Explicit capstone instruction
A capstone defense should answer: What problem? What model? What prediction? What evidence? What changed? What remains uncertain?
The goal is not to claim perfection; it is to show disciplined modeling and iteration.
A final recommendation should be tied directly to criteria and constraints, with remaining limitations named.
Vocabulary: defense; iteration; tradeoff; evidence; limitation.
Worked example
A design can be recommended even with an 8% model error if it meets constraints, performs consistently, and the residual is understood well enough for the decision context.
Guided question
Write a one-paragraph defense for a design that improved one criterion but worsened another.
Independent work
- Submit problem/system definition.
- Submit predictive model and uncertainty.
- Submit test evidence and revision.
- Write final recommendation and next iteration.
Spiral retrieval bridge
- Choose one mechanics model that could support a capstone.
- Choose one waves/circuits/fluids model that could support a capstone.
- From Week 33: distinguish criteria from constraints.
- From Week 34: distinguish measurement from inference.
Misconception check
An engineering defense is not a sales pitch; unresolved evidence and limits belong in it.
Formative check
What makes a capstone conclusion credible?
Reveal response
Traceable evidence, justified modeling, explicit tradeoffs, and honest limitations.
Mentor evidence conference
Ask Archaemenes to challenge system boundaries, predictions, uncertainty, and whether revisions follow the evidence.
Teacher guidance
Foundation: Use a defense outline.
Core: Integrate model/test/revision evidence.
Extended: Evaluate whether another iteration is worth its cost.