Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Quantitative Biology

ISSN 2095-4689

ISSN 2095-4697(Online)

CN 10-1028/TM

Postal Subscription Code 80-971

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Quant Biol    2013, Vol. 1 Issue (1) : 3-8    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40484-013-0004-4
NEWS AND VIEWS
Bridging cross-cultural gaps in scientific exchange through innovative team challenge workshops
Connie M. Lee1(), Siyuan Gong2, Chao Tang2, Wendell A. Lim1
1. Center for Systems & Synthetic Biology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA; 2. Center for Quantitative Biology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
 Download: PDF(376 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Corresponding Author(s): Lee Connie M.,Email:Connie.Lee2@ucsf.edu   
Issue Date: 05 March 2013
 Cite this article:   
Connie M. Lee,Siyuan Gong,Chao Tang, et al. Bridging cross-cultural gaps in scientific exchange through innovative team challenge workshops[J]. Quant Biol, 2013, 1(1): 3-8.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/qb/EN/10.1007/s40484-013-0004-4
https://academic.hep.com.cn/qb/EN/Y2013/V1/I1/3
Fig.1  Opening night of PKU-UCSF Team Challenge Workshop
Fig.1  Opening night of PKU-UCSF Team Challenge Workshop
Fig.2  STRUCTURE OF THE WORKSHOP
Fig.2  STRUCTURE OF THE WORKSHOP
Fig.3  
Fig.3  
Fig.4  Brainstorming and following synthesis.
Fig.4  Brainstorming and following synthesis.
DayArrangement
Day 0Opening reception and poster session. Teams met in person for the first time and did a short brainstorming exercise on the topic “How to improve collaborations between UCSF and PKU”.
Day 1Initial brainstorming by each team on their challenge topic/question. Clustering of ideas. Presentations from each of the 4 teams to all participants; voting from all participants on each team’s ideas; teams develop roadmap and outline their schedules for the next 3 days.
Day 2-3Team breakout sessions; cycles of brainstorming, synthesis and clustering, voting, and project development; team presentations at the end of each day, followed by critique by all participants and project redirection.
Day 4Final group discussions and presentations outlining future roadmap for each topic. Teams submit final 2-page proposal outlining overall vision, providing 2–3 feasible next experimental steps.
Tab.1  Overview of the structure and agenda for the 4.5 day inaugural PKU-UCSF Team Challenge Workshop in Quantitative Biology.
Participant comments from post-workshop survey
“The workshop was absolutely amazing. I think it worked way better than expected…the thing that was most helpful for the Chinese students was to see a research project develop from some vague ideas into a full proposal.”
“More deadlines! …The deadlines forced us to crystallize our ideas into something tangible.”
“I liked the open ended structure and the fact that the participants had a lot of say in the direction of the workshop…”
“As to my favorite part, I think I like all parts of the workshop, the reception, the crazy ideas born in brainstorming, the talk to decide our final topic, and the exciting process to realize it in details…”
“My favorite part is the group searching for papers and group discussions…I think its much more effective than one working alone.”
“I think the topic for each group is very promising and the final presentations were so exciting. The discussions during workshop days were less active than I expected…maybe it's because some people are too shy to express themselves in a foreign language :). We should encourage them.”
“Some of the students were very active while some of them were very shy. The team leaders should pay attention to balance and give a chance to all of them.”
“Dedicate some time to teach students to do presentations. Try teaching the concept of the elevator pitch. Accept only students with moderate or high English skills (students with only very poor English skills do not benefit from the type of workshop).”
Tab.2  A sample of participant comments from an online anonymous survey conducted at the end of the workshop. 83% of the participants responded, providing valuable feedback for future workshops.
Fig.5  Prof. Enge Wang attended the workshop
Fig.5  Prof. Enge Wang attended the workshop
1 Brown, T. (2009) The making of a design thinker. Metropolis, October , 60-62.
2 Bernstein, R. (2011) Drop that pipette: science by design. Cell, 147, 496-497 .
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.10.010 pmid:.Drop that pipette: science by design.22036559
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed