Teamwork
T1: Team Contract
When teams are formed, they will draft a team contract, which specifies how the team will work together and how they will deal with unmet expectations or problems. The team contract is documented in the team notebook.
Grading Scheme: The team contract is graded using a rubric.
T2: Team Assessment
Students will receive a peer assigned grade based on individual contributions to the assignment. When students assess teammates, they will be asked to consider the team contract that the team prepared at the outset of the project. How did members of the team abide by the roles and methods for handling conflict or challenges?
Grading Scheme: Individuals will evaluate themselves and teammates using an online tool called PeerScholar. The average of your teammates’ evaluations of you will count towards up to 3% of your grade.
Process
P1-P5: Preparation Activities
There are 5 preparation activities in total. P1 is the completion of the TCP2 Core Ethics Tutorial; it is not graded but is mandatory if students were to continue in the course. P2-P5 are preparation activities which must be completed before the next class. Typically, the in-class activity depends on and build upon the preparation activity, and so, failure to complete the preparation work will negatively affect the team's ability to complete the in-class activity. All preparation activities should be documented in the team notebook.
Grading Scheme: Each preparation activity will be graded out of 10 based on completeness (i.e., all sections are filled in, all text/images/captions provided). For each activity, indicate each team member’s specific contributions. Each team member's individual grade will be adjusted based on their contribution, i.e., each student will receive the team's grade if they contributed to the activity, 0 otherwise.
D1-D8: Documentation
Classes are interactive and fast-paced. Students will work with their team, as well as with other teams, on a variety of design activities; these include rapid ideation, mapping AI capabilities to use cases, prototyping, and peer evaluation sessions. Teams should upload all in-class work (photos, drawings, notes) to the team notebook as soon as possible, just to keep things collected. Polished writeup of the design activities should be documented in the team notebook.
Grading Scheme: The design activity will be graded out of 10 based on completeness (i.e., all sections are filled in, all text/images/captions provided) and quality: 10 points for complete and perfect submission, 7.5 points for complete but can be improved submissions, and 5 points for incomplete submissions or submissions that need substantial improvement. Teams with complete and perfect submission may be given 5 bonus points for considered further for being the best submission amongst all submissions in the lab section. Each team member's individual grade will be adjusted based on their contribution, i.e., each student will receive the team's grade if they contributed to the activity, 0 otherwise.
Reflection
RE1: Career Goals Summary (Individual, HLTH480 only)
The Career Goals Summary serves as an overview of your career space and introduces who you are, what is important to you, and where you hope to go in your career journey. This blog post is an opportunity to create a professional online presence that highlights your values, experiences, interests, and career aspirations in a way that is meaningful and engaging.
The summary should provide a concise overview of who you are and help readers understand your career interests and aspirations. Think of it as a professional introduction that could be shared with classmates, instructors, mentors, or potential employers. The written content and visual elements should work together to tell your story and communicate what matters most to you.
Grading Scheme: Each home page will be graded on its design elements and use of visuals, clarity of writing. The relevance and meaning of the values, goals and experiences will also be assessed using a rubric.
RE2: Project Reflection (Individual, HLTH480 only)
Each student will complete a multi-part reflection on the community engagement sessions and your experience of applying the social innovation process to address challenges in accessibility and public health. Your reflection should address the development of skills in critical thinking, an innovation mindset, public health communication, collaboration, and leadership that are important for future careers. Your reflection should describe the development in your understanding of the health problem, how you and your group incorporated feedback from stakeholders or the teaching team, and how you evolved your solution to the final version that was presented on demo day. Include examples of artifacts from your group's work on the health innovation challenge that also show the development of your innovation. Artifacts might include: photos of brainstorming on the whiteboards, photos of sticky notes from the ideation workshop, the outline of the problem space and solution, the final deliverable, and photos of you or your team communicating your deliverable during the demo (permission must be granted from all team members to include a team photo).
Grading Scheme: Reflections on the Health Innovation Challenge Reflection will be shared using a rubric and is worth 10% of the final grade.
TC1, TC2: Technical Consultation (Individual, CS497/CS698/MTHEL498 only)
In this activity, CS/Math/Eng students will act as a technical consultant by arranging two consultation meetings with another team ("client team") to understand their target problem and provide teachnical advice and suggestions. Students will provide a summary of the consultation meeting and reflection on the consultation process and experience in the team notebook.
Grading Scheme: This is an individual activity, graded out of 20 based on a rubric, 5 points for the summary, 10 points for the reflection and 5 points based on client evaluation.
Project Output
PO1: Demo Day Presentation
The final presentation will be a poster+demo presentation. The poster must be smaller than 5 feet by 4 feet, and must include a title and team name, and sections that describe the entire design process you went through to create your solution / protoype. Include a lot of screenshots/photos in the poster, and make sure that the text is readable even for people who are standing slightly far away. Leverage the poster to help you give a compelling presentation. The presentation should be 15 minutes long, describing the following:
Introduce Your Problem (suggested duration: 3 mins). What problem is your solution / prototype trying to solve?
Describe Your Process (suggested duration: 2 mins). What was your approach to finding out about the problem and about your target users? What did you find out? How many iterations of design did you go through? What are the features of the prototype (if any)? What design decisions did you have to make?
Describe Your Solution / Prototype (suggested duration: 4 mins). What is your AI and non-AI solution? How do they compare? Are there ways to integrate them into a single, cohesive solution? Why or why not? Show a live demo, if any.
Name 3 Surprises (suggested duration: 2 minutes). What are 3 most surprising things you learned during the design process? These can be your assumptions about the users, the problem, or the design that ended up being false.
Your Hope for the Future (suggested duration: 3 minute). Do you think your solution / prototype solves the problem? Would your solution / prototype work in the real world? Why or why not? What is your business model is you were to actually deploy the technology?
Grading Scheme: The presentation is graded out of 50, 10 for attending other teams' presentations (providing feedback and participating in discussions), 20 for the quality of the poster (visual design, readability, content), 20 for the presentation based on a rubric, taking into account feedback provided by students and/or the instructor. Different from the rest of the deliverables, the demo day presentation is not graded by your theme's TA, but by a random TA or the instructor. There will be guest judges (e.g., other professors, GreenHouse) attending your final presentation, and bonus marks will be given to the team with the best presentation/poster, as voted by the guest judges and other students. Each team member's individual grade will be adjusted based on their contribution, i.e., each student will receive the team's grade if they contributed to the activity, 0 otherwise.
PO2: Solution / Prototype
All the work over the term cumulates to two solutions, one AI and one non-AI. The solution / prototype should contain features that are effective at addressing the problem at hand.
Grading Scheme: The final prototype is graded out of 12 based on a rubric. Different from the rest of the deliverables, the solution / prototype is not graded by your theme's TA, but by a random TA. Each team member's individual grade will be adjusted based on their contribution, i.e., each student will receive the team's grade if they contributed to the activity, 0 otherwise.
PO3: Problem Analysis & Design Evolution Blog Post
Create a blog post that documents your target problem and design process. This is simply a polished version of the team notebook, where you have addressed all the feedback from the TAs / instructors. The blog post should be self-contained and of an appropriate length, leveraging carefully chosen visuals (e.g., images of the artifacts from your design activities), and describing the following:
(1) The Problem
- Describe what specific problems you focused on for your project. What was your motivation for choosing this problem?
(2) Stakeholders
- Describe the direct and indirect stakeholders associated with your target problem.
(3) Contextual Inquiry
- Describe the methods you used to find out more about the problem through interviews, observations and/or literature review. Name 3-5 interesting new insights that you derived from the contextual inquiry.
(4) Initial design ideas
- Discuss how you came up with the initial set of solution ideas, and what specific information from the contextual inquiry you used in your initial design.
- Compare and contrast the AI vs non-AI solution, and reflect on each of their strengths and weaknesses
- Include design artifacts (e.g., sketches, diagrams).
(5) Design Iteration
- Describe how your solution designs evolved over the term. Include screenshots of your evolving design.
(6) Evaluation and Testing
- Describe the results of peer evaluation and the feedback you obtained from peers as well as from organization representatives during demo day.
- Report on design changes that were made based on these evaluation findings.
(7) Reflection
- Reflect on design process you went through and to include you final thoughts on the project, e.g., do you think your solution / prototype has sufficiently addressed the problems you set out to solve at the beginning of the term? What would you do differently if you could re-do this project again?
Grading Scheme: The blog post is graded out of 16 based on a rubric. Different from the rest of the deliverables, the blog post is not graded by your theme's TA, but by a random TA. Each team member's individual grade will be adjusted based on their contribution, i.e., each student will receive the team's grade if they contributed to the activity, 0 otherwise.
Research Report
RR1, RR2: AI Transformation Methodologies (Individaul, CS698 only)
The "AI Transformation Methodologies" report is an individual assignment, where students produce a 2-page draft report (RR1) and a 6-page final report (RR2) with 4 sections:
(1) a literature review on existing frameworks for digital transformation and AI adoption,
(2) an integration plan that describes how the AI prototype (developed by your team) can be piloted, deployed and evaluated within specific healthcare settings
(3) a proposal of a novel process and/or instrument for AI transformation work (e.g., change management procedures, responsible AI tools),
(4) a description of a potential research study that can be conducted within healthcare environments to test your proposed AI transformation processes and instruments.
Grading Scheme: The research draft will be graded out of 1 based on completion. The final research proposal is graded out of 16 based on a rubric.