such as communications, peer reviews, individual contributions, etc… • Ask for comments and feedback… • Guide, do not dictate • Explain the rational for your comments Have the students establish the grading standards before the goals are due (With your “help” of course) Gary Werth

  5. An Example*Round 1… Q: What are the “must haves” to pass this (Detailed Design) review? A: (from students): • Design Details • Envelop Drawing and/or layout • BOM • Schematic diagrams • Drawings (except for existing p/n or mil std parts) • 3 views • Name, part number, revision control • Dimensions & tolerances • Material specs • Test specs • Parts list • Who drew it • notes • Proof that the design meets all the requirements (Engr & business {eg: cost}) • Testing so far • Testing to be done • Analysis for anything feature not tested or testable • All data, documentation, and presentation material in EDGE Congratulations, you just got a “C” Watch the jaws drop!! * MSD I, 11/13 Gary Werth

  6. An Example* continuedRound 2… Q:What else is expected as a Senior Design Team ? A: (from students): • Action list & closure plan • Risk (design & project) & abatement status • SME’s approval of all analyses & test plans • Certification test plan (complete) traceable back to engineering requirements • Project plan • Complete • Critical path • Includes risks/risk abatement • Budget • Minimal design corrections • Action items from this review Good, you are thinking more professionally You are up to a “B” * MSD I, 11/13 Gary Werth

  7. An Example* continuedRound 3… Q: What else is required to make it Outstanding? A: (from students): • Professional presence • Design & POC are bullet proof • What has been learned • Senior Design Process • What has worked really well • What could be improved with suggestions • Mock ups • PO’s ready to issue • Suggested follow on projects and/or alternative design considerations This reflects professional standards “A” * MSD I, 11/13 Gary Werth

  8. It works… • Feedback from 6 teams was positive and uniform: • This process forced them to think about what good looks likerather than just fill in blanks defined by faculty • Solid engineering is the team’s responsibility, not the faculty • The teams developed the standards • Therefore they were committed to the standards • The teams immediately realized all the work that had to be done that was not accounted for in their plans • There was a frenzy of re-planning in time to meet the goal due dates • More pro-active teams allowed time for at least one re-work before grading This was a learning milestone for team self-management Gary Werth

More Related