Transcript
https://otter.ai/u/o_xZMyYMz6jyMTVZbJb5tcQOm5k?view=summary
The meeting focused on feedback for the EDW program. Participants discussed the effectiveness of the project ideation process, suggesting more time for idea development and better communication within teams. They highlighted the importance of mentor support and the need for workshops on coding and electronics. The program's duration was debated, with some suggesting a five-week program for better planning and execution. Materials management was praised for its efficiency, but issues with timely delivery were noted. The idea of pre-program online seminars and customized program versions for different regions was proposed to enhance preparation and engagement.
Action Items
* Explore creating pre-program online workshops or resources to introduce Arduino, coding, and other relevant skills.
* Investigate creating Italian/multilingual versions of existing EDW tutorial and project content.
* Consider extending the EDW program length to 5 or 6 weeks, with the first week focused on project ideation and planning.
* Improve the orientation and organization of the workshop materials and resources available to participants.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants Took Ownership of Their Projects and Materials.
We began by organizing all our project materials and deciding who would take their work home. I asked participants to raise their hands if they were taking part of their project with them, and nearly 90% responded affirmatively. That level of engagement made me very happy. Even if students weren’t taking home the entire project, it was encouraging to see so many committed to preserving some aspect of their work.
Reflection on the Presentation Segment and the Value of Program Feedback.
One of my favorite parts of the presentations was hearing participants speak about what the program meant to them and how it could improve. This feedback is valuable, and we plan to record and summarize it using AI so we can remember this year and use it to make future iterations even better.
Participants Reflected on the Early Days of EDW and Project Ideation.
To prompt discussion, I asked students to think back to the beginning of the program—four weeks ago—when we explored what makes a good project idea, completed small builds, and took photographs. Several participants noted that while the early activities (like the LED and balloon pop challenges) were fun, the ideation process felt too long. Some wished we had formed teams sooner. Others appreciated the process of categorizing and refining ideas, particularly because it allowed everyone to contribute even if their original concept wasn’t chosen.
Student Opinions Varied on the Time Spent Developing Ideas.
While some felt the idea-generation phase could have been shortened, others saw value in the time spent refining categories. RC, for instance, liked how early discussions gave everyone a shared foundation and room to evolve their projects. He felt the timeline balanced creativity with collaboration, allowing ideas to adapt and improve organically.
Most Students Became More Invested in Their Projects Over Time.
When asked to give a thumbs-up/thumbs-down rating on how excited they were at the start of their projects versus later on, most students indicated growing enthusiasm as the project progressed. This suggests that even those initially unsure about their ideas found satisfaction through the process of building and problem-solving.
Students Suggested Anonymous Feedback Options to Increase Participation.
Some students suggested having a “secret box” or comment area for anonymous input. This would help students who feel hesitant to speak up publicly about their ideas or concerns. The group responded positively to the idea, recognizing the value in enabling quieter voices to be heard.
Concerns About Feasibility and Communication Were Raised.
There was discussion about the proposed hydrogen car project, which raised safety and feasibility concerns. One student noted that he would have preferred clearer guidance upfront if a project wasn’t technically possible or safe. We acknowledged this communication gap and discussed how both mentor styles—encouraging exploration and providing technical feedback—are essential but need to be balanced.
Failure Was Embraced as a Key Part of the Learning Process.
Failures were common across the room—some cool, some not—but nearly everyone agreed that these setbacks were learning opportunities. Students emphasized the importance of adapting their ideas based on what didn’t work and highlighted how iteration is central to engineering and design.
Team Dynamics and Communication Were Crucial in the First Week.
Students shared how important it was to get to know their teammates early on and maintain open communication. One student suggested that even dedicating the first week solely to team-building and discussion could prevent misalignment and disengagement later in the project.
Mentors Asked How to Teach These Lessons Earlier.
After reflecting on the importance of team communication and planning, mentors asked students how we might better teach these lessons at the start of the program. Students emphasized the value of experiential learning, noting that hearing advice isn’t the same as learning through doing.
Color-Coded Planning Boards Helped Clarify Team Roles.
One team shared that they used color-coded boards later in the program to assign roles and tasks. Initially shy, they found this visual and organized approach improved communication and helped them coordinate more effectively as the project developed. Commercial examples of such management tools include Trello and Smartsheets.
Prototype-Building Marked a Turning Point in the Process.
By the end of the first week, most teams had started building cardboard prototypes, which gave their projects a sense of momentum. Students agreed that this shift to hands-on work helped solidify their direction and made the experience feel more real.
Students Proposed a Short Intro Project to Kick Off EDW.
Several participants suggested beginning EDW with a two-day project that includes basic electronics and coding. This would give students a taste of the full design cycle and help them gain skills needed for their main projects. They also emphasized the value of interspersing ideation with hands-on work to keep engagement high. One such project might be be "light saber" with Neopixels controlled by an Arduino Nano and accelerometer sensor. See more examples at the Arduino Project Hub and MicroBit.
Workshops and Pre-Program Activities Could Enhance Skill Development.
The idea of running mentor-led workshops—on topics like Arduino, music theory, and art—was widely supported. Students liked the idea of optional afternoon sessions or even pre-program online modules( such as are run by MIT Beaverworks) to help them arrive better prepared. These workshops could also help students discover what they do or don’t enjoy before committing to a project.
Mentors Were Seen as Accessible and Supportive.
Students praised mentors for being approachable and helpful, especially when it came to explaining difficult concepts. Some noted it was easier to ask mentors for help than peers, as mentors were patient and nonjudgmental. This support helped create a collaborative learning environment.
Students Appreciated the Diversity of Skills Among Mentors.
Having mentors with different areas of expertise—ranging from coding to CAD design—allowed students to get tailored guidance within their groups. Many felt this improved the overall quality of their projects and made troubleshooting more efficient.
Working in a Shared Space Fostered Unexpected Collaborations.
Students enjoyed being in one large shared room, noting that it led to spontaneous collaboration between groups. For example, when two teams realized they were working on similar camera systems, they joined forces. This openness was also enabled by mentors moving between teams and sharing insights.
Materials and Ordering Logistics Were Smooth but Could Improve.
Most students were satisfied with how materials were ordered and received, especially when using Amazon and McMaster. However, there were reminders to order early, anticipate broken items, and store shared components neatly. Orientation on tool locations was another area for improvement.
Students Reflected on Program Length and Pacing.
There was consensus that four weeks was effective but felt slightly rushed. Some suggested extending the program to five weeks—using one week for ideation and four for building. Others proposed starting project ideation earlier via online meetings or modules. The key was ensuring enough time for iteration without overwhelming the summer schedule.
Workshops Could Be Tailored to Student Interests and Backgrounds.
Some students wanted more hands-on instruction in person, especially for topics like soldering and coding. There was also interest in regionalizing content for international students. For example, creating localized workshop materials in different languages or cultural contexts could make learning more accessible and inspiring.
The Value of Shared Experience Across Diverse Backgrounds.
Students and mentors alike appreciated the unique blend of cultural perspectives and technical disciplines within EDW. The program’s layout—similar to MIT’s interdisciplinary lab structure—encouraged hallway conversations and informal learning. This diversity enriched the learning environment and supported creativity and innovation.
Final Thoughts and Next Steps.
As the program drew to a close, students shared ideas for improving EDW in the future—more structured workshops, earlier orientation, clearer communication about safety and feasibility, and perhaps an additional week for planning. These reflections will be invaluable as we refine the program for future cohorts. Participants were also invited to help create resources (like orientation videos) to support future students.
Video excerpts:
No comments:
Post a Comment