First prototype: lab and review: Lab, Review, and Transfer
This is 55AA-011, week 8, session 2. It focuses on "First prototype: lab and review" and turns the weekly plan into discussable, practicable, and reviewable class artifacts.
Learning Objectives
- Explain where "First prototype: lab and review" fits in this course and what core problem it addresses.
- Analyze a case or system related to "First prototype: lab and review" using today's method.
- Connect the session task to the course outcome: Propose clear, bounded, and evaluable project goals.
- Complete the questions, notes, and synthesis required by workshop, exercise, and review.
Prerequisites
- Completion of software engineering and at least one systems or security core course.
- Have read the weekly task: Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review.
- Be able to record assumptions, evidence, risks, and questions to validate in class.
Preparation
- Open the 55AA-011 course repository, readings, and this week's task brief.
- Write two true/false claims or open questions about "First prototype: lab and review" before class.
- Be ready to show questions, lab notes, or project fragments from the previous meeting.
Class Flow
0-8Review previous conclusionsQuickly review the concept framework and unresolved questions for "First prototype: lab and review".
review
Quickly review the concept framework and unresolved questions for "First prototype: lab and review".
When judging "First prototype: lab and review", what fact should be confirmed first?
Expected answer: First confirm the object, boundary, attacker or user capability, observable evidence, and evaluation criteria.
Follow-up: If that fact is not directly observable, what minimal experiment would you design?
Opening
Today's session focuses on "First prototype: lab and review". We will not treat it as an isolated topic. We place it in the course workflow: define the object and boundary, gather evidence, and turn the result into engineering action.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
Open the example, data, or project fragment related to "First prototype: lab and review".
First prototype: lab and review: lecture video
8-18Lab goal and acceptance criteriaDefine today's deliverable, evaluation criteria, and minimum completion line.
setup
Define today's deliverable, evaluation criteria, and minimum completion line.
When judging "First prototype: lab and review", what fact should be confirmed first?
Expected answer: First confirm the object, boundary, attacker or user capability, observable evidence, and evaluation criteria.
Follow-up: If that fact is not directly observable, what minimal experiment would you design?
Review
Return to the previous discussion. State one important conclusion in a sentence, then state one remaining uncertainty. We will carry those uncertainties into today's analysis.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
For the weekly task "Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review.", write the object, boundary, evidence, risk, and next action.
First prototype: lab and review: lecture video
18-35Instructor demoDemonstrate how to turn the method into reproducible steps or a project fragment.
demo
Demonstrate how to turn the method into reproducible steps or a project fragment.
Where is the weekly task "Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review." most likely to fail?
Expected answer: Common failures include unclear goals, insufficient evidence, unreproducible environment, and conclusions without process.
Follow-up: What checklist item would reveal this failure early?
Guided question
Here is the first judgment question: if we know only the conclusion but not the environment, inputs, or evidence, can that conclusion guide engineering decisions? Answer yes or no first, then name your assumptions.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
Open the example, data, or project fragment related to "First prototype: lab and review".
First prototype: lab and review: lecture video
35-58Group labStudents execute the weekly task, record evidence, and mark failure points.
lab
Students execute the weekly task, record evidence, and mark failure points.
Where is the weekly task "Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review." most likely to fail?
Expected answer: Common failures include unclear goals, insufficient evidence, unreproducible environment, and conclusions without process.
Follow-up: What checklist item would reveal this failure early?
Explanation
For "First prototype: lab and review", the key is not memorizing definitions but following an analysis order: define the object, list boundaries, state who can do what, find observable evidence, and turn the conclusion into a task or test.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
For the weekly task "Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review.", write the object, boundary, evidence, risk, and next action.
First prototype: lab and review: demo and review video
58-70Peer reviewExchange results and check reproducibility, explanation quality, and missed risks.
review
Exchange results and check reproducibility, explanation quality, and missed risks.
What makes a lab result reviewable by someone else?
Expected answer: It needs environment, commands, inputs, outputs, failure conditions, screenshots or logs, and explanations for anomalous results.
Follow-up: How would you write this requirement into homework or project acceptance criteria?
Practice transition
Now apply that order to the weekly task: Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review. Do not write only the final answer; preserve how you ruled out alternatives.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
Open the example, data, or project fragment related to "First prototype: lab and review".
First prototype: lab and review: demo and review video
70-80In-class revisionRevise notes, code, configuration, models, or report structure based on review feedback.
fix
Revise notes, code, configuration, models, or report structure based on review feedback.
What makes a lab result reviewable by someone else?
Expected answer: It needs environment, commands, inputs, outputs, failure conditions, screenshots or logs, and explanations for anomalous results.
Follow-up: How would you write this requirement into homework or project acceptance criteria?
Summary
Today's deliverable is not polished prose. It is a set of reviewable judgments. After class, complete the required evidence, commands, screenshots, logs, or review notes.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
For the weekly task "Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review.", write the object, boundary, evidence, risk, and next action.
First prototype: lab and review: demo and review video
80-87Selected sharingSelect two or three groups to explain findings, tradeoffs, and next steps.
share
Select two or three groups to explain findings, tradeoffs, and next steps.
What makes a lab result reviewable by someone else?
Expected answer: It needs environment, commands, inputs, outputs, failure conditions, screenshots or logs, and explanations for anomalous results.
Follow-up: How would you write this requirement into homework or project acceptance criteria?
Summary
Today's deliverable is not polished prose. It is a set of reviewable judgments. After class, complete the required evidence, commands, screenshots, logs, or review notes.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
Open the example, data, or project fragment related to "First prototype: lab and review".
First prototype: lab and review: demo and review video
87-90Submission checkConfirm homework, naming conventions, evidence artifacts, and deadline.
summary
Confirm homework, naming conventions, evidence artifacts, and deadline.
What makes a lab result reviewable by someone else?
Expected answer: It needs environment, commands, inputs, outputs, failure conditions, screenshots or logs, and explanations for anomalous results.
Follow-up: How would you write this requirement into homework or project acceptance criteria?
Summary
Today's deliverable is not polished prose. It is a set of reviewable judgments. After class, complete the required evidence, commands, screenshots, logs, or review notes.
First prototype: lab and review class demo
For the weekly task "Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review.", write the object, boundary, evidence, risk, and next action.
First prototype: lab and review: demo and review video
Homework
Deliver a minimum runnable version and test plan. Complete the paired lab, record issues, and explain design tradeoffs in class review. Submit lab notes, review feedback, and the next improvement plan.