Previous Lecture Grades 2003 Home Classes Contact

28-30: Student Presentations 2003:

Title	Presenter	Presentation Day	File
1 Analysis of CO2 Scrubbers	Peter Journay-Kaler	Th 12/04/03	PDF
2 Engineering challenges of the J.W. Space Telescope	Josh Szczepanski	“	PDF
3 Exercise equipment in space	Andrea Hanson	“	PDF
4 Analysis of the ICESAT Laser1 Failure	Sara Sheffler	“	N/A copyrighted
5 Low Temperature Microgravity Physics Facility (LTMPF)	Jeff White	“	PDF
6 Space Aquariums	Helen Carson	“	PDF
7 FCQs FCQs FCQs		Th 12/04/03
8 Biosynthetics / Biotech Designs	Jackson Lee	Tu 12/09/03	PDF
9 Acoustic Mitigation of Hardware	Scott Franke	“	PDF
10 Waste Management Technologies	Mike Lewis	“	PPT
11 Dust Detection in Student Dust Collector / LASP	Chelsey Bryant	“	PDF
12 Dust Detection in Student Dust Collector / LASP	Anselm Fernandez	“	PDF
13 Atmosphere Control of a Mars Greenhouse	Colleen Higgins	“	PDF
14 Beer in Space	Blake Benedict	Tu 12/09/03	PDF
15 Inflatable Space Structures	Matt Allgeier	Th 12/11/03	PDF
16 Inflatable Space Structures	Erin Kelly	“
17 Sustainable Plant Growth in Space	Katie Dunn	“	PDF
18 Space Mouse Habitat - Centrifuge	Matthew Vellone	“	PDF
19 Design Considerations for SNOE / LASP	Patrick Meagher	“	PDF
13 X38 Electric Wiring	Christie Sauers	“	PDF
14 Mars or Bust – Mars Habitat Design	Juniper Jairala	Th 12/11/03	PDF

Grading Criteria / Deliverables:

Your presentation (oral, slides) and files (electronic copy in source and PDF, and 1 hardcopy) will be rated as listed below in 7 criteria (0 – bad, 4 best) for a total of 7 * 4 = 28 points (100%). On occasion, over-achievers will be able to score 5 points (stellar).

1. Oral Presentation (4 Points):
Flows well, practiced, speech adds additional information to visual aids, doesn’t just read info, but works with slides for a well organized, practized presentation.

2. Presentation Organization and Quality (4 Points):
well organized (title/name/date, problem statement, rationale/importance/relevance, background, data/state of the art, data analysis /discussion, summary / take-home lesson / lesson learned, rules of thumb), and of acceptable industry-standard quality (no overkill nor PowerPoint expert skills are required !!!). Slides are well explained and well used to support a point.

3. Slide Quality and Graphics / Visual Aids (4 points):
Slides add to the oral presentation (i.e., visual AIDS), by adding graphics rather than just bulletized text that is read. Sufficient font size, well balanced. An image is worth many words

4. Problem Statement and Rationale (4 points):
Problem statement, rationale and importance of research defined and / or justified.

5. Background and State of the Art (4 points):
What has been done in that area in past, what is the state of the art, what are the key problems / technologies / considerations

6. Analysis / “Rules of Thumb” / “Lessons Learned” (4 points):
Analysis of data or technology (analysis, trade, comparison), derived rules of thumb, lessons learned, take home lesson (if nothing else, what should I remember about this topic).

7. References, cited ?, comprehensive ? Literature research / sources ? (4 points)
Reader can find all relevant and cited information based on cited references. Data or images in slides are clearly cited with respect to origin (if copied). References are listed in a typical scientific or engineering format (see journal or thesis standards).

---

Previous Lecture Grades 2003 Home Classes Contact