2020(S08) Lecture:week 9

From OpenWetWare

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 3: Line 3:
=<center>Week 9 Tuesday</center>=
=<center>Week 9 Tuesday</center>=
-
==Challenge: <font color = blue> </font color>==
+
<center>''“Faith is a poor substitute for reason”'' Thomas Jefferson</center>
 +
As you hone in on the details of your projects, your team should plan ways to validate the system's operation and ways to learn from its glitches. We have two quick challenges for you today. The first illustrates that even the "best" answers you can offer that are consistent with all available data remain tentative, that the answer is either strengthened or revised by additional data and that all interpretations are subject to personal biases, human values and the various ways we all think about the world. The second challenge puts you midstream in a flawed design and requires that you consider the modes of failure to debug/troubleshoot the problem. <br>
 +
We will spend '''only 20 minutes on these challenges''' and then you and your team can use the rest of today's lecture time to prepare for tomorrow's [http://openwetware.org/wiki/20.020:_Technical_Specification_Review Tech Spec Review.]Please plan to arrive at 2PM for tomorrow's presentations. Speaking order will be determined by the order in which your .ppts are sent to Natalie.
 +
==Challenge 1: <font color = blue> The check's in the mail </font color>==
 +
This challenge is adapted from Judy Loundagin's lesson, [http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/chec.lab.html here].
 +
# One member of your team should serve as scribe (with notebook sheet to be provided). Another should be spokesperson (see item 7, below).
 +
# Each team should get one envelope that is filled with fictional checks. Do not look at the checks yet. All envelopes have the same checks.
 +
# Remove and examine '''4 checks only.'''
 +
# Discuss a plausible scenario which involves those checks.
 +
# Once your group has agreed on a reasonable scenario that accounts for the checks, and the scribe has written it down, then you can draw '''4 more checks from the envelope.''' As tempting as they are, the unchosen checks must stay in the envelope, unexamined.
 +
# Reconsider your initial scenario to include the information you can glean from all 8 of the checks. 
 +
# We will take 1 minute to hear from each team. The spokesperson should detail
 +
*the content of the first 4 checks,
 +
*the way your team considered their content and
 +
*the initial conclusion you drew
 +
*the details of the next 4 checks and
 +
*the revisions you made to the scenario to accommodate the information. <br>
 +
Finally, the spokesperson should say '''what kind of check they would expect to see''' in the envelope if their scenario is correct '''OR what kind of check would blow their ideas out of the water''' and demand a full re-write of their explanation.
 +
 
-
==For next time==
 
=<center>Week 9 Studio</center>=
=<center>Week 9 Studio</center>=
-
==<font color = blue>Technical Specification Presentation</font color>==
+
==<font color = blue>Technical Specification Review</font color>==
 +
 
-
==For next time==
 
=<center>Week 9 Thursday</center>=
=<center>Week 9 Thursday</center>=
==Challenge: <font color = blue> </font color>==
==Challenge: <font color = blue> </font color>==
-
==For next time==
 

Revision as of 12:42, 7 April 2008

Contents

Week 9 Tuesday

“Faith is a poor substitute for reason” Thomas Jefferson

As you hone in on the details of your projects, your team should plan ways to validate the system's operation and ways to learn from its glitches. We have two quick challenges for you today. The first illustrates that even the "best" answers you can offer that are consistent with all available data remain tentative, that the answer is either strengthened or revised by additional data and that all interpretations are subject to personal biases, human values and the various ways we all think about the world. The second challenge puts you midstream in a flawed design and requires that you consider the modes of failure to debug/troubleshoot the problem.
We will spend only 20 minutes on these challenges and then you and your team can use the rest of today's lecture time to prepare for tomorrow's Tech Spec Review.Please plan to arrive at 2PM for tomorrow's presentations. Speaking order will be determined by the order in which your .ppts are sent to Natalie.

Challenge 1: The check's in the mail

This challenge is adapted from Judy Loundagin's lesson, here.

  1. One member of your team should serve as scribe (with notebook sheet to be provided). Another should be spokesperson (see item 7, below).
  2. Each team should get one envelope that is filled with fictional checks. Do not look at the checks yet. All envelopes have the same checks.
  3. Remove and examine 4 checks only.
  4. Discuss a plausible scenario which involves those checks.
  5. Once your group has agreed on a reasonable scenario that accounts for the checks, and the scribe has written it down, then you can draw 4 more checks from the envelope. As tempting as they are, the unchosen checks must stay in the envelope, unexamined.
  6. Reconsider your initial scenario to include the information you can glean from all 8 of the checks.
  7. We will take 1 minute to hear from each team. The spokesperson should detail
  • the content of the first 4 checks,
  • the way your team considered their content and
  • the initial conclusion you drew
  • the details of the next 4 checks and
  • the revisions you made to the scenario to accommodate the information.

Finally, the spokesperson should say what kind of check they would expect to see in the envelope if their scenario is correct OR what kind of check would blow their ideas out of the water and demand a full re-write of their explanation.



Week 9 Studio

Technical Specification Review

Week 9 Thursday

==Challenge: ==
Personal tools