Thinking Tracks for Integrated Systems Design

The paper investigates systems thinking and systems engineering. After a short literature review, the paper presents, as a means for systems thinking, twelve thinking tracks. The tracks can be used as creativity starter, checklist, and as means to investigate effects of design decisions taken early in the process. Tracks include thinking about time, risk and safety, and different types of life-cycles. The thinking tracks are based on literature, teaching experience and practice as a system designer. By using the tracks a more complete picture of the system under design, the issue to be solved, the context, stakeholders and the rest of the world is created

Download Entire Issue: Gibbon Surgical Review, Volume 1, Issue 1, 2018

Table of Contents A First Year\u27s Perspective on JeffMD, Somnath Das, MS1 Spotlight on TJUH\u27s Quality and Safety Group, Samantha L. Savitch, MS1 Medical Student Involvement in Quality Improvement Research, Tyler M. Bauer, MS3 Global Surgery: A Shift in the Global Health Paradigm, Myles S. Dworkin, MS3 Thomas Jefferson University Design Vault, Victor B. Hsue, MS2 Physician Spotlight: Ernest (Gary) L. Rosato, MD, FACS, Carrie E. Andrews, MS3 The SCALPELS Program, Emily Papai, MS

Systems thinkers think About systems education under the April 2010 (volcanic ash) clouds of Austria

The fragmented nature of systems education with multiple traditions expressed in very different ways at different institutions with ultimate confusing effects on the community of learners (students, managers, policy makers, etc), led to a group of Systems Thinkers to discuss and create generic curricula for education and learning about systems for the generalist and specialist tracks. An active network of systems educators and stakeholders who can benefit from enhanced systems education in having to deal with complex issues, was also explored. In this presentation some guidelines for designing introductory and advanced courses will be discussed. The Introduction to Systemic Thinking and Practice course is intended as an introductory course for students from all disciplines. The Advanced Systemic Thinking and Practice course is intended as a more advanced course for students who are faced with complex issues that require a trans-disciplinary and integrated approach. The designs contain a set of key systems concepts and frameworks relevant to the appropriate level, along with some indicative tools and methods which will enable students to explore the concepts. The value of a Global Network of Systems Educators will also be discussed and how this network could help to fulfil the needs of managers, policy makers and society in general. An example will be given of how the integration of this network with the UQ-UNESCO/MAB Global Learning Laboratories NET could lead to more people (decision-and policy makers in Governments, managers, businesses, etc.) having the ability to practice systems thinking – all of these contributing to Systems Thinking becoming a more mainstream part of a sustainable society

My boy builds coffins. Future memories of your loved ones

The research is focus on the concept of storytelling associated with product design, trying to investigate new ways of designing and a possible future scenario related to the concept of death. MY BOY BUILDS COFFINS is a gravestone made using a combination of cremation’s ashes and resin. It is composed by a series of holes in which the user can stitch a text, in order to remember the loved one. The stitching need of a particular yarn produced in Switzerland using some parts of human body. Project also provides another version which uses LED lights instead of the yarn. The LEDs - thanks to an inductive coupling - will light when It will be posed in the hole. The gravestone can be placed where you want, as if it would create a little altar staff at home. In this way, there is a real connection between the user and the dearly departed

Development of Integrated Project Tracks for a College-Wide Multidisciplinary Engineering Design Program at RIT

Since 2002, the Kate Gleason College of Engineering (KGCOE) at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) has seen its Multidisciplinary Senior Design (MSD) program grow from a small pilot project into a college-wide initiative involving four departments and almost 400 students annually. While subtle adjustments have been made each year, a major redesign effort was undertaken prior to the 2006 academic year to improve program alignment with departmental objectives, to improve delivery efficiency and effectiveness, and to improve student and faculty satisfaction. Coordination of related projects and sharing of information between approximately 60 design teams in a given year, and preserving continuity of information from one year to the next has proven to be a challenging hurdle. This paper addresses the project definition process, which was overhauled to focus on the definition of related projects within a set of disciplinary “tracks,” consistent with academic programs and faculty interests. Emphasis was placed on the development of reusable and scalable platforms to lay the foundation for future project extensions, and to encourage cross-project and cross-department collaboration. The process by which project tracks, project families and individual projects were identified, screened, modified and ultimately selected will be discussed. The integral relationship between the Design Project Management course, which trains the future project managers and technical leaders of the multidisciplinary project teams, and the project definition process will be illustrated. The development of the Aerospace Systems and Technology Track, with particular emphasis on the Microsystems Engineering (KGCOE) and Technology for the Future Exploration of Outer Space Regions (METEOR) family of projects will be used as a case example to illustrate the process

Recognizing risk-of-failure in communication design projects

The pace of commercial graphic design practice presents very few opportunities to conduct user research after a project’s launch. This makes the design team’s ability to anticipate and address risks during the design development phase even more important, recognized in the astute observation from Tim Brown, CEO of leading international design group IDEO, that sometimes you must “fail early to succeed early.” This paper presents the methods and strategies used by the Centre for Design Research’s (CfDR) creative team to mitigate risk during three communication design case-study projects. Elements of failure are identified in each of the three cases and presented, with discussion of where and why they occurred, and the possible approaches for reducing the risk of such problems re-occurring. To provide structure to the discussion, the paper frames each contributory issue as either a usability, communication or technical failing. The analysis demonstrates that the factors contributing to design process failures are often complex and multi-layered. To avoid a poor design project outcome, it is evident that consistent risk monitoring is present in all stages of a design project, but might be improved by better understanding how issues change their degree of importance and potential negative impact during the course of the project. Developing a mechanism to enable teams to objectively identify and manage these fluctuating project risks, will contribute to a more coherent and effective strategy for recognizing and managing future design projects

Framework to Enhance Teaching and Learning in System Analysis and Unified Modelling Language

Cowling, MA ORCiD: 0000-0003-1444-1563; Munoz Carpio, JC ORCiD: 0000-0003-0251-5510Systems Analysis modelling is considered foundational for Information and Communication Technology (ICT) students, with introductory and advanced units included in nearly all ICT and computer science degrees. Yet despite this, novice systems analysts (learners) find modelling and systems thinking quite difficult to learn and master. This makes the process of teaching the fundamentals frustrating and time intensive. This paper will discuss the foundational problems that learners face when learning Systems Analysis modelling. Through a systematic literature review, a framework will be proposed based on the key problems that novice learners experience. In this proposed framework, a sequence of activities has been developed to facilitate understanding of the requirements, solutions and incremental modelling. An example is provided illustrating how the framework could be used to incorporate visualization and gaming elements into a Systems Analysis classroom; therefore, improving motivation and learning. Through this work, a greater understanding of the approach to teaching modelling within the computer science classroom will be provided, as well as a framework to guide future teaching activities

Teachers' adoption of inquiry-based learning activities : the importance of beliefs about education, the self, and the context

Even though studies have shown that the impact of professional development on inquiry-based learning (IBL) tends to remain limited when it fails to consider teachers' beliefs, there is little known about how these beliefs influence teachers' adoption of IBL. In answer to this issue, the present study offers a framework that explains teachers' use of IBL through three constitutive dimensions of beliefs systems, covering the constructs of education, the self, and the context. This framework is empirically investigated through a survey study with 536 secondary school history teachers. The resulting data are used to estimate a structural equation model (SEM), which indicates that the framework is able to explain a relatively large portion (38%) of the variance in teachers' decision to implement IBL. Based on the findings, the implications for professional development and research on teachers' use of IBL in general, and within history education in particular, are discussed