docPeter Kiewit Institute (PKI) Phone 402.554.2098 1110 S 67 St – PKI 316
download 
Report Transcription
Peter Kiewit Institute (PKI) Phone 402.554.2098 1110 S 67 St – PKI 316
Peter Kiewit Institute (PKI) 1110 S 67th St – PKI 316 Omaha, NE 68182 Phone 402.554.2098 Fax 402.554.2170 [email protected] 2013 ‐ 2014 Proposal, Presentation and Evaluation Manual Table of Contents Program Overview ......................................................................................................................................1 SMP Roles ..................................................................................................................................................1 Submittals ...................................................................................................................................................3 Written Proposal .........................................................................................................................................5 Presentation ................................................................................................................................................7 Evaluation ...................................................................................................................................................9 Awards ..................................................................................................................................................... 12 Subject Matter Experts (SME)................................................................................................................. 13 Workshop ................................................................................................................................................. 13 Career Workshops................................................................................................................................... 14 General Information ................................................................................................................................. 14 Appendices .............................................................................................................................................. 15 Appendix A – Evaluation Forms.............................................................................................................. 16 Appendix B – Evaluation Rubric for Evaluation Criteria A – C............................................................... 20 Appendix C – Evaluation Rubrics for Evaluation Criteria D ................................................................... 21 Appendix D – 2013-2014 Program Schedule......................................................................................... 27 Appendix E – Example Project Schedule ............................................................................................... 28 Appendix F – Teacher and Mentor Resources ...................................................................................... 29 Appendix G – Plagiarism Policy .............................................................................................................. 31 Welcome to the SAME Student Mentoring Program (SMP) The Student Mentoring Committee of the Omaha Post, Society of American Military Engineers (SAME), wishes to thank you for participating in our program this year. We hope this packet will answer many of your questions. The Proposal, Presentation, and Evaluation Manual is meant to be a ready reference containing most of our program material. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or if we can help in any way. Sincerely, Anne Peterson, RLA Vice President for Student Mentoring HDR Engineering, Inc. 402.399.1095 [email protected] Gail Frame Program Administrator SAME SMP 402.554.2098 [email protected] Program website: www.pki.nebraska.edu/simp Facebook page: www.facebook.com/SAMEsmp Program Overview The program is designed to stimulate the student’s interest and excitement in engineering, architecture, and the related sciences. The program has been ongoing since 1994 and has offered more than 4000 students an opportunity to participate in “real‐life” projects facilitated by professional engineers and architects, and other science related professions. The program stresses STEM skills (science, technology, engineering and math), teamwork and exposes students to how a professional looks at a situation, checks the options, determines the disadvantages and advantages of the situation, and selects a solution. There are two divisions, the High School and the Middle School division. Each division team is comprised of interested students, the Teacher/Team Leader, and the Mentor. Each team: Picks their own project topic Defines the scope of work Prepares: o A written proposal o Visual aids o Plans and/or a model Presents their project to a panel of judges to demonstrate what they have learned through the program. SMP Roles Team Leader Communicate and coordinate with Mentor Manage students – keep them focused and on schedule. Facilitate opportunities for students to work on their project between scheduled meetings with the Mentor QC Proposal and help with Presentation practices Communicate with SMP program representatives for additional needs or concerns Mentor Meet with team on a regular basis (approximately once each week) Provide direction in accomplishing project goals Demonstrate how a professional would develop a project solution. Give insight into architectural, engineering or related professions. o Discuss the various fields of Engineering & Architecture. o Demonstrate programs, equipment and other methods used in the course of your work. SAME Student Mentoring Program 1 o Show projects you have worked on. o Tour your office or other engineering /architectural offices. o Visit a job site under construction. QC Proposal and help with Presentation practices Communicate with SMP program representatives for additional needs, expertise, etc. Students Decide on the project. Do the research. Develop UNIQUE solution options. Choose best solution. Prepare written proposal. Prepare presentation materials. Give the presentation. Answer questions from Judges. SAME Student Mentoring Program 2 Submittals General Information Each team is required to post three submittals to the program website during the competition year. The program administrator will email the team leader the user name and password needed to post the submittals. Each submittal must be posted by the due date to receive full points for the competition. The project is not complete until all three submittals are posted to the website. Teachers and Mentors please review your names, company information, logos, and the team’s information to make sure it is complete and correct, including spelling. This information will be used in the Awards Ceremony Program. All information in the submittals will be posted to the SMP website except for the project schedule. The project schedule is for the team and program administrator’s use only. Submittal Specifics Submittal 1 Due on or before October 4, 2013. Teams receive 30 points if the submittal is posted on or before the due date. Required elements include: o Project title o Initial synopsis of the project (between 100 and 200 words) o Tentative milestones and schedule for the project including the fixed program dates. A sample project schedule is located in Appendix E. o Initial team roster with each student’s grade o Permission slips for all students Submittal 2 Due on or before January 31, 2014. Teams receive 30 points if the submittal is posted on or before the due date. Required elements include: o Updates to project title/synopsis o Updates to team roster o Updates to milestones and activities o Permission slips for new students SAME Student Mentoring Program 3 Submittal 3 Due on or before February 21, 2014. Teams receive 30 points if the submittal is posted on or before the due date. Required elements include: o Final team roster with each student’s grade o Final project title and synopsis o Updates to team milestones and activities Information provided in this submittal will be used to generate the Awards Ceremony Program and student participation certificates. Please make sure it is correct, especially spelling of team member names. If all team member permission slips have not been turned by this deadline, the 30 points will be forfeited. Web Posting Instructions The Program Administrator will provide each team leader with a USERNAME and PASSWORD for each team. Students must get the USERNAME and PASSWORD from their teacher. To post a submittal: o Access the SMP website at www.pki.nebraska.edu/simp. o Click on the Submittals button or Teams>Submittal Interface in the sidebar navigation options. o Click the appropriate submittal link. o Enter the required information into the form. o When finished, click the Preview Submittal button at the bottom of the page. o If changes are needed, use the back arrow and make changes. o When finished with review click Submit Entry button, print copy (if desired) and exit. o Content can immediately be viewed on the Teams page. If results are not what was expected, go back to the Submittal interface to edit. SAME Student Mentoring Program 4 Written Proposal General Information The intent of this program is to emulate the "real‐life" process of an architectural or engineering project. The evaluation process is not to be an academic exercise. Like real life, a written proposal introduces an architect’s or engineer’s project to an interested potential client. If the proposal is good enough, the authors get an opportunity for an interview or in‐ person presentation. Delivery Written Proposals are due on or before March 7, 2014 by 5:00 PM. Five unbound three‐hole‐punched copies must be delivered to the program administrator. Please note: An electronic copy of the proposal will be requested from the winning teams. Mail or deliver to: University of Nebraska at Omaha, PKI 316 1110 S 67th St Omaha, NE 68182‐0694 Attn: Gail Frame Teams receive 60 points if received on or before the due date. Reports that are not turned in by the due date may not be judged, resulting in zero points awarded. Format Page Size is 8 ½x11” for text and 8 ½x11” or 11x17” (foldout) for figures and text. All 11x17” sheets shall be single sided. Text content limited to a maximum of 20 typewritten pages, excluding non‐text items such as graphics, photos, charts, etc. If non‐text items are interspersed with text, total text portion may not exceed 20 equivalent pages. The cover sheet is not counted as part of the 20 page limitation. Appendix material is optional. It does not count as part of the 20‐page limitation, but cannot exceed 20 additional pages. Minimum body font size is 10 point. In complying with our “green” approach, text should be placed on the front and back of each page. SAME Student Mentoring Program 5 Content Each proposal must include the following elements; however proposals are not limited to only these elements. Title Page including: o School Name o School Team Leader o Mentor Name(s) o Brief Project Description Title o Date o List of Names and Grades of All Student Team Members Project Problem Statement Recommendations (Project Solution) Action Plan for Implementation of Recommendations Team Organization (for example, a chart) Process Description (Journey Documentation) Lessons Learned Acknowledgments Bibliography If any of these minimum content elements are missing, the proposal will be considered incomplete and will not receive the full potential of awarded points SAME Student Mentoring Program 6 Presentation General Information The presentations will be on Thursday, April 3, 2014 at the Scott Conference Center– University of Nebraska at Omaha (SCC) The following time limits apply: High School Division Set‐up 5 minutes Presentation 20 minutes maximum Interview (Q & A) 10 minutes maximum Clean‐up 5 minutes 5 minutes Middle School Division Set‐up Presentation 15 minutes maximum Interview (Q & A) 10 minutes maximum Clean‐up 5 minutes Content Presentations are intended to add to, build upon or emphasize elements presented in the written proposal. Models, boards, videos and other visual aids can be used to demonstrate a design element, a process, show plans, etc. The use of models and display boards is strongly encouraged but NOT REQUIRED. There are no evaluation points given for having a model. Any handouts accompanying the presentation shall be limited to 8 single‐sided pages (8½ x11” or 11x17” foldout sheets). These are also NOT REQUIRED. Room Size and Equipment The competitions will be held in the four side rooms and the Board Room. Room sizes are 26x37 ft. except for the Board Room which is 26x44 ft. Each room will have two 2’x5’ tables (for displays or models) and one easel Rooms have built‐in large screens for presentation. Teams will be responsible for all other support equipment and arrangements for any special requirements or conditions they may have. Please contact the Program Administrator at least one week prior to Competition Day if additional equipment is needed. All models/display boards/etc. are to be stored in the Center Room on the specified tables until needed for the presentation. SAME Student Mentoring Program 7 After the presentation model/display boards/etc. are to be returned to the Center Room. At the end of the competition event (about 3:30 pm) model/display boards/etc. and table will be moved to locations along the outside walls by Program Officials and event staff. Please do not leave valuable on the tables unattended, such as laptops, cameras, video players, etc. The team may bring these back and set them up on the display tables for the evening Awards event. Program Officials and SCC staff will not be responsible for lost items. Miscellaneous Students are strongly encouraged to attend other team presentations. Otherwise, teams are asked to stay in the Center Room area during presentations to keep hallways outside presentation rooms quiet. Once a presentation has begun, no one will be allowed to enter or exit in an effort to minimize disruptions for the speakers. Please let everyone know this including parents. Certificates for each student participating will be presented to the teachers during the competition so they may give them to the students. Photographs of each team with teacher(s) and mentor(s) will be taken before or after the team’s presentation out in the Center Room. Team plaques with these photographs and the gold and or silver level of achievement medals will be delivered to the teacher a few weeks after the Awards Ceremony. Lunch will be available at the SCC cafeteria for $8.00 per person. Teams must contact the Program Administrator prior to the competition day to give a head count for lunch and submit payment for lunch tickets. Lunches for teachers and mentors are provided courtesy of SAME but a count is needed. Please do not bring food into the Scott Conference Center. Vending machines are available but food must be eaten only in the vending and food court areas. SAME Student Mentoring Program 8 Evaluation Evaluation Panels Panels of industry experts will evaluate and score projects using the Evaluation Forms located in Appendix A. The rubrics used to assist in point assignment for the projects are located in Appendices B and C. Evaluators will be rotated between rooms such that the same four evaluators will only preside together once. One group will evaluate High School teams and a separate group will evaluate Middle School teams. No evaluator will judge both High School and Middle School teams. Evaluators will be selected from military engineering, college level education and the architecture or engineering industry and consulting. Evaluation Criteria Problem Identification and Development (PROPOSAL & PRESENTATION) The following are key components in successfully identifying and developing the project problem: Need and Demand: Recognize the need for a project, define the issues and describe the demand for a solution. Needs and demand are often discovered through the use of surveys, interviews and other primary research sources, as well as comparisons with existing resources. Clarity of description: Explain the problem clearly and thoroughly. Real world relevance: Identify and describe who or what are the clients, users, or other elements impacted by the problem, how they are affected, and how this relates to actual or current conditions. Complexity: Identify, research and report the various aspects of the problem. Originality: Define and explain the problem issues in an original or unique way. Examples include, but are not exclusive to, relating the problem in a personal way to team experience, defining a problem that requires innovative solutions, or evaluating a common problem with an uncommon approach. Recommendations and Action Plan (PROPOSAL & PRESENTATION) Clarity of description: Explain the solution clearly and thoroughly. Address issues defined in the problem identification. Use research, figures, examples, diagrams, tables and other exhibits to show thoroughness of design process and support conclusions. Real world feasibility: Identify how the recommendations or solutions will benefit the client, users or elements, including (but not exclusively) economically, socially, environmentally or politically. SAME Student Mentoring Program 9 Solution value relative to cost: Provide an estimate of the project costs, and describe how the solution is worth the price of the project. For example, discuss the life‐cycle benefits of the solution compared to initial project costs. Action plan for implementation: Describe the steps needed to implement the project. Identify possible funding sources. Indicate what approvals may be needed and who would need to provide approval, i.e. school boards, city council, U.S Army Corps of Engineers, etc. to further implement the project. Journey and Lessons Learned (PROPOSAL ONLY) Team journey description: Describe the process on project selection and why the preferred project was chosen. Report team activities, such as field trips, interviews, and research, used toward developing the problem and solution. Development issues and resolutions: Explain efforts toward developing teamwork and cooperation between members. Describe barriers to teamwork, design, or project development issues and how they were overcome. Lessons learned and applicability to future: Describe principles learned or discovered in developing project. Report on activities that were unique to the team outside the regular academic experience and how the activities benefited the team or individual members. Describe what may have been done differently, given the teams’ experience on this project, and how this would apply to future projects. Describe how the experience working on this project may affect team performance in other activities outside this program. Merit Categories The following six merit categories, defined by the program requirements, represent design elements that should be incorporated into every project, regardless of the project type: Applied Science Sustainability Innovation Teamwork Research Technology During the project planning process, the teams should keep in mind how aspects of their project apply to these categories. For example, a well‐planned and successful project would require extensive research and good teamwork. By performing, documenting and then applying primary research (surveys, interviews, etc.) and secondary research (reliable internet sources, scientific manuals, studies, etc.), a team would demonstrate a good understanding of the research element. Employing team building activities early in the process can build trust and communication skills within the team. Matching team members’ interests and abilities to project assignments may generate more enthusiasm about the project, which will be demonstrated by team synergy. SAME Student Mentoring Program 10 Additionally, demonstration of the sustainable or innovative elements does not preclude that the project be wholly about those subjects. Rather, the team can arrive at their solution and then integrate sustainable strategies or discover innovative methods that enhance their recommendations. The use of applied science or technology is inherent in an approach to a ‘real world’ engineering, architectural or scientific project. Known methods or processes are used to calculate or evaluate data to support desired results. Participating in and then demonstrating some understanding of these methods or processes is key to learning about engineering and architecture professions. The definitions, examples and rubrics for each of these categories are shown in Appendix C. SAME Student Mentoring Program 11 Awards Types of Awards Post President’s Awards Highest total points in each of the High School and Middle School divisions. High School Team: Trophy, $1,500 cash award for the school and a $1,500 Scholarship for a graduating senior pursuing a degree in Engineering, Architecture, or related sciences. Middle School Team: Trophy and a $1,500 cash award for the school. Awards of Distinction Sponsored by SAME Sustaining Members The top five teams in both the High School and Middle School Divisions with the highest point scores generated from the Gold and Silver Level Merit Categories will be presented with an Award of Distinction. (Total of 10 awards) Teams receive trophy and $500. Gold and Silver Level of Achievement in Merit Categories Gold and Silver medals will be placed on team plaque with team picture. Level of achievement will be recognized at Awards Ceremony. Awards Ceremony Along with the competition results, the Awards Ceremony will feature a key speaker or presentation, scholarship announcements and camp participant announcements. All teams must participate in the Student Awards Ceremony. It is expected that all will dress appropriately. Teachers and Mentors are strongly encouraged to attend the Awards Ceremony event. If your team receives an award, you are asked to come to the stage with your team and be photographed. Parents and other family members are encouraged to attend the Awards Ceremony. All participants’ names along with candid shots and team photos may be posted to the Program web site. Photographs of teams receiving awards are sent to the sponsor of that award as part of the recognition process. The Program staff will be processing scoring between the end of the competition day and the Awards Ceremony. If time allows, copies of the Evaluator’s critiques will be given to the teachers at the Awards Ceremony. Further scoring feedback will be provided at a later date. Post President and/or Award of Distinction recipients may be asked to speak and/or display their projects during the next year at a SAME Omaha Post meeting, Industry Day Exhibition, E‐Week, and other opportunities that may arise. Please preserve your models and/or display boards for these events. SAME Student Mentoring Program 12 Subject Matter Experts (SME) Subject Matter Experts (SME) The Program Administrator and Vice President for Student Mentoring will have a list of Subject Matter Experts (SME) available as a resource for teams during the program year. These SMEs have volunteered to be available to consult with teams when special expertise, knowledge, guidance or other support is needed on the project. Arrangements to meet with the SME, whether at the school or the SME’s office, is the responsibility of the team, team leader and mentor. The SME is not a mentor, or exclusive to one team. The program encourages teams to take advantage of this resource to get a fuller problem solving experience and make connections with professionals. Workshop A Workshop will be held on the Saturday morning date noted in the Calendar for all team members, teachers and mentors. The workshop is held at The Peter Kiewit Institute, using the classrooms and computer labs in this campus building. This workshop will provide teams with an opportunity to better understand the program elements and network with other teams, teachers and mentors, as well as program staff. Instruction in the following subjects has been offered in the past, but the final workshop program will be announced prior to the workshop date: Technical Writing Model Building Cost Estimating SketchUp Presentation Skills REVIT Building Codes Team Building Teams, including teachers and mentors, are strongly encouraged to attend. This workshop provides further insight into the program requirements, provides teams with problem solving tools, and attendance will give the team an advantage. Lunch is provided. The Program will also offer other incentives for attendance. Teams that have attended the past workshops have found the information very helpful toward completing a successful project. Team representation is very important. Even if your team has attended in the past, we try to find new subjects to present. Suggestions on future workshop topics are also encouraged. NEW OPPORTUNITY – an additional session will be offered specifically geared to meet the needs of teachers and mentors. Topics will include interpreting the SMP rubrics, creating team schedules and the project identification process. SAME Student Mentoring Program 13 Career Workshops New this year is the opportunity for high school students to attend workshops focusing on a variety of engineering and architecture careers. Students will be given the opportunity to learn more about the core skills required, educational requirements and anticipated salaries. We plan on presenting information in each of the following career categories but this list is subject to change: Architecture Civil Environmental Mechanical Electrical Manufacturing Electronic Security Acoustical Lighting Bio‐Medical Chemical These workshops will be held on Saturday mornings in January and February at the Peter Kiewit Institute, allowing the students to explore that facility while they learn more about the various disciplines from professionals employed in the industry. General Information News media (print and television) will be encouraged to cover the students throughout the project development process. Teachers, mentors, students and evaluators will be asked to complete post project surveys. Requests for reimbursement of expenses by teams for their projects must be submitted to the Program Administrator for approval prior to purchase. A Volunteers’ Social will be held on January 21, 2014 for all adult program participants, including teachers, mentors, judges, room monitors, workshop instructors, program staff, and SAME Board Members. This Social is intended to thank the participants and provide an opportunity for networking. It is a good time to discuss program issues, exchange ideas, give suggestions, and anything that enhances the program experience. The time and venue will be announced later, but the date is set on the program calendar, so please note and reserve that date. SAME Student Mentoring Program 14 Appendices Appendix A .......................................................... Evaluation Forms Appendix B .......................................................... Evaluation Rubric ‐ Evaluation Criteria A ‐ C Appendix C .......................................................... Evaluation Rubrics ‐ Evaluation Criteria D Appendix D ......................................................... 2010 – 2011 Program Calendar Appendix E .......................................................... Example Project Schedule Appendix F .......................................................... Mentoring Resources Appendix G ................................................................. Plagiarism Policy SAME Student Mentoring Program 15 Appendix A – Evaluation Forms Evaluator Scoring The following forms are used to evaluate the projects. Overall Category Ratings are to be recorded in all of the shaded "Ratings" column fields on the Evaluation Forms for each team. Only fractional ratings in increments of 0.5 are allowed. (The only exception to this is specific to the Proposal Phase Evaluation Form ‐ Field E "Required Proposal Content" ‐ see instruction on form). The rubrics that judges use for Evaluation Criteria A – C are found in Appendix B. The rubrics for the merit categories scored in Evaluation Criteria D are found in Appendix C. SMP utilizes a weighted scoring model indicated by the Multiplier column on the evaluator forms. When tabulating final scores, each evaluator’s rating is multiplied by the indicated amount. Scores from the proposal and presentation forms are added, resulting in a total final score in the thousands. The teams with the highest score in their division are awarded the Post President’s Awards. The scores for the Proposal, Presentation and six other Merit Categories are then evaluated as to where they fall within a prescribed range for the Gold and Silver Levels of Achievement. Each gold or silver level acquired generates medal points. These medal points determine which teams win the Awards of Distinction. If there is a tie in the medal points, the higher overall team score determines the outcome. Assuming a team was awarded all the available points, 41% of their total score would have come from Proposal points with 59% coming from Presentation points. A more detailed breakdown would look like this: A. Problem Identification & Development 23% Submittal Points / Required Proposal Content 7% B. Recommendations & Action Plan 44% D. Merit Categories 18% C. Presentation: Team Presentation & Panel Q&A C. Proposal: 5% Journey & Lessons Learned 4% Scores are frequently very close so teams should strive for points in all categories. SAME Student Mentoring Program 16 PROPOSAL PHASE EVALUATION FORM SCHOOL NAME (and team number if more than one team) _______________________________________________ SCHOOL CODE (from Room Assignments & Schedule Form) ________ PROJECT TITLE (from Proposal) ____________________________________________________________________ NOTE: Total proposal text content that will be considered is limited to a maximum of 20 typewritten pages, excluding any optional graphics, photos or charts (as deemed necessary). If graphics, photos, charts, etc. are interspersed with text, total text portion may not exceed 20 equivalent typewritten pages. Appendix material is optional, Minimum permissible text body font size is 10 point. RATING SCALE: RATING = 0 NOT DEMONSTRATED RATING = 1 REWORK EVALUATION CRITERIA A. JOURNEY & LESSONS LEARNED 1. Team journey description 2. Team development issues & resolutions 3. Lessons learned (outcomes applicable in future) D. MERIT CATEGORIES (Provide ratings in all 6 categories) E. ** Circle One 16 x 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 30 x 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 6x 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x 2x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1x 0 1 8 9 Clarity of description Validity of technical solution basis Real world feasibility (economically, politically, socially) Solution value relative to cost Action plan for implementation C. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. RATING = 4 OUTSTANDING Clarity of description Real world relevance (project need and impact) Level of difficulty (from where the team started). Originality RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION PLAN 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. RATING = 3 VERY GOOD *Multiplier PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION/ DEVELOPMENT 1. 2. 3. 4. B. RATING = 2 GOOD Applied Sciences Innovation Research Sustainability Team Work Technology REQUIRED PROPOSAL CONTENT 1. Includes ALL required content & text (1 point per item) Title Page/Sheet: Include school name, school team leader, mentor name(s), brief project description title, date and list of names and grades of all team members Project problem statement Recommendations (project solution) 2 3 Date SAME Student Mentoring Program 17 5 6 7 Action plan for implementation of recommendations Team organization (chart) Process description (journey documentation) Lessons learned Acknowledgments Bibliography * The boxed point value shown indicates relative weight of evaluation category **Circle your rating in the shaded area. Fractional ratings in increments of 0.5 only The circled ratings will be put into a computer program that will apply the point values and calculate the score Evaluator 4 PRESENTATION & INTERVIEW EVALUATION FORM SCHOOL NAME (and team number if more than one team) _________________________________________ SCHOOL CODE (from Room Assignments & Schedule Form) ______ PROJECT TITLE (from Proposal) ________________________________________________ Requirements: 1. Set-Up: 2. Presentation: 3. Interview (Q&A): 4. Clean Up: 5 Minutes 20 Minutes High School / 15 Minutes Middle School 10 Minutes 5 Minutes Presentation Handout (Optional; Not Required) 1. Limited to 8 pages, single sided, 8½”x11” or 11”x17” foldout sheets with 4 color maximum RATING SCALE: RATING = 0 NOT DEMONSTRATED RATING = 1 REWORK EVALUATION CRITERIA RATING = 2 GOOD *Multiplier 24 x 0 A. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION/ DEVELOPMENT 1. Clarity of description 2. Real world relevance (project need and impact) 3. Level of difficulty (from where the team started) 4. Originality B. RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION PLAN 1. Clarity of description 2. Validity of technical solution basis 3. Real world feasibility (economically, politically, socially) 4. Solution value relative to cost 5. Action plan for implementation 45 x C. TEAM PRESENTATION & PANEL (Q&A) 1. Readability and appropriate use of graphics / posters/slides / videos and/or models 2. Conclude presentation within allocated time period 3. Presentation flow (lack of transition ”dead” spots) 4. Knowledgeable responses to evaluator questions D. MERIT CATEGORIES (Mark all 5 categories) 1. Applied Sciences (field or lab experimentation) 2. Innovation (i.e. topic and/or solution) 3. Research 4. Sustainability 5. Team Work 6. Technology RATING = 3 VERY GOOD **Circle One 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 8x 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 3x 3x 3x 3x 3x 3x 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 * The boxed point value shown indicates relative weight of evaluation category. **Circle your rating in the shaded area. Fractional ratings in increments of 0.5. The circled ratings will be put into a computer program that will apply the point values and calculate the score. Evaluator Date SAME Student Mentoring Program 18 RATING = 4 OUTSTANDING OVERALL EVALUATION SUMMARY The teams are very interested in their overall performance. The evaluator is encouraged to comment on each team. Evaluators must be mindful of the age of the students and provide only constructive criticisms. SCHOOL NAME (and team number if more than one team) ______________________________________________ SCHOOL CODE (from Room Assignments & Schedule Form) ______ PROJECT TOPIC _______________________________________________________________________________ COMMENTS REPORT: PRESENTATION: Please use back if needed Evaluator Name (not required): Date: SAME Student Mentoring Program 19 Appendix B – Evaluation Rubric for Evaluation Criteria A – C Problem/ Solution/ Journey Evaluation Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Interpretation Outstanding Problem and solution are clearly defined, well explained, accurate and of highest quality in content and appearance. Proposal and Presentation is well organized, demonstrates thorough knowledge of project elements and provides detailed support. Presentation builds upon information provided in Proposal. Project approach is original. Team issues and resolutions discussed. Several team building activities used and incorporated into project results. Project could definitely be taken to higher development level. Problem and solution are substantially defined, accurate and of good quality in content and appearance. Proposal and Presentation is organized, demonstrates sufficient knowledge of project elements and provides some support. Presentation builds upon information provided in Proposal. Project approach discussed. Team issues and resolutions discussed. Participation in some team building activities. Problem and/or solution include no inaccuracies or grammatical errors. Problem and/or solution sufficiently defined and require minor clarifications. Team issues and resolutions discussed. Problem and/or solution include some minor inaccuracies or grammatical errors. Problem and/or solution insufficiently defined and require major clarifications. Proposal and/or Presentation have major grammatical errors, inaccuracies, and/or poorly organized. Proposal and Presentation do not relate well to each other. Team issues briefly reported. No team building activities noted. Did not address requirements. Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated SAME Student Mentoring Program 20 Appendix C – Evaluation Rubrics for Evaluation Criteria D Applied Science Applied science is using established scientific and mathematical knowledge to develop a solution to a real world problem. Engineering and architecture is artfully applying science in order to solve problems. Examples of applied science may include: Performing calculations (by hand or with computer software) in order to design a system or determine the effectiveness of a system Evaluating material properties Applying information about human health or human perception to a design Applying experimental methods to develop a database or test a solution Applied Science Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Outstanding Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated Interpretation Goes well beyond the expectation in use, demonstration, and reporting of applied science methods. Applied science is completely integrated into the project solution, and reporting makes it clear the team made a conscious decision to do so. Includes or demonstrates the methods of applied science. Project solution or reporting includes no inaccuracies or errors in use, application, or reporting of applied science methods. Includes or demonstrates the methods of applied science. Project and/or solution includes some minor inaccuracies or errors in use, application, or reporting of applied science methods. Includes or demonstrates the methods of applied science. Project solution or reporting includes major inaccuracies or errors in the use application, or reporting of applied science methods. Project and/or solution claims or attempts to include applied science methods, but project topic does not support the full potential of the category. Project does not include applied science methods. SAME Student Mentoring Program 21 Innovation Innovation is the introduction of something new, for example a new idea, method, or device. The team demonstrates innovation in the selection, development or solution of their project. Innovation may include any of the following: A unique, imaginative, “outside the box” solution for the needs of their project An improvement of an existing technological product or system Use of “cutting edge” technologies or materials for their project A unique way of using common technology or materials for their project The development of a solution for a future need or project Innovation Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Outstanding Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated Interpretation Project and/or solution includes multiple concepts or technologies that have rarely been tried or proposed. Use of the concepts or methods are fully explained and justified. The project or solution seems very feasible within the project constraints given the extremely new and innovative concepts. Project and/or solution has no inaccuracies or errors in claiming, describing or reporting innovation. Project and/or solution demonstrates the use of multiple new cutting edge ideas or methods. In each case innovation is identified and well described. The project or solution seems feasible within the project constraints given the extremely new and innovative concepts. Project and/or solution has minor inaccuracies or errors in claiming, describing or reporting innovation. Project and/or solution demonstrates the use of at least one new cutting edge idea or method. Innovation is identified and well described; project and/or solution includes major inaccuracies or errors in claiming or reporting innovation. Feasibility of the innovation is questionable within the project constraints or is not fully addressed. Some innovation in project topic and/or solution is included, but may not be well described or identified. Innovation that is included is not feasible within project constraints. Innovation is not demonstrated in the project. SAME Student Mentoring Program 22 Research Basic research is driven by curiosity or interest in a question or topic. It can be gathered from primary sources such as surveys, observation, and studies or secondary sources such as published reports, articles, books, and studies from academically reliable sources. All sources of secondary research should be documented in a bibliography. The team demonstrates in‐depth research associated with their project in any of the following: Research into various alternatives for selection of the project solution Research into the needs of project users through surveys, interviews, etc. Research on information associated with a component of the project problem solution Research Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Interpretation Outstanding All sources are documented. Primary and secondary research is used throughout the project. Research is clearly described and applied to the solution. It includes several supporting details and/or examples. All sources are documented. Primary and secondary research is used anecdotally in the project. Research is clearly described and relates to the solution. It provides some supporting details and/or examples. Most sources are documented. Only secondary research was evident in the project. Research clearly relates to the solution. Few details and/or examples are given. Sources are not documented. Limited research was evident on the project. Research has little or nothing to do with the solution. No details and/or examples are given. No research was gathered for the project. Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated SAME Student Mentoring Program 23 Sustainability Definitions of sustainability often refer to the "three pillars" of social, environmental and economic sustainability. Using sustainable strategies in project and solution development will minimize harmful environmental impact on the earth and promote human physical and physiological health. Projects can use LEED strategies but are not restricted to these guidelines. Examples of sustainable strategies may include: Reusing land and materials for a new purpose Creating energy efficient designs Generating power from renewable resources such as wind and solar energy Designing with a reduced amount of material and waste Conserving water Using renewable materials for a project Designing products that will produce fewer toxins during construction and operation Improving the quality of people’s environment Creating designs that will react to their users and their environment Sustainability Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Outstanding Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated Interpretation Goes well beyond the expectation in use, demonstration, and reporting of unique sustainable strategies. Sustainable strategies are completely integrated into the project and solution, and reporting makes it clear the team made a conscious decision to do so. Includes or demonstrates sustainable strategies. Project solution or reporting includes no inaccuracies or errors in use, application, or reporting of its sustainable strategies. Includes or demonstrates sustainable strategies. Project and/or solution includes some minor inaccuracies or errors in its use, development, application, or reporting of sustainable strategies. Includes or demonstrates the concepts of sustainability, but does not fully describe or fulfill the possibilities for sustainable strategies as it applies to the project. Project solution or reporting includes major inaccuracies or errors in the use, development, application, or reporting of sustainable strategies. Did not include sustainable strategies. SAME Student Mentoring Program 24 Teamwork Teamwork maximizes team synergy through extensive active participation of all team members, at both the (specialized task) work group and overall team levels. Teamwork maintains team effort (as a group) through resolution of difficult circumstances. Effective teams comprehend, recognize, and capitalize on the diverse strengths, abilities, and talents of the individual team members. Effective teams also apply individual talents to the project work, solution, and (written/oral) reporting in a clearly coordinated fashion that demonstrates on‐going intra‐team communications. Teamwork can be evident in the presentation and in the Journey and Lessons Learned section of the written proposal. Teamwork Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Outstanding Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated Interpretation Teamwork is fully integrated into the project and/or solution in ways that allow each team member to achieve their full potential in terms of their individual talents. Team displayed obvious energy and team spirit and it is evident that all team members contributed to the project. Team participated in teamwork building activities and documented those activities in the written proposal or presentation. Teamwork is clearly demonstrated and/or reported. Most team members appear to be fully engaged in the project and/or solution. Some demonstration of team work is reported, but some misunderstandings of the spirit of teamwork are shown. Some team members do not appear to be fully engaged in the project and/or solution. Demonstration of teamwork is minimal. Project work and reporting appears to be the work of only a few individuals working together as one group. No apparent division of labor to maximize the talents of all individuals. No teamwork was demonstrated. SAME Student Mentoring Program 25 Technology Technology is the knowledge and application of tools, techniques, crafts, systems or methods of organization. Technology changes the natural environment to satisfy our wants and needs. Technology can be evidenced in a project by appropriate application and/ or use of existing known scientific, engineering, and/or architectural process‐related technology to enable or enhance the project solution. Technology Rating 4 3 2 1 0 Category Outstanding Very Good Good Rework Not Demonstrated Interpretation Project and/or solution includes multiple technologies. Technology applications are project‐appropriate, fully explained and results‐justified. Team understands the technology process. The project or solution as aided by technology seems very feasible within the project constraints. Project and/or solution demonstrates the appropriate use of one or more technologies. In each case, applied technology is clearly identified and well‐ described. Project and/or solution has no inaccuracies or errors in claiming, describing or reporting technology (‐ies). Project and/or solution demonstrates an appropriate use of technology or a mix of technologies that are minimally identified and described. Project and/or solution includes some inaccuracies or errors in claiming or reporting of applied technology. Indicated results from use of technology are not clearly substantiated or are somewhat questionable within the otherwise‐stated project constraints. Some technology was applied to the project topic and/or solution, but is either not feasible or is misapplied within the project’s constraints. Technology is incorrectly or improperly described or identified. Did not include use of technology in project. SAME Student Mentoring Program 26 Appendix D – 2013‐2014 Program Schedule September 18, 2013 Teacher/ Mentor Orientation October 4, 2013 Submittal 1 (30 points) Teacher and Mentor Information Tentative Project title and brief synopsis Tentative milestones and schedule Initial team roster with each students’ grade Permission slips for all students October 19, 2013 Workshop January, 2014 Career Workshop (High school only‐date to be determined) January 21, 2014 Volunteer Social January 31, 2014 Submittal 2 (30 points) Updated team roster Updated milestones and schedule Other updates and accomplishments Permission slips for new students February 15, 2014 Career Workshop (High school only) February 21, 2014 Submittal 3 (30 points) Final project title and synopsis Final team roster with each student’s grade Updates to team milestones and activities Missing permission slips result in loss of 30 points March 7, 2014 Written Proposal Due (60 points) March 13 or 18, 2014 Judges’ Orientation April 3, 2014 Competition Day and Awards Ceremony May 6, 2014 SAME Industry Day (2014 winning teams) SAME Student Mentoring Program 27 Appendix E – Example Project Schedule Your schedule and any updates should be posted at school for all team members to read! The bold goals are common to all teams and MUST be included. Milestone Date Goal (Item to Complete) Completed (Check Box) m/d/y Introduce program and mentors, brainstorm and discuss projects m/d/y Finalize project selection, team assignments , scope, description, synopses, and timeline m/d/y Develop (Research, Survey, etc.) Questions, Survey, Visit (mentor office, a work site, ?) m/d/y Submittal #1 due (via web site) m/d/y Review survey results, continue research, develop project m/d/y Submittal #2 due (via web site) m/d/y Workshop (at PKI, 1110 South 67th) m/d/y Continue project work , model work and report, documentation , cost analysis, adjustments m/d/y Submittal #3 due (via web site) m/d/y Finalize report and drawings m/d/y Report Due (PKI Room 391 before 5:00 pm) m/d/y Presentation Work , Model Work m/d/y Presentation & Awards (At Scott Conference Center 6450 Pine St) SAME Student Mentoring Program 28 Appendix F – Teacher and Mentor Resources Thank you so much for donating your time to our program. This is our 20th year and without our teachers and mentors the program simply would not work. The following is designed to help you get started mentoring your team. The first few sessions should be focused on team building and gaining trust between all of the team members, student to student, and student to adult. Suggestions for Mentors 1. As soon as you know which school team you have been assigned, contact the second mentor and the school Team Leader (teacher) and find out the team’s meeting schedule. We ask that you or the second mentor plan to spend an hour each week with the team. You may qualify for a maximum of 15 PDHs for this time spent but please note you must request a certificate at year end to receive one as we do not send them out automatically. 2. At the first team meeting, use this opportunity to get acquainted with the students. a. Tell them about yourself, where you work, and what type of work you do. b. Ask them about their interests. c. Give them an overview of the mentoring program and its schedule. (Orientation Handbook) d. Suggest that they keep a diary, which will come in handy when they start to write their report. (For about $2, you can buy a "Project Planner" which is ideal for this purpose.) 3. At the next meeting(s), you should discuss engineering methods; brainstorming, problem solving, and teamwork. 4. It's important to acquaint the students with the power of teamwork early on. Ask them to look up the definition of "synergism" as an assignment and then have them report at the next meeting on what it means. 5. Explain that engineering is about solving problems. Remember, you are a resource for the team. You should not be doing their work. It is important that they own the project. It may take you as many as four to five meetings before you get them to a point where they have covered all this material and they can zero in on a project. 6. Get them to write a synopsis of their project and to set up a schedule to complete the project in time for the presentations. These are part of the requirements for the first submittal 7. You may not be able to make all their meetings. This is one of the reasons for two mentors per team. Let the team and your co‐mentor know this in advance. Keep each other appraised of the teams’ progress. SAME Student Mentoring Program 29 8. Take the students to your (or a friend’s) office and show them where architects / engineers work and what the company produces. Most have no idea what an office looks like, what you physically do, or your company's connection to the real world. 9. You are a resource for your team, not the resident expert; if you need assistance in an area outside of your expertise, or have any problem, contact the Program Administrator or the Program Chairperson. SAME has many sustaining member firms that are totally committed to the Mentoring Program. The program will have a list of Subject Matter Experts (SME) to choose from so you can find more expertise related to your project. It is your responsibility to arrange for meetings with the SME. 10. You should help critique their written report and their oral presentation just as your boss does for your work, but keep in mind their age and experience. Do not do these tasks for the students. The students have the ultimate responsibility for these tasks. They must own the project. SMEs are available to assist with writing and layout if needed. 11. Plan to be available for their oral presentation and for the awards ceremony. It will show you care about their work. Also, we would like to have you included in the team photos. 12. Remember, the reason for the program is to introduce architectural and engineering concepts to the students. It is very important to understand that we strongly believe that all the students who participate in the program are winners. Suggestions for Teachers 1. Contact your team mentors as soon as possible. Set up a weekly schedule for meeting as soon as possible, so the Mentor can plan work activities and travel around this time. 2. Plan activities so that team members can take the best advantage of the mentors’ time. The mentors should be engaging with team members, not observing activities with little or no interaction. Work that can be done without the mentors’ presence should be done at other times than weekly meetings. 3. Make arrangements for all travel outside of the classroom, including permission slips, so that teams may visit mentor offices, sites relating to project, the workshop, and the competition day. 4. Check and review all required submittals. It is VERY IMPORTANT to make the submittal on time, and very easy points to obtain. Although it is encouraged that the students do the work of the submittal, not making the deadline can be detrimental to the rest of the project efforts. 5. Team building includes interaction between teacher and mentors. A good relationship, division of labor and other positive activities will be an advantage to your team, as well as good role modeling. SAME Student Mentoring Program 30 Appendix G – Plagiarism Policy SAME Student Mentoring Program Plagiarism Policy All of us – teachers, students, mentors and parents‐ acquaint ourselves with information and ideas by reading print and digital texts created by others, and we write in order to analyze, synthesize, evaluate, and/or extend that body of knowledge. The use of sources is an important academic skill. Over the course of their academic years, students should become proficient in locating sources, evaluating them for relevance and credibility, integrating information and ideas from other texts into their own work, and citing sources using the appropriate conventions. Whenever students write a paper drawing upon outside sources, the ethical standards of the SAME Student Mentoring Program require that any information, idea, or language that originates with another writer be appropriately acknowledged. Quotation If material is copied verbatim from any source, whether print or digital, quotation marks must be put around the verbatim text and a citation of its source must be provided. Paraphrase “Paraphrase” does not mean copying someone else’s sentences with a few changes in the wording. Instead, it means putting another writer’s ideas into the writer’s own words, crafting their own sentences, and using the ideas to advance their line of thought. Paraphrased text must have the source cited. Citation Style manuals such as those of American Psychological Association (APA) and the Modern Language Association (MLA) offer extensive guidelines on using and citing quoted and paraphrased material. These and other style guidelines are available in any good writing handbook and at Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/ Plagiarism Use of borrowed ideas, information, or language without appropriate citation is plagiarism. This is a serious academic offense and will not be tolerated in the SAME Student Mentoring Program. The purpose of the SMP program is to mentor and guide the students through the program’s requirements and it is the responsibility of all participants to monitor and encourage the proper acknowledgment of other’s work and ideas. ADAPTED FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA OMAHA PLAGIARISM POLICY SAME Student Mentoring Program 31
