2024 112 SRP Guidelines

pdf

School

McGill University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

BIOCHEMIST

Subject

Biology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by MasterEnergy11759

1 BIOL112 - STUDENT RESEARCH PROJECTS (SRP) Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 ACADEMIC INTEGRITY and AI .............................................................................................................................. 3 SRP WEEKLY TIME FRAME AND GRADING SCHEME ....................................................................................... 4 LAB 6 TRIO PRE-PROPOSAL CONSULTATION AND BIOSAFETY ............................................................... 5 LAB 7 TRIO PROPOSAL .................................................................................................................................... 6 LAB 9 TRIO DATA COLLECTION ...................................................................................................................... 9 LAB 10 TRIO POST-EXPERIMENTAL TA CONSULTATION .......................................................................... 10 LAB 12 TRIO PRESENTATION ......................................................................................................................... 11

2 INTRODUCTION Research is a major part of any university, and in addition to teaching most faculty also have an active research program in their field of study. The first-hand experience you gain from designing and conducting your own research project is invaluable. McGill University has a strong reputation in undergraduate research, and now you will get a chance to try research in first year. In lab 1, you will start thinking about what topic(s) you have some interest investigating about. For your research project, you will be working in groups of three. You will write a project proposal together and conduct the same experiment together in the lab room. Working as a team requires good communication and discussion between project partners, so you are in agreement about what to do and are on the same page about your common project. When conducting any experiment, one should apply the “prudent avoidance principle”. This will be discussed every lab week as every experiment presents risks. You and your group of three will be conducting the same, single experiment in the lab environment during lab week #9 for 2 hrs only. Whatever you and your project partners decide to investigate together, your experiment will be validated for its rationale, feasibility (in time, spaces and the resources available), logistics, and safety. There is an orderly, sequential process of TA- validated submissions or consultations, you must follow, so you can proceed to the next step, without skipping anything crucial. Your TA must validate, not only that you have a valid experimental question, but will carry out your experiment safely in the lab space. Some of the material and samples as used in the weekly lab experiments can be provided by the course, but you can also provide some items that will have to be validated by your TA. Look around you, many commonly found & used items can be useful for your experimental set-up. Grocery stores, drug stores, hardware stores, nurseries, pet shops, etc. are filled with items that can be used for your experiment. SO MANY ASPECTS OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY ARE SUBJECT TO STUDY !

3 ACADEMIC INTEGRITY As per university regulations, evidence of created, modified or copied data or text without citing the proper source(s), must be transferred to Students Affairs for investigation. Fairness to all students and to those who depend on the validity of a McGill degree depends on honest evaluation of student comprehension and experience of the course material. Therefore, we will make every attempt to assure that each student is evaluated on their own work and only that work. The Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures define honesty in academic work and the penalties for those found to have cheated. McGill University values academic integrity. Therefore, all students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating, plagiarism and other academic offences under the Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures. Please see www.mcgill.ca/integrity for more information. McGill University’s policy regarding the use of Generative AI Students are encouraged to make use of technology, including generative artificial intelligence tools, to contribute to their understanding of course materials. Students are not encouraged, unless otherwise stated, to make use of artificial intelligence tools, including generative AI, to help produce assignments. We believe that working through the assignments on your own will help you gain a better understanding of the course material and will better prepare you not only for the other course examinations, but also for the subsequent CS courses, internships, research opportunities, and jobs. However, students are ultimately accountable for the work they submit. Any content produced by an artificial intelligence tool must be cited appropriately. Many organizations that publish standard citation formats are now providing information on citing generative AI (e.g., MLA: https://style.mla.org/citing-generative-ai/ ).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 WEEKLY TIME AND GRADING SCHEME FOR TRIO SRP (15%) To be completed in the sequential order as below, as your TA needs to approve each aspect of your SRP. Your TA will grade all aspects based on the rubrics provided in this document. Ensure you closely look at them. *All the components are graded individually, except the trio brainstorm and proposal. Guidelines to effectively search the literature from the McGill Libraries and online sources to find the information you will need to elaborate your trio SRP are covered in one of the early lectures. Week Weekly tasks and Assignment Tool submissions Grade After lab 1 Individual brainstorm about SRP (on completion) 1.0 % During lab 5 *Trio brainstorm about SRP. One submission per trio (on completion) 1.0 % Lab 6 Trio pre-proposal TA consultation - conducted in trios, but graded individually. No graded written submission required. . 2.0% Biosafety - conducted in trios, but graded individually. No written submission required. 1.0% Lab 7 * Trio SRP proposal with detailed experimental design, equipment and organism lists, biosafety and assigned tasks, (total 1000 words maximum, not including bibliography and organism/supply list). One submission per trio. 2.0 % Lab 8 Trio SRP proposal handed-back with TA comments _ Lab 9 Trio SRP data collection. Experiments to be done as one team, not individually. 2.0 % Lab 10 Post-experiment student TA consultation. - conducted in trios, but graded individually. No graded written submission required. 2.0 % Lab 12 SRP presentation slides due before the lab. One submission per trio. 2.0 % Over the whole Trio SRP Capacity to trouble-shoot and pro-activeness. 1.0 % Over the whole Trio SRP Constance in communicating with partners and TA. 1.0 % TOTAL 15.0 %

5 LAB 6 TRIO SRP PRE-PROPOSAL CONSULTATION (2%) & BIOSAFETY (1%) Consult done as a trio but graded individually Student names: % Excellent (100%) Good (75%) Average (50%) Weak (25%) Unsatisfactory (0%) 0.5 Background, questions, hypothesis, and predictions Student has clearly done appropriate background research, and has a well- defined hypothesis and predictions supported by their background research. Student has a hypothesis and predictions, but it does not correspond with the background research they describe. Student has a hypothesis and predictions but has not done background research to support it. Student has a project idea but has not done any background research. They do not have a hypothesis or predictions. Student is completely unprepared: they do not have a project idea, hypothesis, or predictions. 1.0 Treatments, controls, replication, randomization Student has a realistic, well thought out and designed experiment with appropriate controls. They can answer questions about the design well Student has put thought into the design and controls, but it is not realistic. They can answer some questions about it. Student has a general design, but has not thought about the logistics, timescale, or controls. They cannot answer questions about it well. Student has put minimal thought into experimental design, the logistics, timescale , and controls. They cannot answer questions about it. Student has put no thought into experimental design. 0.5 Proposed time frame Excellent evaluation of time required Minor correction to evaluation of time required Several minor corrections to evaluation of time required Several major corrections to evaluation of time required Entirely unrealistic 1.0 Biosafety Hazards identified & mana ged adequately Some but not all biosafety concerns are identified/addressed Has no comprehension of possible hazards. CAREFUL! 3.0 TOTAL Are the project tasks well balanced between all project partner(s)? _ TA COMMENTS:

6 LAB 7 HOW TO WRITE A PROJECT PROPOSAL A proposal involves an evaluation and synthesis of scientific studies/original research. It is a written argument in which ask a new research question based on the information you gathered from your research review. Your goal is to convince the reader (your TA) that the research question you propose can be done with the proposed methods and also why the research should be done at all (argue how your results may yield insight to some real-world issue). Scientific writing style guidelines The most important function of scientific writing is to provide unambiguous communication of scientific discoveries. Your meaning should always be conveyed with precise meaning in the most concise way possible. If there are two ways to express the same concept, always choose the shorter one. Your proposal should contain the sections described in depth below. The section names are bolded but not underlined. Do not use direct quotations, footnotes, or endnotes in any of these sections. 1. Title A title should indicate the intent of the investigation, or it may inform the reader about the methods. Titles should outline the scope of your proposal. You can begin by composing a list of key words from your study and putting them into a sentence. You can then rephrase and add/delete words as necessary. 2. Background information This should include: (i) background on the scientific question you wish to address; (ii) why it is important; (iii) information on the study species; (iv) and why it was chosen to answer this question. This information should lead the reader to the logical basis of your question and hypothesis. The background information should start broadly and get more specific by the end. 3. Question, hypothesis, and predictions Your hypothesis should be clear and concise, with supporting predictions. Hypothesis and predictions should be testable and falsifiable. A graph can be included here with your predicted results. 4. Methodology This should be an overview of exactly what you intend on doing, and the reader should be able to recreate the experiment based on this description. This should include explanations of the treatments, control, replication, and randomization (depending on the project). Write the methods, materials, and experimental design out in as paragraphs in a sequential order in which they are to be done. Do not list methods and materials in point-form. Explain why a particular method or aspect of a method was chosen when it may appear arbitrary to the reader (e.g. treatment of 18 instead of 20 degrees). Use subheadings to introduce methods by topic (e.g. Study organism and sampling scheme, data analysis, etc). Include all essential factors producing your results – all controls, variables, and treatments. You should also include some ideas of how the data will be collected and interpreted (statistical methods i.e. average, standard error, if you can).

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 Methods sections should be written in the future tense as you will not have yet completed the experiment. There is no need to state the rationale for each method as this should be evident by your introduction. Flowcharts or drawings/diagrams of the experimental design might be helpful for you to explain and the reader to understand the methodology that you intend to do. 5. Equipment List (i.e. materials) This is an extension of the methodology with an explicit list of the materials you will use for your experiment, including the organisms, consumables, glass/plasticware and equipment you will need. 6. Timeline A realistic overview of how long you expect the experiment to last (ex. much less than 2 hrs). Timepoints for data analyses (ex. each minute, each 15 minutes, etc.). 7. Biosafety Identify and determine ways to manage hazards adequately. 8. References References to academic articles will be cited in the text and following the proposal with a references/bibliography page. References will comply with APA 7 formatting. Scientific papers do not use quotations or footnotes to cite references. Citations in the text always include the author(s) and the year such as “-Some sentence here- (Jones, 1998)”, or “According to Jones (1998), -some sentence here-“. In the case of two authors, use (Jones & Johns, 1998) or (Jones et al. 1998) to cite three or more authors. The citations in the text should allow the reader to understand where the information in a sentence is coming from. At least five academic articles are required for full marks. Further information can be found here: https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/apa_style/apa_formatting_and_style_guide/general_ format.html . It is highly suggested that you use a reference manager to format your citations, such as Mendeley ( https://www.mendeley.com/download-reference-manager/ ), EndNote, ( https://libraryguides.mcgill.ca/citation ), Zotero ( https://www.zotero.org ), Google Docs ( https://support.google.com/docs/answer/10090962?hl=en&co=GENIE.Platform%3DDesktop ), or Microsoft Word (Reference tab, Citations & Bibliography). Some hints for organization Make an outline, writing informal sentences for each section. It is often easiest to begin with the question and purpose of your study. From there you will be able to formulate your hypothesis and predictions. Methods can then be written along with the timeline and equipment list. You will then want to make a list of information that is necessary for your reader to understand the contents of the proposal so far. This will comprise your introduction section. Remember to follow a context-content- conclusion structure in your paragraphs (Mensh & Kording, 2017). The first sentence in a paragraph sets up the context, while the following sentences provide some content for the reader’s consideration and the last sentence a conclusion to be remembered (more tips in this article ). Finally, you will compose your title to be informative of the proposed study.

8 Common errors • The percentage symbol is only used after a number • Do not use ampersands (&), rather use the word “and” • Do not use the symbol “[ ]” for concentration • Avoid the use of “and/or” and “etc.” • Numbers under 10 are always spelled out unless they are the beginning of a sentence Ex. “We will use four glass containers…” or “Twenty-two degrees Celsius will be used…” • Organism Latin names should always be used to first describe an organism and they should always be italicized. The genus should always be capitalized Ex. “ Saccharomyces cerevisiae , commonly known as Baker’s yeast, will be investigated…” Once you are done writing Make sure to go back and proofread (read out loud or use the read aloud function on Word!) the entire proposal for spelling, grammar, or stylistic errors! SRP Proposal (2%) Graded as a trio. One submission per trio. Maximum 1000 words (excluding bibliography) Suspected cases of plagiarism will be transferred to Student Affairs for investigation. % Excellent (100%) Good (75%) Average (50%) Weak (0-25%) 0.25 Background information Provides background on subject matter and includes a logical lead up to hypothesis. Good overview but lacking in clarity or logic. Information was present, but there is significant room for improvement. Minimal background information provided. 0.25 Question, hypothesis, and predictions Clear, concise hypothesis with logical and testable predictions. Hypothesis or predictions could use refinement. Hypothesis is vague and predictions could be improved. Hypothesis and predictions could use significant improvement. 0.25 Methods and respective tasks Method to collect and interpret data fully explained, including details. Tasks provided fully. Method is clear but lacking in detail. Tasks are lacking certain details. Method is unclear. Tasks lists do not include some items mentioned. Explanation of methods is incomplete. Task details are largely incomplete. 0.25 Organism, supplies, and equipment list Full, detailed equipment list. Equipment list is lacking certain details. Equipment do not include some items mentioned. Equipment list is largely incomplete. 0.25 Timeline Realistic - - Unrealistic 0.25 Biosafety Identifies & uses adequate safety measures - - Not conscious of hazards, careful! 0.25 References References within the text and bibliography are complete and comply with APA formatting Some references are incomplete or do not comply with APA formatting Largely missing references either within the text or bibliography OR does not comply with APA formatting No in text references or bibliography 0.25 Style, spelling, and grammar Style, spelling, and grammar are excellent Some errors in style, spelling, and/or grammar Quite a few errors in style, spelling, and/or grammar Little to no effort was put into style, spelling, and/or grammar 2.0 TOTAL TA COMMENTS:

9 LAB 9 DATA COLLECTION (2.0 %) graded individually This is the week to collect your data as a trio, performing your experiment in the lab spaces for 2 hrs only. Take pictures of your set up and the experiment throughout! These will be helpful for your presentation. You will not be graded on if you experiment worked or not! The goal is for you to perform an experiment, troubleshoot where possible, and present what you have. You may end up with no results and that is ok! You can discuss with your TA during the post-experimental consultation in lab 10. For the presentation in lab 12 there are options including, but not limited to, presenting: what went wrong and why, what you could have done differently if you were to do the experiment again in the future, or an original research article that relates to your project. The supervising TA in each room will evaluate students individually with regards to the elements listed below : LAB DAY : REGULAR TA NAME : STUDENT NAME and ID Number: EXPERIMENT TOPIC: SUPERVISING TA NAME : 0 to 0.2 Safety concerns 0 to 0.2 Preparedness 0 to 0.2 Methodology concerns 0 to 0.2 Autonomy 0 to 0.2 Adequate use of the BIOL 112 equipment & placed back at it’s original location when done for use by the next day’s Biol 112 students and to avoid them being in the way for the MIMM labs taking place right after. 0 to 0.2 Optimal use of the consumable items provided (i.e. re-use when appropriate) 0 to 0.2 Washing and placing all re-usable items (glassware & plasticware, etc.) & placed back at their original location when done for use by the next day’s Biol 112 students and to avoid them being in the way for the MIMM labs taking place right after. 0 to 0.2 Cleanliness of workspace when done 0 to 0.2 Quality of questions 0 to 0.2 Capacity to share resources TOTAL :

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

10 LAB 10 POST-EXPERIMENTAL TA CONSULTATION (2%) Consult done as a trio but graded individually Bring your raw data to your consultation with you To prepare for your post-experimental consultation ensure you have: 1. A solid understanding of the experiment and how it was carried out and be able to convey this to your TA 2. Dealt with all issues that arose and can describe to your TA any modifications you made 3. Your raw data and some preliminary ideas of how to transform the data in graphs (quantitative data) or scales (qualitative data) Student name: ___ % Excellent (100%) Good (75%) Average (50%) Weak (0-25%) 1 Knowledge of project Student has a strong knowledge of how experiment was carried out. Student contributed less but knows how the experiment was carried out. Student’s knowledge of project is incomplete. Knowledge of project lacking: student does not have a firm grasp of how the experiment was carried out. 0.5 Students displayed an Students Students displayed a ability to cope Students encountered encountered strong ability to cope with unforeseen problems with their problems with their Problem solving OR with unforeseen circumstances. project, but project and displayed project was sufficiently complex circumstances OR students planned Modifications were made to the project modifications made were minimal and little to no ability to overcome and well- well enough their and were sufficient to were not carried out in challenges. planned, preventing experiment and no get results but a timely enough Students were not issues problem was were not well thought manner to gain proper able encountered. out. results. to accommodate time constraints. 0.5 Data collection and preliminary analysis Data collected and proposed analysis is logical, well thought- out, and thorough. Data was collected, but proposed analysis is lacking in clarity. Students collected Students have failed to collect data or have collected data that cannot be used. data, but not systematically, which produced uncertainty and/or confounding factors. 2 TOTAL Is the project well balanced between you and your project partner(s)? _ TA COMMENTS:

11 LAB 12 HOW TO CREATE AN EFFECTIVE PRESENTATION All trios will be presenting their research project in a classical oral presentation format. Your presentation should convey clearly and concisely what your question was, how you addressed the question, what your data shows, and what you can conclude from the results. To do this you will need the following sections for your presentation: 1. Title (1 slide) The title should be similar to that in the proposal or you can modify to convey some of your results. Look at some academic articles to see how to go about this. With the title you should also include the names of all trio members, the date, and your TA’s name (oral: on the same slide) 2. Introduction (1-2 slides) Should contain key information addressed in the proposal: (i) background on the scientific question you wish to address; (ii) why it is important; (iii) information on the study species; (iv) and why it was chosen to answer this question. This information should lead the reader to the logical basis of your question and hypothesis. The background information should start broadly and get more specific by the end. 3. Question, hypothesis, and predictions (1 slide) Your question, hypothesis, and predictions are the same as those stated in the proposal (including any clarifications by your TA). Again, a graph can be included with your predicted results. 4. Methods and biosafety (1-2 slides) The methods and biosafety should convey the same ones you proposed in your proposal. Image(s) should be shown for the trio’s experimental set up. 5. Results (1-2 slides) Each trio will present their common results together. The results should be presented in either a graph or table with summary statistics (average, standard error, etc.) where appropriate. Raw data should not be presented. Each trio member should present a portion of the project. 6. Discussion and conclusion (1-2 slides) Does your data support or refute your hypothesis? How do your data and hypothesis fit/relate to the scientific literature? If your data does not completely support your hypothesis, what are some alternative explanations found in the scientific literature? What limitations were there to your experiment? How could one improve it if you were to do it again? What other questions do your results raise? What has the results of this experiment added to the knowledge within the field and how could this be applied in the real world?

12 7. References At the bottom of slides References within your presentation should not be presented at the end as a bibliography. Rather, they should be presented throughout the presentation in the appropriate section. The reference follows APA format but there is no title (to make the reference much shorter). This way the audience can still find the correct reference without it taking up too much room. Other aspects of the presentation for which you will be graded on 1. Question and answer period To prepare for the Q&A portion of the presentation try to come up with some ideas of questions that might be asked by audience members. There will be a maximum of 5 minutes for questions and each member should participate in order to obtain these marks. You will be graded on your ability to answer all reasonable questions. 2. Clarity How easy it was for the audience to follow along and understand the material being presented. To ensure you have a clear presentation you can show it to a friend or family member. You should also practice what you would like to say aloud during the presentation. 3. Presentation style Your presentation should be stylistically pleasing avoiding such things as: i) blocks of text; ii) contrasting colours (the best visual is black text on a white background); iii) unnecessary details (such as in the methodology); reading what is on the screen; and slide titles that are not informative (each slide title should be the take home message from that slide). You can add some style by looking at templates available in Word, Google Slides, or online. 4. Time management Most group must be trios. Presentations will be 10-12 minutes with an extra 3 minutes for each additional student i.e. groups of 2 have 10-12 minutes, groups of 3 have 13-15 minutes, and groups of 4 have 15-18 minutes. Some hints for your presentation • As in the SRP Proposal, your presentation/poster should follow a context-content-conclusion storyline where the Introduction-Question-Hypothesis set the context, the Methodology and Results host content, while the Discussion and Conclusions provide the audience with a central message to be remembered. • Prepare and practice your presentation beforehand. • Think carefully if a graph or a table are better to clearly show a key message from your results, but do not include both for the same purpose! • Do not saturate your slides with text or graphs. An unsaturated slide gives you the chance to better explain an idea/message instead of reading and/or rushing through its contents, maintaining your audience engaged. • If there is valuable information that is not central to your hypothesis and/or you can’t show due to space/time limitations, include it in Supplementary Material slides. You may use them to answer questions from the audience.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

13 LAB 12 RESEARCH PROJECT PRESENTATION (2%) Done as a trio but graded individually Any suspected case of cheating or plagiarism will be transferred to the Office of Students’ Affairs for investigation. STUDENT NAME: % Excellent (100%) Good (75%) Average (50%) Weak (0-25%) 0.25 Intro, Question, Hypothesis, Predictions, Methods and Biosafety Introduction was complete and led to a logical question, hypothesis, and predictions. Biosafety measures were all considered and addressed. One or more of the aspects were missing or incomplete. Many aspects were missing or incomplete. Most or all aspects were missing or incomplete. 0.25 Results, Discussion, and Conclusion Results were clear and followed by a logical discussion and conclusion. Results, discussion, or conclusion were missing some aspects. Results, discussion, or conclusion were unclear in some aspects. Results, discussion, and/or conclusion were unclear or missing. 0.25 References References included and consistently formatted in APA. References included, but not formatted in APA style. Few references given, formatting inconsistent. No references given. 0.50 Question and answer Answers to all reasonable questions logical, well thought out, and thorough Answered most reasonable questions Answered most reasonable questions, but could have provided more detail Failed to answer reasonable questions 0.25 Clarity Delivery was clear and easy to follow. Delivery was decent but lacking in some aspects of clarity. Delivery was often unclear. Difficult to follow presentation. 0.25 Presentation style Clear title, graphs, tables, and figures that support the content of the presentation. Stylistically pleasing. Good use of graphs and figures but could be improved OR missing title slide. Effort was made in the style but was lacking. Included graphs, tables, or figures but they were not clear. Little effort was made stylistically. Poor effort to include graphs, tables, or figures. No effort was made stylistically. 0.25 Time management Students stayed within time constraints - - Students went over time allotted OR well under time allotted 2 TOTAL TA comments:

2024 112 SRP Guidelines

Related Documents