Considerations for capstone design

    • Guides

This table is the first version of a document intended to highlight some of the common considerations across capstones. It is intended to be a brief highlighting of dimensions and issues rather than extensive explanation. Many of the considerations are about balance – considering depth when you have breadth, moderating client assessments etc. Others are reminders to consider alternatives, upsides and downsides of any particular approach. We would be very interested in any feedback on whether this format and/or the content is helpful, or suggestions for additional dimensions.

Scale
Targeted (small or narrow) Comprehensive (big or broad)
Consider:
Relevance, integration, challenge, dissemination and excitement		 Consider:
Structures to allow variation, depth as well as breadth, staged outcomes
Overall focus/foci
Research Industry Open
Consider:
Ethics, cost of supervision, expectations, primary/secondary, meets diverse student needs		 Consider:
External clients, competitions, simulations, go beyond entry level: depth and independence		 Consider:
Scope to manage staffing given variation, can meet program outcomes, trying learning contracts
Organisation
Group Individual Interdisciplinary
Consider:
Using realistic roles, types of collaboration desired, training in management approaches, fallback plans		 Consider:
Limitations in scope, combine with collaborative activities, managing lost students, personal interests		 Consider:
Making it feel real, exploring boundary issues and complex problems, managing diverse views
Delivery
Lectures Classes
Consider:
Keeping focus on process, broadening, inspiration; use guests, networking events; reduce over time, get students to deliver them
 Consider:
Focusing on work in progress, flexibility: scale back or let students run them over time
Work-based Supervision
Consider:
Video-conference catch ups, cohort meetings, network events, employer accountability and assurance of learning		 Consider:
Need for clear structure, provide supervisor guide, group meetings, student space to meet, PG mentors

 

Assessment
Presentations Journals Reports
Consider:
Clarity about content or performance focus, expertise of staff, peer assessment/panels, lots of practice sessions		 Consider:
Detailed guidance, avoid potential for post-hoc ‘creativity’, ensure depth, cross-link with other assessments		 Consider:
Providing templates and examples, training on professional report-writing, individual plus group sections
Performances (any kind) Artefacts Behaviours
Consider:
Using panels, peers, add articulated processes, make it public or within context, link to major events		 Consider:
Have a client in mind, clear criteria, managing storage, making it public, try video/digital models		 Consider:
Combine peer and self review, teach coaching skills, early set up and multiple feedback loops
Self/peer review Client review Papers
Consider:
Clearly connect with learning outcomes, moderate, beware self as counter to peer review, use multiple feedback loops		 Consider:
Panels or moderated assessment, allowing for differing expectations, scope and context, conflict management		 Consider:
Submission for publication, learning through internal peer review processes, writing groups, staged and joint efforts