Week 12 Studio: Final crit — the alert vocabulary as a system
A structured peer crit of near-final drafts of the capstone assessment, testing whether each student's alert vocabulary holds together as a coherent system before it's submitted
10 May 2027
Before the studio#
Bring a near-final draft of your alert vocabulary from The Instrument Cluster You’d Trust — the full list of alerts with their triggers, channels and urgency hierarchy, even if the written defence isn’t finished. A rough table or diagram is fine; a polished document is not the point of today.
In the studio#
Idris pairs students by vehicle type where possible, so each partner brings a genuinely different context to judge against. Each presenter gets five minutes to walk their vocabulary through as a whole system — not alert by alert, but the relationships between them: what shares a channel, what escalates into what, what happens if two alerts fire at once. The partner’s job is to find one place the system doesn’t hold together, and to say so specifically, drawing on any week’s material that applies — an unclear red/amber boundary, a channel that would fail in the stated context, an alert whose false-alarm cost hasn’t been considered. The room then rotates.
Afterwards#
Write down the one change your crit partner’s feedback is prompting before you leave — not a list of everything raised, the single change most worth making with the days remaining before Wednesday’s submission.
The spec
What you bring to the session. Written so a reader can tell whether it has been met without asking you.
- you presented your vocabulary's urgency hierarchy to a partner and can name one gap or inconsistency they found in it
- you gave written feedback on a partner's vocabulary that names a specific failure mode (a false alarm, an overloaded driver, a channel that fails) their design doesn't yet handle
- you can state one concrete change you're making to your own submission as a direct result of today's crit
Teaching team
- Idris Fenn — tutor