NSEMO: Rapid Assessment Programme

Community-Based Experimental Learning Projects

NSEMO Scheduling

with 2 comments

Projected Scheduling

Projected Scheduling

Click here to view the complete Gaant Schedule

During the first two weeks, each member of the group will complete their research and compile it into individual sections of the final report. Members will contact the professionals they were assigned to as part of their section, in order to aid and supplement their individual research. On days when the group meets, information and progress will be shared and noted, and plans for the final RDA program will be made. The final report will be completed and sent to Dorit Manson on March 18th.

The final report will include all recommendations put forward by the team regarding the RDA program for North Vancouver. Upon completion of the final report, the team will prepare for the presentations to UBC and NSEMO. The Poster presentation is a requirement from UBC, and will be viewed by faculty and professionals that are available on the day.

After contacting Dorit, we set the date for the NSEMO presentation on Wednesday, April 3rd at 3PM.

 

Written by Vickramjit Singh Poonia

March 8th, 2013 at 4:21 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

2 Responses to 'NSEMO Scheduling'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'NSEMO Scheduling'.

  1. Great Job on the Gantt chart. Very impressive. This will give your team a heads up in trying to stay focused while ahead of the ball game.

    As stated before, try and make sure you hit your deliverables on target. It seems that you have now been organized much better with a great plan moving towards the end product than the first couple of weeks.

    I look forward to joining your group meeting next week.

    Cheers,

    Arman

    aaaaa

    8 Mar 13 at 5:24 pm

  2. Hi All,

    Ditto re Arman’s comments. The plenary discussion yesterday underlined the significance of this work. It’s impressive to see how far you have come to date.

    Stepping back from this detailed work, can you see similarities and differences between the management of this project and the CIVL 201 project? They were both open-ended but my impression is that this one had even more possible solutions than the bridge design. Also, perhaps this one has been harder to scope?

    Keep up this excellent work,
    SN

    nesbit

    12 Mar 13 at 5:56 pm

Leave a Reply

Spam prevention powered by Akismet