NASA Project, part 2 (10op)

Osaamistavoitteet (Opintojakso)

Students develop new solutions to the epic challenge of sustainable human habitations of Mars
During the two semester long program students study and apply the ICED methodology (Innovative Conceptual Engineering Design), which is an innovation process used at NASA.

Credit points about 10 according to agreement with supervisor.

Sisältö (Opintojakso)

Project Implementation part
Multidisciplinary and international
10 ECTS credits
Two - three teams
Development of Earth-independent food production system
Development of a system globally distributed experts to be able to assist astronauts on Mars
Use of Collaboratory as a learning platform

Esitietovaatimukset (Opintojakso)

5K00CU15 NASA Project, part 1 required as a background course.

Arviointimenetelmät ja arvioinnin perusteet

Evaluation is based on two parts:
Project work evaluation table (grading weight 2/3) and
Individual peer review in teams (grading weight 1/3).

Arviointiasteikko

0-5

Opiskelumuodot ja opetusmenetelmät

Project work as part of Nasa Epic Challenge programme. Classroom lectures and lectures given by Nasa experts online. Self studying.

Arviointikriteerit - hylätty (0) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

Project can be evaluated as failed because of following reasons
- the coach has been responsible for all communication with the client
- project group has not had any documented meetings
- project group has not written a project plan and/or project report
- project group has not evaluated the process and outcome of the project

Arviointikriteerit - tyydyttävä (1-2) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

The group does not have clear rules, the work proceeds mostly due to the coaches or clients activity. Project leader does not take responsibility on leading. Time and work management, and control is inadequate.
Members of project group focus on their own sub-tasks, co-operation between group members and with the client, and utilization of the group members' special skills is inadequate. Work load is unevenly divided between the group members. Project outcome is incomplete, or group's and client's judgement of the outcome differs significantly.

Arviointikriteerit - hyvä (3-4) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

Group agrees on the rules with the assistance of coach, and mainly follows the agreed rules during the project. Project leader takes responsibility on the progress of the project, and takes care that each member can participate in the project work.
Group members work according to the agreed rules and project leader's guidelines. They listen to each other's opinions and co-operate with the client. Project members' commitment to the project varies in different phases.
Project outcome is in accordance with the task description. Group and client have quite similar opinions on the quality of the project work and its outcomes.

Arviointikriteerit - kiitettävä (5) (Ei käytössä, kts Opintojakson Arviointikriteerit ylempänä)

Group self-directively and collectively agrees on the rules and takes care that all group members follow them during the project.
The project leader takes appropriate responsibility, takes the group members' skills into account and leads the project with smoothly. Project leader finds creative solutions to enhance good working atmosphere. Time and work load allocation is systematical and balanced.
Each group member works for accomplishing the project aims in co-operation with group members. All group members participate actively in all phases of the project. Group members listen to and respect others' opinions and competences. Group members co-operate with the client and adjust plans according to feed-back.