Basic Information
- Course Code: ENT 606
- Course Name: Building a Proof of Concept
- Course Offered In: 2023-2024
- Semester Season: Autumn
- Instructors: Prof Kums and Prof Sankalp
- Prerequisites: None
- Difficulty (1 being easy and 5 being tough): 3
Course Content
The initial 1-2 lectures were engaging. We were shown videos showcasing various programs run by IDC and the different projects designed by students, such as a bicycle made from bamboo and a product design that received a design patent. Each year, the course has a theme; for us, it was AI and prompt engineering.
In the first week, we had a drawing assignment. The instructor informed us that all subsequent projects would be group-based, and we needed to form groups of 4-5 members before the second class. Over the next two weeks, Professor Kums gave lectures on design thinking, which were quite abstract and challenging to remember.
Professor Sankalp took a class where he discussed a case study of his students developing a remote telemedicine system. He emphasized the importance of considering all stakeholders in product design, not just the customer and user.
There was a lab session where we were instructed to bring stationery items. In class, we were tasked with designing a product within three hours using the stationery items we brought and additional materials provided in the lab. Some groups made craft products, while others created games. In the following lecture, we presented what we built and explained how we used AI tools for brainstorming.
For the mid-semester assignment, we had to submit personal journals and a PowerPoint presentation. We were required to identify a problem and develop a solution using ChatGPT and other AI tools, including the prompts we used in the presentation. A template for the PowerPoint was provided, and we had to present our work to the class.
After the mid-semester, we were tasked with brainstorming a very challenging problem and developing a solution using ChatGPT and other AI tools like Whimsical. This part of the course proved difficult. The professor had high expectations for extraordinary ideas and rejected many student proposals. Consequently, many teams ended up working on vague ideas. Some started working on Time Machine or Invisibility suits or something. Whatever we select we had to show a prototype of our idea in the end semester exam. And the final evaluation was done by 2-3 external evaluators who were expecting a practical and realistic problem for which there is a need in the market.
Because of this mismatch a lot of students got less marks in the end semester exams and hence the grading was not as chill as 2023.
Feedback on Lectures
Lectures were easy and simple to understand. Sometime it felt like there was not much to learn from the lectures as they were too simplistic and there is almost no theory or information that has to be memorised. There were some hands on session on Whimsical which was good. We were allowed to use POC lab which is a plus but not a lot of students actually used it until the end semester presentation came near.
Feedback on Evaluations
Attendance - 10%
Journal (Individual Digital)- 15%
Gate I - 25% (Team PPTs)
Gate II - 25 % (progress presentation: PoC Prototype, Team PPTs, Movie)
Final Exam - 25% (10% Viva Voce individual & 15% Team Final PoC prototype, PPTs, Movie)
The evaluation before the mid-semester was moderate. For the mid-semester exams, we had to upload a PowerPoint presentation detailing what we had learned from the course so far, what our team had accomplished, and our individual contributions to the team.
However, the end-semester evaluation was stricter due to the presence of external evaluators who were expecting students to work on realistic and feasible problem statements. Many teams were slacking off, and also the professor had high expectations, wanting students to work on futuristic ideas that could change the world. This led to the rejection of many realistic student proposals, causing some teams to work on vague concepts like Time Machines or Invisibility Suits.
For the end-semester exam, we had to present a prototype of our chosen idea. The final evaluation was conducted by 2-3 external evaluators who expected practical and realistic projects addressing market needs.
Because of this mismatch a lot of students got less marks in the end semester exams and hence the grading was not as chill as 2023. We also had to submit personal journal for the end semester exam as well covering our individual contribution and team work after mid-semester exams.
Study Material and Resources
None required. Prof will share ppt templates, PDFs. IDC YouTube channel can be referred for playlists on design thinking. According to the theme, learn the topic from online resources. No book is required as such. Improve your Canva or PPT creation skills probably by using templates or using other AI PPT creation tools as this will help a lot.
Follow-up Courses
ENT 602 or other ENT Lab courses
Final Takeaway
This course is chill and easy, especially if you are enthusiastic about starting a startup. Typically, only 1-2 people in your group will do most of the work. While you won’t learn much theory or many concepts, putting in hard work can lead to significant learning and potentially building something useful, such as a Proof of Concept (POC) or Minimum Viable Product (MVP), that can be developed further.
You can always learn the theoretical aspects later. Many students choose this course because of its relaxed nature, but don’t get discouraged if you can’t find others who are not as enthusiastic about startups as you. If you put this time to good use then you can learn skills that will help you for a long time.