Building 2000: Technology Transfer and the Design Process; Pilot Study of Five UK Projects

1991 ◽  
pp. 817-822
Author(s):  
Sue Wolff ◽  
Mike Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Design Process

scholarly journals The Effects of a Co-design Based Invitation Strategy on Participation in a Preventive Health Check Program: A Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trine Thilsing ◽  
Lars Bruun Larsen ◽  
Anders Larrabee Sonderlund ◽  
Signe Skaarup Andreassen ◽  
Jeanette Reffstrup Christensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
At Risk ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Educational Attainment ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Family Income ◽  
Target Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Participation Rates ◽  
Lifestyle Related Diseases

BACKGROUND Primary-care-based preventive programs that aim to reduce morbidity and mortality from lifestyle-related diseases often suffer from low to moderate participation rates. Improving participation rates is essential to clinical effect and cost effectiveness. In 2016-2017 we conducted the first pilot study (TOF pilot1) testing a primary-care-based preventive program (the TOF intervention) comprising systematic identification of individuals at risk of lifestyle-related diseases, and subsequent targeted preventive services offered to the at-risk population. A total of 40.2% of the invited patients consented to take part in the study with the highest participation rates obtained among women and patients with higher income, education, and employment. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a revised invitation strategy targeting men and patients of low educational attainment on overall participation rate and participant demography. METHODS This study was embedded in the second pilot study (initiated in October 2018) testing an adjusted TOF intervention (TOF pilot2). The revised invitation strategy comprised a pre-notification postcard and a new invitation targeting men and patients of low educational attainment. The new invitation was developed in a co-design process involving communication professionals and target group representatives. The study sample consisted of 4633 patients aged 29-59 years and residing in two municipalitites in the Region of Southern Denmark. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to four invitation groups receiving either 1) The original invitation used in TOF pilot1 (Control group), 2) The original invitation and the pre-notification postcard, 3) The new, revised invitation and the pre-notification postcard, or 4) The new invitation only. RESULTS Overall, 2171 (46.9%) patients consented to participate. Compared to receiving the original invitation alone, participation rates increased significantly for those groups who received the new revised invitation alone (p<.001), the new invitation with the pre-notification postcard (p<.001), and the original invitation with the pre-notification postcard (p<.001). Participation across the three intervention groups was increased among women as well as men, patients of high as well as low educational attainment and patients of low as well as higher family income. The largest relative increase in participation was seen among males, patients with low educational attainment, and patients with low family income. No significant increase in participation was detected among unemployed patients and patients of non-Danish origin. CONCLUSIONS The results showed that significant improvements in participation rates can be obtained from pre-notification postcards and invitations that have undergone a co-design process, involving communication professionals and target group representatives. Although firm conclusions can not be made from the present study, the apparent increased effect on participation among men and patients of low socioeconomic status may be relevant in programs that aim to reduce inequality in health. In order to reach the most socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, the invitation strategy should probably be combined with other more individual-oriented recruitment approaches. CLINICALTRIAL Clinical Trial Gov (NCT03913585)

Pilot study describing the design process of an oil sump for a competition vehicle by combining additive manufacturing and carbon fibre layers

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 149-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aitor Cazón ◽  
Jorge G. Prada ◽  
Eric García ◽  
Gorka S. Larraona ◽  
Sergio Ausejo
Keyword(s):  
Additive Manufacturing ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Carbon Fibre ◽  
Design Process

Fast Track

2004 ◽  
pp. 180-195
Author(s):  
Philip Duggan ◽  
Claude Ghaoui ◽  
Mike Simco
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Software Development ◽  
Cross Section ◽  
Design Process ◽  
School Environment ◽  
Fast Track ◽  
Power Structure ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
Fast Tracking

Most studies involving students in designing and developing software involve research teams and other professionals outside of the normal school environment. This pilot study demonstrated that involving students in the design and development of software could take place entirely within the school environment. This methodology was called “fast tracking.” Students could, and did, play demanding and effective roles in the process of software development. Students were responsible for selecting their own roles in the design process and were assertive in selecting the teaching staff they wanted to work with. The students also proved to be adept at selecting a suitable toolkit for implementing the software. The participating students represented a cross section of the entire ability range. A quantitative analysis of “flow” as an indication of the success of the implementation indicated that middle ability students derived the most educational benefit from using software developed under the fast track approach. Relationships between students and teaching staff exhibited changes in the power structure, which were often difficult to redress outside of the pilot study.

A Pilot Study of Engineering Design-Decision Methods in Practice

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Nichols ◽  
Andrew Olewnik
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Engineering Design ◽  
Student Perceptions ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Decision Method ◽  
Decision Methods ◽  
Future Work

Numerous engineering design-decision methods have been developed to assist groups of engineers in making choices within a design problem. However, while there are a variety of methods to choose from, there is no empirical data that exhibits which decision-method is best for specific phases of the design process, or that designers are willing to adopt particular decision methods. Due to this lack of empirical data, industry may not use certain engineering design methods since they do not have the resources or time to investigate which method would work best for them. This work presents the development of a framework to examine various engineering design-decision methods in practice. The framework is used in a pilot study with undergraduate engineering students which compares usage of Pugh’s Controlled Convergence (PuCC) and the Group Hypothetical Equivalent and Inequivalent Method (G-HEIM) to the results of an “informal” method (a group decision that is made without a formalized decision method). Results of the pilot study include documenting the emergence of decision “traps” within each group, assessing student perceptions about using formalized design-decision methods through interviews and surveys (critical to understanding potential barriers to adoption of formal methods), and insight into where formal decision methods are most appropriate within a design process. Finally, a number of changes and additions to the framework and study protocol are identified for future work focused on repeating the study with more participants and potentially in industrial settings.

Perceptions of Prototypes: Pilot Study Comparing Students and Professionals

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlye Lauff ◽  
Daria Kotys-Schwartz ◽  
Mark E. Rentschler
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Design Education ◽  
Mechanical Engineering ◽  
Engineering Students ◽  
Communication Tool ◽  
Fundamental Part ◽  
Engineering Work ◽  
Recommendations For Practice ◽  
Physical Elements

Just as design is a fundamental part of engineering work, prototyping is an essential part of the design process. For many engineering design courses, students must develop a final prototype as part of the course requirements. And in industry, engineers build multiple prototypes when creating a product for market. Although prototyping is core to design education, there is a lack of research on understanding the perceptions and usage of prototypes from both students and professionals. Without understanding students’ perceptions of prototypes, we cannot adequately train them. Likewise, without knowing how professionals use prototypes, we cannot translate these practices back to design education. This paper reports on the pilot study comparing the perceptions of prototypes between mechanical engineering students and professional engineers. The findings indicate that the interpretation of the term “prototype” varies between students and professionals. Specifically, these mechanical engineering students have a more narrow perception and identify prototypes as only having a few key elements, namely for building and testing functionality and feasibility of physical elements in a product. Comparatively, professionals have a broad perception of prototypes. They identify a wider range of attributes, including prototypes as a communication tool, an aid in making decisions, and a way to learn about unknowns throughout the design process. Many instructors in design education are cognizant of the importance of prototyping. However, we believe that students require explicit instruction about key concepts. It is not enough to just tell students to “prototype.” As design educators, we must be aware of the various roles of prototypes, and teach these concepts to students. We provide some immediate recommendations for practice, including a list of ten principles of prototypes to create similar mental models between students.

scholarly journals Students’ Comprehension of Design Collaborations with External Organizations

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 579-588
Author(s):  
Laura Gottlieb ◽  
Yvonne Eriksson
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Word Frequency ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Governmental Agency ◽  
Multiple Stakeholder ◽  
Design Students ◽  
Written Assignments ◽  
Voice Recording

AbstractThis pilot study examines how design students comprehend collaborations with external organizations— the roles and involvement of different actors in a design process. The study looks at two undergraduate courses where a total of 33 design students collaborate with a municipality and governmental agency. Data focuses on the students' terminology in regard to the external organizations and is collected through questionnaires, voice recording, workshops and written assignments. The data analysis is both quantitative and qualitative, focusing on the word frequency and semantics of the terminology. The results show that the students were not used to working closely to external organizations. This is reflected in the prevalent use of the term “client” instead of “collaborative partner”. Not working closely with organizations nor users is reflected in the students’ inabilities to handle the complexities that emerge when working with multiple stakeholder and users. At the end of the paper, suggestions are made of ways to develop students’ comprehension of ways to involve external organizations and users in the design process.

Student System Level Design Activities: An Empirical Pilot Study on Improving Design Outcomes

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Ruder ◽  
Durward K. Sobek
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Causal Relationship ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Statistical Testing ◽  
System Level ◽  
Outcome Quality ◽  
System Level Design ◽  
Laboratory Exercise ◽  
Level Design

Previous studies have indicated that system level design (SLD) has a positive association with the outcome of engineering design projects. However, the causal relationship has not been established. This pilot study will explore the feasibility of implementing a laboratory experiment on design process and attempt to demonstrate a causal relationship between SLD and design outcome quality. Using outcome data from the pilot student laboratory exercise, a comparison between design processes that used SLD activities and those that did not are made using simple statistical testing methods. The results of this comparison support previous indications that SLD has an effect on outcome quality. The difficulties of constraining students performing SLD activities gave rise to an alternative method of analyzing SLD activities and lead us to conclude that our protocol is insufficient to test design process but is suitable for testing the application of a specific tool.

ASSISTING DESIGN IDEAS: PTOOLKIT, A PILOT STUDY

2015 ◽  
Vol 77 (29) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aeni Zuhana Saidin ◽  
Nassiriah Shaari ◽  
Asmidah Alwi
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Data Interpretation ◽  
Persuasion Knowledge ◽  
Evaluation Procedures ◽  
Evaluation Phase ◽  
Actual Evaluation ◽  
Design Ideas

Design for persuasion requires the designer to understand theories, ideas and strategies of persuasion that could change, modify or adapt people’s behaviour.  This situation requires the designer to access appropriate persuasion knowledge by making the design suit to the persuasion intention.  Therefore, a tool called as PToolkit was introduced to assist designer during the design process.  Then, a pilot evaluation was conducted to evaluate PToolkit.  This is to ensure that the actual evaluation phase would run smoothly, as well as having an initial understanding of the ability of PToolkit in influencing the design ideas.  As a result, few evaluation procedures were amended and ways of data interpretation were suggested.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document