Interdisciplinary Capstone Engineering Projects for Medical Technologies Design: Cross Discipline Design and Communication Challenges
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This paper reports observations made during a 5-year implementation of Interdisciplinary Capstone Engineering Projects for Medical Technologies Design at McGill University between 2019-2023. This effort was realized in the context of a NSERC Engineering Design Chair for unifying the capstone projects across all departments in the Faculty of Engineering in order to strengthen the diversity of students design training. Students experience, examples of interdisciplinary training, development of assessment methods and industrial sponsors feedback are reported. It was observed that interdisciplinary teams acquired the Design graduate attributes required by the Canadian accreditation board based on graded work and were able to overcome the communication barriers. Various design and communication activities were assessed including conceptual design, design embodiment, design prototypes and testing and reports writing, oral presentations, team meetings. Students were also required to make a design notebook logging their concepts in the form of sketches, minutes of meetings, with concept generation and selection methodologies. Metrics needed to be developed for the different accreditation criteria, questionnaire were elaborated for the sponsors and surveys were implemented for assessing current students and alumni training satisfaction level. The results are summarized with histograms, tables and percentages. A comparison between prior implementation period and post implementation period is made. The results are analyzed in terms of Design training proficiency, taking into account the skills acquired for designing, manufacturing and testing. The sponsors information reported the appreciations of individual contribution, incorporation of clients needs, team's communication with the client project and team's achievement of client objectives. It was observed that the students were globally interested by the multidisciplinary projects. It is concluded that the teams involved with the design of Medical Technologies were successful in achieving the assigned design projects and were able to overcome the communication challenges linked to the different engineering disciplines. This resulted in excellent academic accomplishments, working prototypes and appreciation by the sponsors.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,049 | 0,066 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».