Tag Archives: programs

HOW DO INTERIOR DESIGN PROGRAMS TYPICALLY ASSESS AND EVALUATE CAPSTONE PROJECTS

Leave a reply

Interior design capstone projects are usually the culminating experience for students near the end of their program, acting as a way for students to demonstrate their comprehension and integration of everything they have learned. These large-scale projects are intended to simulate a real-world design process and commission. Given their importance in showcasing a student’s abilities, interior design programs put a significant amount of focus on thoroughly assessing and providing feedback on capstone projects.

Assessment of capstone projects typically involves both formative and summative evaluations. Formatively, students receive ongoing feedback throughout the entirety of the capstone project process from their design instructor and occasionally other faculty members or design professionals. Instructors will check in on progress, provide guidance to help address any issues, and ensure students are on the right track. This formative feedback helps shape and improve the project as it comes together.

Summative assessment then occurs upon project completion. This usually involves a formal presentation and portfolio of the completed work where students demonstrate their full solution and design development process. Faculty evaluators assess based on pre-determined rubrics and criteria. Common areas that rubrics cover include demonstration of programming and code compliance, appropriate design concept and theming, selection and specification of materials and finishes, clear communication of ideas through drawings/models/renderings, and organization and professionalism of the presentation.

Additional criteria faculty may consider include the level of research conducted, appropriate application of design theory and principles, creative and innovative thinking, technical skills shown through drawings/plans, accuracy and feasibility of specifications, comprehension of building codes and ADA/universal design standards, demonstration of sustainability concepts, budget management and how the project meets the needs of the target user group. Strengths and weakness are analyzed and noted.

Evaluators often provide written feedback for students and assign a letter grade or pass/fail for the project. Sometimes a panel of multiple faculty members, as well as potentially industry professionals, will collectively assess the capstone presentations. Students may be called on to verbally defend design decisions during the presentation question period as well.

The capstone experience is meant to holistically demonstrate the technical, practical and creative skills interior designers need. Programs aim to simulate real consultancy work for clients. Assessment emphasizes how well the student operated as an independent designer would to take a project from initial programming through to final design solutions while addressing all relevant constraints. Feedback and evaluation focus on professionalism, attention to detail, competence in key areas as well as the overall effectiveness and polish of the final presentation package.

Recording rubrics, grading criteria and individual written feedback allows programs to consistently measure skills and knowledge demonstrated by each student completing a capstone project. It also provides opportunities for growth – students can learn from both strengths and weaknesses highlighted. Aggregate program assessment data from capstone evaluations further helps faculty determine if broader curriculum or pedagogical adjustments may be beneficial. The thorough and multifaceted assessment of interior design capstone projects acts as an important culminating evaluation of student learning and competency prior to graduation.

Interior design capstone projects are intended to simulate real-world design processes and commissions. Assessment involves formative feedback throughout as well as summative evaluation of the final presentation based on predetermined rubrics. Areas covered include programming, concept/theming, materials/finishes, clear communication, research conducted, design principles applied, creative/innovative thinking, technical skills, specifications/feasibility, codes/standards, sustainability, budgeting, meeting user needs and overall professionalism. Multiple evaluators provide written feedback and assign grades/ratings to gauge student competency in key designer skills upon completing their studies.

WHAT ARE SOME POTENTIAL CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING UNIVERSAL BASIC INCOME AND JOBS GUARANTEE PROGRAMS

Leave a reply

One major challenge is the very high cost of implementing either of these programs nationwide. Providing a basic income that allows people to live above the poverty line could cost trillions of dollars per year. For example, one study estimated that a universal basic income of $12,000 per adult in the U.S. would cost around $3 trillion annually. Implementing a jobs guarantee with living wages could also cost over $500 billion per year. Finding sufficient public funding on this scale would be extremely difficult and require massive tax increases.

Ballooning government spending on either program could strain public finances and substantially increase budget deficits if tax revenue does not increase significantly as well. Very large increases in taxes would be difficult politically and could have unintended economic consequences by reducing private consumption, business investment, and economic growth. Simply printing money to fund the programs would also risk high inflation by drastically increasing the money supply.

Means testing, residual benefit cliffs, or limiting the programs’ eligibility could help control costs but add complexity and potentially undermine the goals of universal coverage and providing an unconditional safety net. If benefits are too low, both programs may still leave many below the poverty line and fail to meaningfully improve economic security. But if benefits are too high, costs could rapidly escalate further. Striking the right balance with benefits would be very challenging.

There are also concerns that a universal basic income could reduce incentives for people to work, seek higher education, start businesses, or actively engage in the jobs market. While work requirements could be imposed for the jobs guarantee program, monitoring compliance and ensuring there are enough suitable jobs available would be difficult to implement effectively at a large national scale. Both programs could distort individual choices and labor market behaviors in ways that unintentionally undermine productivity, innovation, or longer-term economic growth.

Ensuring the programs do not drastically increase dependency on government support or cause “welfare traps” that discourage leaving public assistance is another challenge. While basic income supporters argue it increases individual autonomy and freedom, others argue it could undermine personal responsibility and self-sufficiency over time on a society-wide level. Effectively addressing these concerns through alternative policy designs would be complex task with many trade-offs to consider.

Administering either program in a sufficiently transparent, equitable manner nationwide would also require establishing an immense new bureaucracy and expanding the existing administrative state substantially. Determining eligibility criteria, tracking payments, monitoring job participation rates, preventing errors and fraud, and ensuring compliance could overwhelm existing agencies. Adapting payments over time based on evolving economic conditions would add yet more administrative complexity.

Geographic cost of living differences across states and regions would need to be taken into account for benefit levels to have similar purchasing power nationally as well. But large variances in payments between jurisdictions could face political opposition or seem unfair. Balancing equity concerns with local cost drivers would be very difficult at a national scale.

While universal basic income and jobs guarantee programs aim to tackle important social goals, implementing either one nationwide in the United States faces tremendous logistical, administrative, and fiscal challenges given the enormous population size and costs involved. Striking the right policy design with appropriate safeguards and controls to outweigh these challenges would require overcoming substantial hurdles. Success would depend on careful study and piloting of creative alternatives to scaling up versions of these ideas within existing public finance constraints. But the unprecedented nature of such large programs also means uncertainty about potential unintended consequences that could undermine their goals if not properly addressed.

WHAT ARE SOME OF THE CURRENT RESEARCH INITIATIVES AND PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

Leave a reply

The University of Washington is a major public research university engaged in many cutting edge research initiatives across its three campuses in Seattle, Tacoma, and Bothell. Some of the most notable current research areas and programs include:

The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) is a global health research center at UW that is leading efforts to accurately measure the world’s most significant health problems and evaluate the strategies used to address them. IHME conducts extensive research to develop better data to answer questions like how long people live and how healthy their lives are. Their work supports decisions and policies that create the greatest health for the greatest number. IHME brings together more than 500 affiliated experts from around the world to develop evidence to help improve population health.

The University of Washington has one of the top brain research institutes in the world – the Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences (I-LABS). Researchers within I-LABS study how people develop cognitive abilities like language, memory, decision-making and more over the entire lifespan from infancy to old age. Their work aims to better understand normal cognitive development and learning as well as disorders like autism, Down syndrome, traumatic brain injuries and dementia. I-LABS brings together neuroscientists, psychologists, computer scientists and more for collaborative, interdisciplinary research to advance knowledge in learning and cognition.

The Department of Computer Science & Engineering at UW is a global leader in artificial intelligence, machine learning, data mining, graphics and visualization, security and privacy, systems and networking. One major initiative is the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence which was founded in 2014 through a $100 million gift from Paul Allen. Researchers there are developing human-level artificial intelligence that can read, learn, reason and answer questions posed by people. Other prominent AI research includes using machine learning techniques to study topics like healthcare, sustainability, education and more.

The Department of Biological Structure houses major research centers like the Center for Sensorimotor Neural Engineering which is advancing rehabilitation for people with neurological disorders through neural prosthetics and neurotechnologies. Their projects include brain-computer interfaces for restoring movement after paralysis, high-resolution imaging of neural circuits, and neural decoding for a ‘mind-reading’ prosthetic hand. Another prominent program is the Brotman Baty Institute for Precision Medicine which aims to transform healthcare through research, clinical applications and education related to precision medicine approaches.

The UW has internationally recognized programs in environmental health sciences researching crucial global challenges like climate change, sustainability and environmental health impacts. For example, the Department of Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences leads interdisciplinary teams investigating relationships between environmental exposures and human disease. Researchers study topics such as the impacts of air pollution, endocrine disrupting chemicals and extreme weather on public health. Other prominent initiatives examine the effects of climate change on health, ecosystems and communities in the Pacific Northwest region and Arctic.

The Department of Chemical Engineering brings together scientists and engineers conducting innovative research with broad applications. Their projects include developing more sustainable and environmentally-friendly technologies for areas like water treatment, solar energy conversion, biomaterials synthesis and more. For instance, researchers are working on improved membrane materials for water purification and desalination as well as new technologies for carbon dioxide capture and conversion from fossil fuel power plants. Another major focal area is custom-designed nanomaterials for applications in energy storage, catalysis and biotechnology.

This gives a broad overview of just some of the impactful research taking place across various departments and institutes through the University of Washington’s three campuses. UW researchers are leveraging cutting edge science, large datasets and collaborative teams to make discoveries and advance solutions related to health, technology, environment, sustainability and many other crucial topics that stand to improve lives worldwide. The scale and quality of research at UW firmly positions the institution as one of the top public universities for advancing scientific progress and innovation.

HOW CAN NURSING CAPSTONE PROJECTS CONTRIBUTE TO EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICES PROGRAMS AND POLICIES IN THE NURSING PROFESSION

Leave a reply

Nursing capstone projects conducted by students in their final year of Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN) or Master of Science in Nursing (MSN) programs have great potential to add to the body of evidence that can inform practices, programs, and policies in the field. As a requirement for graduation, capstone projects allow students the opportunity to explore a topic of their choice related to nursing in significant depth through primary research. The results of these projects, when disseminated properly, can provide real-world data that can advance evidence-based practices in the profession.

There are several ways in which nursing student capstone projects can contribute valuable evidence. First, capstone topics frequently focus on implementing evidence-based interventions or programs on a small scale within the clinical settings where students complete their practicums. For example, a student may evaluate a new patient education approach, staff training protocol, discharge planning process, or care coordination model. If shown to achieve positive outcomes, these pilot programs demonstrated through capstone research could serve as models to be adopted more broadly within an organization or healthcare system. The projects essentially function as a low-risk testing ground for evidence-based innovations before wider implementation.

Secondly, many capstone projects examine patient outcomes related to existing nursing practices, treatments, or models of care. For instance, a student may study the efficacy of a particular treatment regimen for a certain diagnosis, postoperative recovery associated with different surgical approaches, or relationships between nursing interventions and complications. This type of outcomes research generated by capstones adds to the body of evidence informing decisions about clinical guidelines and standards of practice. It also helps identify areas where practices could be improved to achieve better results.

Some nursing students use their capstones as an opportunity to survey clinicians, patients, or other stakeholders to assess things like satisfaction with services, awareness of available resources, barriers to optimal care, and unmet needs. This feedback gathered through capstone research may point to gaps or weaknesses in existing programs that could be addressed through policy changes. It also provides a mechanism to evaluate the impact of previous changes. Results of surveys and needs assessments contribute important evidence to guide decisions about developing or modifying healthcare services, community resources, and support systems.

Capstone projects further assist with developing evidence to support advocacy and address larger systemic issues in healthcare. For example, a student may study disparities in access to services, social determinants of health in a population, impact of regulatory policies, allocation of resources, or gaps between guidelines and real-world practices. Research on this macro level through capstones sheds light on policy-level factors influencing outcomes and identifies areas for systemic improvements through legislative or regulatory action. It gives nursing students an opportunity to assume increased leadership roles as evidence-based advocates for their patients and profession.

As requirements for graduation, nursing capstones are formally evaluated which provides quality assurance that the resulting evidence is valid and methodologically rigorous. Students undergo an extensive process to design sound research proposals that are reviewed and approved by academic advisors with advanced research expertise. Capstones also integrate scientific writing standards to ensure findings are clearly communicated and data interpreted appropriately. The end products are therefore trustworthy contributions that healthcare organizations, clinical leaders, lawmakers, and other stakeholders can safely incorporate into decision making.

Nursing capstone projects represent a considerable untapped resource for generating valuable evidence to advance evidence-based practices, programs and policies in the profession. By giving students hands-on experiences implementing pilot programs, evaluating outcomes, assessing needs, and addressing broader systemic issues, capstones produce real-world data that can be used to guide continuous quality improvement across all levels of the increasingly complex healthcare system. With proper dissemination, the results of these student research projects have great potential to positively impact patient care and strengthen the nursing profession overall.

WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY PROGRAMS FOR PLASTIC PRODUCTS

Leave a reply

Producer responsibility is a policy approach where producers are assigned responsibility for the entire life cycle of a product, especially for the take-back, recycling and final disposal of a product. This approach provides incentives for producers to incorporate environmental considerations into the design of their products. For plastic products, several countries and jurisdictions have implemented producer responsibility laws and programs.

One significant example is the European Union’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive which was instituted in 1994 and updated in 2018. It establishes minimum requirements for plastic packaging waste management and recycling across all EU member states. It requires producers of plastic packaging to contribute financially to waste management systems through fees paid to compliance schemes. Packaging producers must minimize the volume and impact of plastic packaging waste, set up systems to take back packaging waste from consumers free of charge, and meet minimum recycling and recovery rates that will increase over time. The directive has led to substantial increases in plastic waste collected and recycled in EU countries over the past few decades.

In Canada, programs for plastic packaging and printed paper have been implemented under the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment framework since 1993. In Ontario, the industry-led Multi-Material Stewardship Western program requires producers, brand owners and first importers of plastic packaging to register and pay fees that fund Blue Box recycling collection from households. Minimum recycling targets are set by the government which have gradually increased to 70% by 2025. The fees paid by the companies to manage end-of-life products incentivize them to use less material in their packaging designs.

Another notable initiative is Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) laws passed in several US states for plastic bags, packaging and polystyrene food containers (commonly called Styrofoam). For example, in California the Plastic Bag Ban and Plastic food containers law (Senate Bill 270) required stores to provide reusable or compostable checkout bags to customers for a fee as of July 2015. This has significantly reduced single-use plastic bag consumption in California. Stores must provide an at-store dropoff program to recover plastic food containers, plastic bags and plastic films for recycling. Stores also pay annual administration fees to the state agency overseeing the program. Similar EPR laws have passed in Washington, Oregon, Hawaii and Maine among other US states.

Many countries in Asia have also passed producer responsibility regulations for plastic waste such as South Korea’s Act on the Promotion of Saving and Recycling of Resources and China’s Plastic Pollution Prevention and Control of Regulation. In South Korea, producers must meet recycling targets and are required to report on their plastic products placed on the market. They also have to join a recycling fund managed by local authorities to pay for collection and sorting of plastic waste. Under China’s new regulation passed in 2020, producers are responsible for setting up recycling systems and are accountable for abandoned plastic waste on land and in waterways. The regulation also bans certain single-use plastics in major cities.

A few industry-led initiatives complement the mandatory policy approaches. For example, PRO Canada operates voluntary take-back programs for flexible plastic packaging and plastic bags in multiple provinces funded by industrial fees. Operation Clean Sweep, a global program led by the plastics industry, aims to eliminate plastic pellet, flake and powder loss from production, storage and transport facilities to stop this pollution from entering waterways and oceans.

Producer responsibility regulations help shift the burden and costs of plastic waste management upstream to producers rather than downstream to municipalities. By requiring producers to finance the end-of-life management and adopting minimum recycled content standards, it encourages design of plastic products and packaging for recyclability and reuse. These policies have collectively led to increased recovery and recycling of plastic waste globally as part of the transition towards more circular plastics economy. While challenges remain in improving plastics recycling infrastructure and rates, mandating producer responsibility has proven effective in many jurisdictions at reducing plastic pollution and waste. As more countries adopt versions of EPR laws for plastic products, it stands to significantly curb plastic leakage into the environment over the long run.