Preview Workflow

Viewing: ECE 4970W fischerjd : Senior Capstone Design - WI

Last approved: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:25:41 GMT

Last edit: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:25:41 GMT

Proposal Type

Writing Intensive

Contact Information

ciscojo
Jonathan
Cisco
CiscoJo@missouri.edu
573/884-6221
Campus Writing Program
Are you submitting this proposal on behalf of an instructor?

Instructor for whom you are submitting proposal:
fischerjd
James
Fischer
Fischerjd@missouri.edu
573/882-4382
Electrical and Computer Engr
Subject Area’s Department Chair/Director:
palaniappank
Kannappan
Palaniappan
pal@missouri.edu
573/884-9266
Computer Science

Term for Proposal

 
Fall 2016

Course Catalog Information

ENGR
Electrical And Computer Engine (ECE)
Electrical And Computer Engine
4970W
3
 
30
Senior Capstone Design - WI
Group Design Projects. Design methodology, project management, development of specifications, examination of alternatives, preparation of proposal. Lectures on safety, ethics, professionalism, and economics. Oral and written reports. Not for graduate credit.
 
Lecture/Standard with Laboratory
A-F (allow student to choose S/U option)
ECE 3110 and senior standing. Restricted to Electrical and Computer Engineering students only or instructor's consent.
 
 
 

Instructor Information

fischerjd
James
Fischer
Fischerjd@missouri.edu
573/882-4382
Electrical and Computer Engr
(numbers only)
Adjunct Instructor
333 Engineering Building West
 
 

The Campus Writing Program conducts a two-day faculty workshop to assist with the design and implementation of your writing intensive course. Once your course proposal has been approved by the Campus Writing Program, you will receive information on time, date and location of the workshop.
Indicate below if additional instructors are planned, but specific individuals have not yet been chosen. Check all that apply

Briefly describe the qualifications of the known graduate instructors, or planned qualifications if graduate instructors are still to be selected, bearing in mind that graduate students teaching honors courses should be advanced students with a record of excellent teaching.
 

Honors Course Information

 
 
Answer the questions below as they would apply to one section. For all other sections, provide similar information in the Additional Sections Information box below.
 

 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

Writing Intensive Course Information

Multidisciplinary Group Design Projects. Design methodology, project management, development of specifications, examination of alternatives, preparation of proposal. Lectures on safety, ethics, professionalism, and economics. Oral and written reports. Writing Intensive. Not for graduate credit. Three additional writing assignments are given in this course: the 5-Year Plan, the "Project Scope" group collaboration report (Capstone project), and the "Personal Contributions" individual report (Capstone Project). 1) "Post-Graduation 5-Year Plan" Purpose: * Encourage students to think about the next five years of their lives after they graduate from Mizzou. * Emphasize the need for continuing education * Contrive continuing education goals and a strategy for achieving those goals. * Encourage students to commit to the process of becoming a licensed professional engineer. * Encourage students to get into the habit of planning for the future and documenting that plan for future reference. Number of required drafts: One draft graded Credit/No Credit Length: At least two pages, double-spaced, 12 pt. font, 1" margins on all sides. Persons to evaluate each draft: Instructor 2) Capstone Design Project Formal Written Report: Project Scope Report (Group Collaboration) General. Each student is assigned to a three or four-person project group. Students within a given project group work collaboratively on their senior Capstone design project. At the beginning of the term the students in a given project group work collaboratively to create a "Project Scope" report that documents the scope, specifications, functional blocks, goals, constraints, assumptions, etc. for their senior Capstone design project. Purpose. To serve as a formal reference and specifications document against which the students design and build their respective contributions to the group's project. To formally document the scope of a project group's senior Capstone design project within an engineering group context. To demonstrate competence in the fields of Electrical Engineering and/or Computer Engineering. Workload Distribution. Each student is assigned ownership of specific sections of the "Project Scope" report. Each student shall contribute an approximately equal portion of writing workload for this report. The writing workload is managed via a writing workload estimation spreadsheet that identifies the written elements that shall comprise the Project Scope report, and an estimate of the writing effort for each written element. Oversight. The course instructor and at least one assigned faculty adviser from the ECE Department provide guidance and feedback to the student regarding the content of this report. Drafts. There are at least four drafts for this report. Draft 1. The "Specifications" chapter and specifications-specific appendices are the focus of this draft. This information defines the engineering specifications for the proposed Capstone design project. This draft is due no later than the end of the second week of the term. Draft 2. The "Goals" chapter and goals-specific appendices are the focus of this draft. Each project shall define at least one customer-centric SMART goal that defines a specific benefit the project shall provide the customer. Each project shall define at least four engineering SMART goals. Each goal shall have a set of associated SMART objective statements that define the actions the group members will perform to achieve the stated goal. For each goal the groups shall define a) the measurable criteria for that goal, and b) how they will perform the measurement, and c) the PASS/FAIL criterion for the measurement. Samples of the measurement instruments (e.g., surveys, data collection sheets, etc.) shall be provided in the report's appendices. This draft is due no later than the end of the fourth week of the term. Draft 3. Report refinement and the first round of project evaluation data are the focus of this draft. This draft is due no later than the third Friday before the end of the term (not counting Finals week). Draft 4. This is the final draft version of the "Project Scope" report. Evaluation. All drafts are reviewed by one or more of the course instructor, the project adviser(s), and/or the teaching assistants. Final draft: Instructor and faculty adviser. 3) Capstone Design Project Formal Written Report: Personal Contributions Report General. Each student is assigned to a three or four-person project group. Students within a given project group work collaboratively on their senior Capstone design project. At the end of the semester, each student writes this "Personal Contributions" report, on their own, to document their personal contributions to their group's Capstone project. Purpose. To formally documents a student's personal contributions to their group\'s senior Capstone design project. To demonstrate competence in the fields of Electrical Engineering and/or Computer Engineering. Oversight. The course instructor and at least one assigned faculty adviser from the ECE Department provide guidance and feedback to the student regarding the content of this report. Drafts. At the discretion of the student's faculty adviser, the faculty adviser may require the student to submit one or more draft chapters from his/her project report to the faculty adviser throughout the term. A formal, complete draft report is delivered to both the course instructor and the student's faculty adviser approximately two weeks before the end of the term. This draft is typically 15+ pages in length. A revised formal draft of the report is delivered to both the course instructor and the faculty adviser at the end of the term. Evaluation. All drafts are reviewed by one or more of the course instructor, the project adviser(s), and/or the teaching assistants. Final draft: Instructor and faculty adviser.
See changes below
Face-to-face
Self paced?

39
37
Should this course be considered for funding?
Yes
Large Enrollment Courses:
 
 
 

Writing Intensive Assignments

Words
Contemporary Engineering Issues combined with Engineering Ethics
Purpose. To write an argumentation essay that explores an assigned contemporary engineering issue (e.g., the Takata Airbag Recall) and argues the author’s opinions regarding the issue from within the context of engineering ethics. To learn how to write an opening paragraph that effectively (1) identifies and introduces the reader to the paper’s subject matter (e.g., the Takata Airbag Recall) and context (engineering ethics), and (2) funnels the reader’s attention from general introductory comments about the paper’s subject into more specific information that serves to orient the reader to the author’s purpose (argumentation) and context (engineering ethics), and then into the paper’s thesis statement. To demonstrate knowledge of, and the ability to correctly apply, engineering ethics concepts. To learn how to properly use the IEEE’s citation style to cite information sources.

Content. An opening paragraph that uses funneling effectively to introduce the reader to the paper’s subject and the author’s purpose and context, and that concludes with the author’s thesis statement. Four to five body paragraphs wherein the author uses critical thinking to analyze the subject matter, to state their opinion(s) regarding the paragraph’s subject matter, and to provide strong supporting evidence in defense of their arguments. A closing paragraph that restates the paper’s thesis statement and summarizes the author’s opinions(s) on the assigned subject within the context of engineering ethics. A separate “Works Cited” page at the end. See the attached document “ECE 4970 Combined CI Ethics Paper – Notes.docx” for the content requirements of each draft.

Number of required drafts. The students will incrementally write this paper in four separate drafts.

Length of each draft.

Draft 1) ~350 words. The opening paragraph and the topic sentences for four or five body paragraphs (the structure of the report).

Draft 2) 1100+ words. The revised opening paragraph, the first two body paragraphs, the “Works Cited” section.

Draft 3) 1800+ words. The revised opening paragraph, the revised first two body paragraphs, the remaining two/three body paragraphs, the closing paragraph, and the “Works Cited” section.

Draft 4) 1800+ words. The final revisions for the entire paper.

See also the attached document “ECE 4970 WI CI + Ethics Paper – Notes.docx”.

Persons to evaluate each draft.

1) Course graders. The course’s instructor (“INSTRUCTOR”) and the course’s grading teaching assistants (“GTA”) are collectively referred to herein as the “COURSE GRADERS.” The COURSE GRADERS will evaluate each student’s writing using the same rubric that the students use for the in-class peer review (see below).

2) Student peer review. When each draft assignment is due, each student brings a printed copy of their draft assignment to class, exchanges their paper with another student’s paper, and peer reviews the other student’s paper during the lecture hour using an instructor provided rubric. The reviewing student may write constructive comments on the author student’s paper. The reviewing student submits their completed peer review—i.e., the author’s paper and the completed rubric—to the INSTRUCTOR who then performs a CREDIT/NO CREDIT evaluation and recordation of the peer review effort. The completed peer reviewed documents—i.e., the student author’s paper and the accompanying rubric accomplished by the student reviewer) are returned to the student author within two class lectures after the student peer review is performed.

Comments. In past semesters this assignment was given as two separate writing assignments: a “contemporary issues” assignment/paper, and a separate “engineering ethics” assignment/paper. Each of these papers had two drafts. For the Fall 2016 semester I combined these two assignments and changed the number of drafts from two to four. The four drafts allow the students to write less per draft so that they may put more emphasis on the specific learning outcomes for each draft.
Length of assignment:
350
Peer Review
4700
Course Graders
5050

Informative abstract and “Introduction” chapter for the “Individual Contributions” capstone project report.
Purpose. During the last half of the ECE 4970 semester, each student writes an individual contributions report (“INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS REPORT”) that details the student’s contributions to their group’s capstone project. (n.b. Within the ECE Department, the senior capstone design project is a group effort.) This WI assignment focuses on two of the required writing elements from that report: the informative abstract with index terms, and the “Introduction” chapter. The purposes for this assignment are to help students learn to write an informative abstract with index terms, and an “Introduction” chapter for an engineering report (writing within the discipline).

Number of required drafts. One rough draft and a final draft.

Length of each draft.

Informative abstract. A single paragraph, 250 words maximum, double-spaced, 12 pt. font, 1” margins on all sides. The abstract is followed immediately by a separate paragraph that lists search engine index terms and keywords. At least some of these index terms / keywords must appear in the abstract’s text.

“Introduction” chapter. At least two full pages of text, double spaced, 12 pt. font, 1” margins on all sides. Provides for the reader’s benefit the report’s purpose and scope, a summary of the student’s contributions to their group’s capstone project, and a report overview paragraph that verbally summaries the information provided in the report’s chapters and appendices.

Persons to evaluate each draft.

1) Course graders. The COURSE GRADERS will evaluate each student’s writing using the same rubric that the students used for their peer review (see below).

2) Student peer review of the rough draft. When the rough draft assignment is due, each student brings a printed copy of their draft assignment to class, exchanges their paper with another student’s paper, and peer reviews the other student’s paper during the lecture hour using an instructor provided rubric. The reviewing student may write constructive comments on the author student’s paper. The reviewing student submits their completed peer review—i.e., the author’s paper and the completed rubric—to the INSTRUCTOR who then performs a CREDIT/NO CREDIT evaluation and recordation of the peer review effort. The completed peer reviewed documents—i.e., the student author’s paper and the accompanying rubric accomplished by the student reviewer) are returned to the student author within two class lectures after the student peer review is performed.
Length of assignment:
250
Peer Review
620
Course Graders
870

Post-Graduation Five-Year Plan
Purpose.

Encourage students to think about the next five years of their lives after they graduate from Mizzou.

Emphasize the need for continuing education

Contrive continuing education goals and a strategy for achieving those goals.

Encourage students to commit to the process of becoming a licensed professional engineer.

Encourage students to get into the habit of planning for the future and documenting that plan for future reference.

Number of required drafts. One draft graded CREDIT / NO CREDIT

Length. At least two pages, double-spaced, 12 pt. font, 1” margins on all sides.

Persons to evaluate each draft. The COURSE GRADERS will evaluate this paper.
Length of assignment:
660
Course Graders
 
 
660

Capstone Project Group Report
General. Each student is assigned to a project group consisting of (typically) four ECE students. Students within a given project group work collaboratively on their senior Capstone design project. The students within a given capstone project group work collaboratively to write the capstone project group report (“GROUP REPORT”).

Purpose. To formally document the capstone project’s scope, background, requirements, customer goals, engineering goals, safety concerns, budget, timeline, and evaluation plan. To serve as a reference document against which the students must design and build their capstone design project.

Workload Distribution. Each student is assigned ownership of specific sections within the GROUP REPORT. Each student is required to contribute an approximately equal portion of writing workload for this report. The writing workload is managed via a writing workload estimation spreadsheet that identifies the required written elements for the GROUP REPORT as well as a writing workload estimate for each required element. The students within a given project group use this spreadsheet to equitably divide the writing workload among themselves.

Oversight. The COURSE GRADERS, the project group’s primary faculty advisor, and any ancillary advisors provide guidance and feedback to the students regarding the information content and quality of this report.

Drafts. There are at least four drafts for the GROUP REPORT.

Draft 1. The revised system diagram, functional diagram, and software architecture diagram figures, and discussions thereof for the proposed implementation of the project. This draft is due no later than the end of the second week of the term. (n.b. These items are originally defined in the ECE 3110 “ECE Projects” course, wherein the ECE students formally propose their senior capstone design projects for the following ECE 4970 semester.)

Draft 2. The revised customer goal statement(s) and engineering goals statements. Each project group shall define at least one customer-centric SMART 1 goal that defines a specific benefit the project shall provide the customer. Each project shall define engineering SMART goals whose focus is four of more of the following realistic design constraints: economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, or sustainability. Each goal statement shall be accompanied by one or more SMART objective statements that outline the group’s plan of action for achieving the goal. For each goal statement, the group’s must also define a) the measurable criteria for that goal, and b) the method they will use to measure each criterion, and c) the PASS/FAIL threshold for each criterion. Samples of the measurement instruments and raw data (e.g., surveys, data collection sheets, etc.) shall be provided in the report’s appendices. This draft is due no later than the end of the fourth week of the term.

Draft 3. Report refinement and the first round of documenting the evaluation data and results are the focus of this draft. Documenting the delivered implementation versus the proposed implementation for the project. Documenting the actual versus proposed project budget. Documenting the actual versus proposed project timeline. This draft is due no later than the third Friday before the end of the term (not counting Finals week).

Draft 4. This is the final draft version of the GROUP REPORT.

Evaluation. All drafts are reviewed by the COURSE GRADERS and by the project group’s primary faculty adviser. Adjunct advisors may also serve as reviewers. Final draft: Course instructor and the primary faculty adviser.
Length of assignment:
330
Course Grader/Team
990
Course Grader/Team
1320

Capstone Project Individual Contributions Report
General. Each student is assigned to a three or four-person project group. Students within a given project group work collaboratively on their senior Capstone design project. At the end of the semester, each student writes a formal report that details their own contributions to their group’s capstone project. This individual report is referred to herein as the “INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS REPORT.”

Purpose. To formally documents a student’s personal contributions to their group’s senior Capstone design project. To demonstrate competence in the fields of Electrical Engineering and/or Computer Engineering.

Oversight. The COURSE GRADERS, the project group’s primary faculty advisor, and any ancillary advisors provide guidance and feedback to the student regarding the information content and quality of this report.

Drafts. No fewer than three drafts of this report must be written. At the discretion of the course instructor and the student’s primary faculty adviser, the faculty adviser may require the student to submit one or more draft chapters from their INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS REPORT throughout the term. A formal, complete draft report is delivered to both the course instructor and the student’s faculty adviser no later than two weeks before the end of the term (excluding finals week). This draft is typically 15+ pages in length (including cover sheet, tables of contents, appendices, etc.). A revised final draft of the report is delivered to both the course instructor and the faculty adviser before the end of the term.

Evaluation. All drafts are reviewed by the COURSE GRADERS and by the project group’s primary faculty adviser. Adjunct advisors may also serve as reviewers. Final draft: Course instructor and the primary faculty adviser.
Length of assignment:
4950
Course Grader
4950
Course Grader
9900

Total pages for all assignments:
First drafts:
19.82
Revisions:
34.12
53.94
[Some assignments do not lend themselves to a strict page/word count, namely the group assignment. I have thus added the assignment as if the student were writing a page, but the committee should not that the thinking required of that assignment likely exceeds the work required for a typical page of prose]

Writing Intensive Teaching

Instructor provided feedback
Peer review
 
Each student writes his/her own papers and reports. For the Capstone project GROUP REPORT, the students in a given project group (3-4 students/group) write collaboratively to create the report. Before writing begins, a workload estimator spreadsheet, which I provide, is used by the students to estimate and balance the writing workload across the group’s members.
The contemporary issues and engineering ethics writing assignment requires students to evaluate an assigned real-world scenario where engineers are forced to make difficult ethical decisions. The students must use critical thinking to analyze the engineers’ actions within the context of engineering ethics, and the students must argue their opinions about how the engineers in the scenario should have acted differently, or that the engineers did in fact act ethically and appropriately.
See the Gantt chart timeline provided in attached file “ECE 4970 - Course Schedule - 2016 Fall.xlsx”.
30
%
Writing Intensive: 30%
* Contemporary Issues + Engineering Ethics
* Informative Abstract and "Introduction" chapter from the Capstone project Individual Contributions report.

In-class participation: 25%
* in-class peer reviews
* quizzes (safety, copyrights, trademarks, patents)
* Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) in-class exercise
* Post-Graduation Five Year Plan writing assignment

Senior capstone design project: 45%
* Project outcome
* group report
* individual report
* project demonstration
* Formal end-of-term presentation
* advertisement flyer
* Individual deadlines/milestones log sheet
* Project advising / individual progress reporting log sheets
* Team member performance evaluation
2
* Grading Teaching Assistants (GTA) are hand-selected ECE graduate students who have strong English language skills. GTAs must attend a CWP "TA Writing Intensive Workshop" with me prior to the term in which they will grade writing assignments. I will give them sample papers to grade to evaluate their English language, proofreading, and commenting/feedback skills. (<-This might be done more than once, until I am satisfied with the GTA's competence as a grader.)

Course Syllabus

Upload Course Syllabus

Administrative Information

Natural and Applied Sciences
 
 

Acknowledgement

I have read and reviewed the updated proposal

Additional Comments

10.17.16: Instructor requests this be marked for FALL 2016
Jonathan Cisco (CiscoJo) (Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:45:21 GMT): Pushing through to have course marked for Fall 2016.
Patricia Luckenotte (luckenottep) (Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:23:10 GMT): Term effective has been changed from SP2017 to Fall 2016
Patricia Luckenotte (luckenottep) (Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:25:37 GMT): ECE 4970, 01 and 01A has been flagged for Writing Intensive fr the Fall 2016 semester.
Key: 113