THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE 2016 SUMMER ... · 2016 SUMMER INTERNSHIP COURSE GRADING...
Transcript of THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE 2016 SUMMER ... · 2016 SUMMER INTERNSHIP COURSE GRADING...
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE
2016 SUMMER INTERNSHIP COURSE
GRADING CRITERIA and EVALUATIONS
Grading/Evaluation of Research Projects:
The Mentors will provide continuous assessment to evaluate the different core components of
the Internship throughout the 7 weeks. Many of these evaluations will be done electronically.
The mentor will be evaluating his/her Bench Research or Scientific Writing group only. For
Presentations skills, the mentor will be evaluating ALL interns (except in a few cases).
Main criteria that will be assessed by the Mentors during the Internship Course:
BENCH RESEARCH SCIENTIFIC WRITING
PRESENTATION SKILLS
Three evaluation opportunities (Internship Weeks 5, 6, 7)
Three evaluation opportunities (Internship Weeks 5, 6, 7)
Three evaluation opportunities (Internship Weeks 5, 6, 7)
1. Skills and accuracy2. Project knowledge3. Teamwork4. Data entry5. Interpretation of
data
1. Keywords search2. Literature search3. Review of key
articles4. Refinement of
initial outline5. Writing progress6. Regular written
updates to mentor7. Creation and use
offigures/tables/flowdiagrams
8. Quality of article9. Completion of 1st
draft10. Complete
references & endnote library
11. Plagiarismreport
12. Innovativewriting skills
1. Delivery style2. Organization3. Clarity &
knowledge4. Responses to
questions5. Slide quality6. Time management
The Interns’ scores in the main components of the Internship course will be recorded in a
Grading Certificate which will be presented to the Intern at the end of the Internship. An
example of the Grading Certificate is shown on the last page.
Interns who complete the Internship with full attendance and have obtained an overall score of
>70% (Grades B- and above) will be awarded an Internship Certificate.
METHOD TO EVALUATE BENCH RESEARCH:
EVALUATION RATING Excellent 5
Good 4 Average 3
Fair 2 Poor 1
CRITERIA: RATING Fulfilled the learning objectives of the Bench Research Exercise* : 1. Competency verified for Bench Research Training Skills 5 2. Demonstrates awareness about each lab technique and the theory behind it 5 3. Able to read, understand and follow a protocol for a particular technique 5 4. Have the necessary skills to perform several lab techniques (as per training provided
during bench research)5
5. Able to accurately record raw data into the worksheet 5 6. Demonstrated proficiency to perform calculations and determine its validity 5 7. Exhibited the knowledge to interpret the general trend/meaning of the results
obtained5
8. Demonstrated the skills to be able to do basic troubleshooting as the experimentprogresses
5
9. Exhibited proficiency to do internal QC for the experiment 5 10. Exhibited the aptitude to organize and portray results into a presentation 5 11. Display ability to coordinate each lab technique with others as a team 5 12. Display ability to plan for the experimental work flow as a team 5 Interaction and relationship with Mentor: 13. Discussed each step of the experiment for verification and troubleshooting with their
Mentor5
14. Provided daily updates on progress of each research day to the Mentor 5 Interns Abilities: 15. Exhibits discipline, ability and commitment to see their project all the way to the last
Research Day5
TOTAL 75 • All 5s → maximum (75)• More 5s than 4s → minimum for Mentor’s Choice Award (68)• Minimum to clear this evaluation (50)• Consideration for Mentor’s choice (score of 68-75); cleared this evaluation (score of at least 50)
* Assessed at the beginning of Week
METHOD TO EVALUATE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH:
EVALUATION RATING Excellent 5
Good 4 Average 3
Fair 2 Poor 1
CRITERIA RATING Fulfilled the learning objectives of the Scientific Writing Research Exercise* : 1. Attended the Scientific Writing Research Workshop (Amy Moore’s) 5 2. Demonstrates awareness about plagiarism and its consequences 5 3. Demonstrates ability to independently conduct a thorough and exhaustive literature
search5
4. Demonstrates ability to independently come up with keywords for a research topic 5 5. Exhibits the ability to screen articles and filter those that are most relevant to the
topic at hand5
6. Exhibits the ability to read, understand and extract information from relevant articles 5 7. Demonstrates ability to organize vast information in a logical and comprehensive
manner5
8. Displayed skills to come up with an expanded outline for the research topic at hand 5 9. Demonstrates skills to work in a systematic manner to add information to the outline 5 10. Demonstrates proficiency to document key information from articles into a tabular or
diagrammatic form5
11. Exhibits the competency to record and to reference material taken from other articles 5 12. Demonstrates ability to use reference managers to manage references 5 Interaction and relationship with Mentor: 13. Met consistently (minimum of 2 to 3 times weekly) with their Mentor to seek
guidance and feedback on writing tasks5
14. Provided weekly to bi-weekly written updates on progress of writing to the Mentorand CRM Director
5
Interns Abilities: 15. Demonstrates discipline, ability and commitment of carrying the project beyond the
Internship till publication5
TOTAL 75 • All 5s → maximum (75)• More 5s than 4s → minimum for Mentor’s Choice Award (68)• Minimum to clear this evaluation (50)• Consideration for Mentor’s choice (score of 68-75); cleared this evaluation (score of at least 50)
*Assessed at the beginning of Week 7
GRADING OF INTERNS:
EVALUATION RATING Excellent 5
Good 4 Average 3
Fair 2 Poor 1
CRITERIA: RATING 1. Fulfilled the learning objectives of the Internship* :
• Participation in daily lectures 5 • Participated in research seminars 5 • Participated in research writing workshop 5 • Participation in research meetings 5 • Participation in group discussions 5 • Participation in bench research 5 • Participation in a writing project 5 • Presented research results (bench projects) in research meetings 5 • Presented research findings (writing projects) in research meetings 5 • Presented PowerPoint talks (as an individual) on their writing project 5 • Presented PowerPoint talks (as a group) on their bench project 5 • Interacted positively with the Faculty, Mentors, Speakers and Interns 5
2. Produced a quantifiable amount of work during the Internship:• Completed a lab project along with other Interns in their group 5 • Completed the first full draft of a paper 5
3. Demonstrate having acquired / improved on new / existing soft skills from the Internship 5 TOTAL 75
• All 5s → maximum to pass with distinction (75)• More 5s than 4s → minimum to pass with distinction (68)• All 4s → minimum to pass with honors (60)• Pass without honors (50)• Pass with distinction (score of 68-75); pass with honors (score of 60-67); pass without honors
(score of 50-60)
* Assessed at the beginning of Week 7
5. CRITERIA FOR AWARD OF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE:
• Secured a pass with distinction (Score of 68 – 75)
• Pass with honors (Score of 60 – 67)
• Pass without honors (Score of 50 – 60)
SW 1st evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)
1st ASSESSMENT OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (MENTOR’S CHOICE)
(20% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 3- 07/01/2016 Total Score /100marks
Criteria Mentor’s Score
1
Keywords * the Intern should be familiar on how to conduct a thorough keyword search using common electronic databases and have come up with their own keywords (besides the suggested keywords that have been given to them)
The Intern is making excellent progress in conducting their keyword search/has finalized all their keywords
20 marks
The Intern is making very good progress in conducting their keyword search 16 marks
The Intern is making good progress in conducting their keyword search 12 marks
The Intern is making fair progress in conducting their keyword search 8 marks
The Intern is making poor progress in conducting their keyword search 4 marks
2 Literature search * the Intern should be adept in conducting a thorough, relevant literature search using common electronic databases (besides the recommended articles that have been given to them)
The Intern is making excellent progress in conducting their literature search / has completed their literature search
20 marks
The Intern is making very good progress in conducting their literature search 16 marks
The Intern is making good progress in conducting their literature search 12 marks
The Intern is making fair progress in conducting their literature search 8 marks
The Intern is making poor progress in conducting their literature search 4 marks
3 Outline * fundamental outlines have been given to the Interns, and Interns are encouraged to expand and add original ideas to the outline
The Intern has added a great amount of original input to the fundamental outline 20 marks
The Intern has added a substantial amount of original input to the fundamental outline 16 marks
The Intern has added moderate amount of original input to the fundamental outline 12 marks
The Intern has added minimal original input to the fundamental outline 8 marks
The Intern has added no original input to the fundamental outline 4 marks
4 Writing progress * the Intern should have begun the writing of their actual material, Mentors may also consider the quality of their work (content, language, grammar)
The Intern is making very good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 20 marks
The Intern is making good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 16 marks
The Intern is making fair progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 12 marks
The Intern is making slow progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 8 marks
The Intern has not started in the writing of the actual manuscript 4 marks
5 Regular written updates to Mentor
SW 1st evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)
* a written update constitutes an email that includes the word file with the Intern’s manuscript writing progress (since the last email), and that specifies what has been completed, what the remaining steps are, and states any difficulties faced, asks relevant questions
Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (2-3x/week) 20 marks
Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (1x/week) 16 marks
Meets regularly with Mentor but does not provide written updates to Mentor 12 marks
Does not meet regularly with Mentor but provides written updates to Mentor 8 marks
Does not meet and does not provide regular written updates to Mentor 4 marks
TOTAL COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SW 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)
2nd ASSESSMENT OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (30% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..……
Deadline: WEEK 5- 07/15/16 Total Score……..……/100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s
Score
1 Review of key articles * the Mentors should take into account how many articles have been identified vs. how many key articles have been read
The Intern is making excellent progress in the review of key articles 20 marks
The Intern is making very good progress in the review of key articles 16 marks
The Intern is making good progress in the review of key articles 12 marks
The Intern is making fair progress in the review of key articles 8 marks
The Intern is making poor progress in the review of key articles 4 marks
2
Writing progress * actual writing of the manuscript should have begun and the written material should be submitted to the Mentor for assessment of progress, Mentors must also consider the quality of their work (content, language, grammar)
The Intern is making excellent progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 20 marks
The Intern is making very good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 16 marks
The Intern is making good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 12 marks
The Intern is making fair progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 8 marks
The Intern is making poor progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 4 marks
3 Figures and diagrams * figures and diagrams should ideally be novel and not a rehash of a past figure/diagram and/or table
The Intern has started constructing the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 20 marks
The Intern has started sketching the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 16 marks
The Intern has given the exact plan for the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 12 marks
The Intern has narrowed down ideas for the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 8 marks
The Intern has identified broad areas of information that could be represented as Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables
4 marks
4 EndNote library citations * all references are done using EndNote, all references are cited in text using the appropriate format, Mentors should assess the upkeep of the library
EndNote library is 100% up to date 20 marks
EndNote library is 80% up to date 16 marks
EndNote library is 60% up to date 12 marks
EndNote library is 40% up to date 8 marks
EndNote library is 20% up to date 4 marks
5 Regular written updates to Mentor
SW 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)
* Mentors should assess the quality of each update: a written update constitutes an email that includes the word file with the Intern’s manuscript writing progress (since the last email), and that specifies what has been completed, what the remaining steps are, and states any difficulties faced, asks relevant questions
Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (2-3x/week) 20 marks
Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (1x/week) 16 marks
Meets regularly with Mentor but does not provide written updates to Mentor 12 marks
Does not meet regularly with Mentor but provides written updates to Mentor 8 marks
Does not meet and does not provide regular written updates to Mentor 4 marks
TOTAL COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SW 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)
3rd ASSESSMENT OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (50% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 6- 07/22/16 Total Score /100marks
Criteria Mentor’s
Score
1
Completion of 1st Draft / Plagiarism Report
* the plagiarism report (Turnitin) must have been run on the manuscript and submitted to the Mentor before the assessment date
First draft of the manuscript is 100% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 20 marks
First draft of the manuscript is 90% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 16 marks
First draft of the manuscript is 80% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 12 marks
First draft of the manuscript is 70% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 8 marks
First draft of the manuscript is 60% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 4 marks
2
Figures/Tables/Flow Diagram
* figures and diagrams should ideally be novel and not a rehash of a past figure/diagram and/or table
The Intern has submitted the finalized Figures/Diagrams to ARTs 20 marks
The Intern has finalized (received approval) the Figures/Diagrams with the Mentors 16 marks
The Intern has sketched the Figures/Diagrams for the Mentors 12 marks
The Intern has started constructing the Figures/Diagrams 8 marks
The Intern repeated the use of an existing Figures/Diagrams or has none of their own 4 marks
3
Complete References & EndNote
* all references are done using EndNote, all references are cited in text using the appropriate format, Mentors should assess the upkeep of the library
EndNote library is 100% up to date 20 marks
EndNote library is 80-90% up to date 16 marks
EndNote library is 60-70% up to date 12 marks
EndNote library is <50% up to date 8 marks
EndNote library is not submitted 4 marks
4 Innovative Writing Skills
* Mentors should assess if the Intern had demonstrated an innovative writing style
The Intern has displayed a unique style of writing 20 marks
The Intern has displayed a great style of writing 16 marks
The Intern has displayed a good style of writing 12 marks
The Intern has displayed a commendable style of writing 8 marks
The Intern has displayed a basic style of writing 4 marks
5 Quality of Article
SW 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)
* Mentors should assess the quality of the article from the perspective of content (information, flow and readability), language (appropriate use of scientific writing without too much jargon), grammar & spelling (adheres to the basic rules of the English language)
Article is well-written and of high quality 20 marks
Article is well-written and of moderate quality 16 marks
Article is poorly-written and of moderate quality 12 marks
Article is poorly-written and of mediocre quality 8 marks
Article is poorly-written and of poor quality 4 marks
TOTAL COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SW Top 3 Selection WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 26, 2016)
FINAL SCIENTIFIC WRITING RANKING
Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline: WEEK 7- 07/26/16….Total Score……..……/100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s Score
1 Significance and rationale of the scientific writing project is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the topic and displays clear understanding of the significance of the topic
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
2 Literature review is presented for understanding of scientific topic
* displays clear understanding of the current literature and background of the topic
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
3 Design of structure and outline of scientific project is valid for the topic
* demonstrates competency in explaining the topic design in a clear and concise manner
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
4 Results are clearly stated and Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information
SW Top 3 Selection WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 26, 2016)
* displays analytical skills in reporting findings of the existing literature
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
5 Interpret findings, draw conclusions, and make recommendations for future research
* shows ability to interpret the existing literature, draw accurate conclusions, and make recommendations for further research
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
TOTAL
COMMENTS: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BR 1st Evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)
1st ASSESSMENT OF BENCH RESEARCH (20% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 3- 07/01/ 16 Total Score /100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s
Score
1
Number of techniques trained in and completed & Number of repeats performed per technique
* the Intern must have completed the required number of techniques and number of repeats for pipetting and basic techniques (counting of beads, sperm count, motility, viability)
The Intern’s completed 100% of the required training 20 marks
The Intern’s completed 90% of the required training 16 marks
The Intern’s completed 80% of the required training 12 marks
The Intern’s completed 70% of the required training 8 marks
The Intern’s completed 60% of the required training 4 mark
2
Accuracy of results obtained
* the Intern must have completed the required number of techniques and number of repeats for pipetting and basic techniques (counting of beads, sperm count, motility, viability)
The Intern’s results fall within the reference range 20 marks
The Intern’s results fall within 5% of the reference range 16 marks
The Intern’s results fall within 10% of the reference range 12 marks
The Intern’s results fall within 15% of the reference range 8 marks
The Intern’s results fall within 20% of the reference range 4 mark
3 Reporting of results
* the Intern populated the Excel sheet and entered his results in the Excel file provided
The Intern’s completed 100% of the reporting 20 marks
The Intern’s completed 90% of the reporting 16 marks
The Intern’s completed 80% of the reporting 12 marks
The Intern’s completed 70% of the reporting 8 marks
The Intern’s completed 60% of the reporting 4 mark
4 Initiative and dedication
* the Intern showed initiative, commitment, dedication and an eagerness to participate
The Intern showed very strong characteristics of initiative and dedication 20 marks
The Intern showed good characteristics of initiative and dedication 16 marks
The Intern showed fair characteristics of initiative and dedication 12 marks
The Intern showed poor characteristics of initiative and dedication 8 marks
The Intern showed no characteristics of initiative and dedication 4 mark
BR 1st Evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)
5 Understanding of the project and general impression
* the Intern showed initiative, commitment, dedication and an eagerness to participate
The Intern showed very good progress in their understanding of their bench training 20 marks
The Intern showed good progress in their understanding of their bench training 16 marks
The Intern showed fair progress in their understanding of their bench training 12 marks
The Intern showed slow progress in their understanding of their bench training 8 marks
The Intern showed no progress in their understanding of their bench training 4 mark
TOTAL
COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BR 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)
2nd ASSESSMENT OF BENCH RESEARCH (30% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 5- 07/15/16 Total Score /100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s
Score
1 Skills and Accuracy * skills and accuracy in basic techniques (pipetting, sperm count, motility, viability), any other specific task that the Intern was assigned to
The Intern shows excellent skills and high accuracy (mostly within the reference range) 20 marks
The Intern shows very good skills and very good accuracy (mostly within 5-10% of the reference range)
16 marks
The Intern shows good skills and good accuracy (mostly within 10-15% of the reference range) 12 marks
The Intern shows fair skills and fair accuracy (mostly within 15-20% of the reference range) 8 marks
The Intern shows poor skills and poor accuracy (mostly >20% of the reference range) 4 mark
2
Project Knowledge
* knowledge of the Interns own bench project based on the Mentors discretion and interaction with the Intern - understanding the rationale of the project, the reason for performing specific tests
The Intern displays solid knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 20 marks
The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 16 marks
The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 12 marks
The Intern displays poor knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 8 marks
The Intern displays very little knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 4 mark
3 Teamwork
* communication with Mentor and Team Members, professionalism
The Intern displays team spirit/acts as a team player 20 marks
The Intern shares info about the project with team members, offers help to Mentor/team members when appropriate
16 marks
The Intern is considerate about others’ own tasks 12 marks
The Intern is conscientious about research responsibilities/tasks assigned 8 marks
The Intern is respectful of others’ time, work and space 4 mark
4 Data Entry
* data entry into the specific project worksheet and into the Excel worksheet
Data entry is 100% up to date 20 marks
Data entry is 90% up to date 16 marks
Data entry is 80% up to date 12 marks
BR 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)
Data entry is 70% up to date 8 marks
Data entry is 60% up to date 4 mark
5
Interpretation of Data
* understand the significance of the results obtained, and is able to troubleshoot during bench work
The Intern displays solid knowledge about the interpretation of data 20 marks
The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 16 marks
The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 12 marks
The Intern displays poor knowledge about the interpretation of data 8 marks
The Intern displays very little knowledge about the interpretation of data 4 mark
TOTAL
COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BR 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)
3rd ASSESSMENT OF BENCH RESEARCH (50% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 6- 07/22/16 Total Score /100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s Score
1 Skills and Accuracy * skills and accuracy in basic techniques (pipetting, sperm count, motility, viability), any other specific task that the Intern was assigned to
The Intern shows excellent skills and high accuracy (mostly within the reference range) 20 marks
The Intern shows very good skills and very good accuracy (mostly within 5-10% of the reference range) 16 marks
The Intern shows good skills and good accuracy (mostly within 10-15% of the reference range) 12 marks
The Intern shows fair skills and fair accuracy (mostly within 15-20% of the reference range) 8 marks
The Intern shows poor skills and poor accuracy (mostly >20% of the reference range) 4 mark
2
Project Knowledge
* knowledge of the Interns own bench project based on the Mentors discretion and interaction with the Intern - understanding the rationale of the project, the reason for performing specific tests
The Intern displays solid knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 20 marks
The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 16 marks
The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 12 marks
The Intern displays poor knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 8 marks
The Intern displays very little knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 4 mark
3 Teamwork
* communication with Mentor and Team Members, professionalism
The Intern displays team spirit/acts as a team player 20 marks
The Intern shares info about the project with team members, offers help to Mentor/team members when appropriate 16 marks
The Intern is considerate about others’ own tasks 12 marks
The Intern is conscientious about research responsibilities/tasks assigned 8 marks
The Intern is respectful of others’ time, work and space 4 mark
BR 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)
4 Data Entry
* data entry into the specific project worksheet and into the Excel worksheet
Data entry is 100% up to date 20 marks
Data entry is 90% up to date 16 marks
Data entry is 80% up to date 12 marks
Data entry is 70% up to date 8 marks
Data entry is 60% up to date 4 mark
5 Interpretation of Data
* understand the significance of the results obtained, and is able to troubleshoot during bench work
The Intern displays solid knowledge about the interpretation of data 20 marks
The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 16 marks
The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 12 marks
The Intern displays poor knowledge about the interpretation of data 8 marks
The Intern displays very little knowledge about the interpretation of data 4 mark
TOTAL
COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BRPG1stevaluationWEEK5Monday(July11,2016)
1st EVALUATION OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (10% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline: Week 5 07/11/16….. Total Score……..……/100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s Score
1 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
2 Experimental design is valid for question addressed * demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
3 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
4 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills
Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 20 marks
Good (time ± 1 min) 16 marks
Fair (time ± 2 min) 12 marks
BRPG1stevaluationWEEK5Monday(July11,2016)
Poor (time ± 3 min) 8 marks
Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min) 4 marks
5 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions
Excellent 20 marks
Good 16 marks
Fair 12 marks
Poor 8 marks
Very Poor 4 marks
TOTAL
COMMENTS:
BRPG 2nd evaluation WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 25, 2016)
Week 7 (2nd evaluation) OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (20% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline: Week 7- 07/25/16….. Total Score……..……/100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s Score
1 Hypothesis is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the study
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
2 Sufficient background is presented for understanding of the research question * displays clear understanding of the current literature and background for the study and research question
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
3 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
4 Experimental design is valid for question addressed * demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
5 Results are clearly stated * demonstrates an understanding and ability to analyze the results
Excellent 10 marks
BRPG 2nd evaluation WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 25, 2016)
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
6 Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information * demonstrates skills to present the data with figures and tables
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
7 Conclusions are clearly described * shows ability to draw accurate conclusions based on the study findings
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
8 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
9 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills
Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 10 marks
Good (time ± 1 min) 8 marks
Fair (time ± 2 min) 6 marks
Poor (time ± 3 min) 4 marks
Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min) 2 marks
10 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
BRPG 2nd evaluation WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 25, 2016)
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
TOTAL
COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
BRPG 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Friday (July 29, 2016)
FINAL ASSESSMENT (3rd evaluation) OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (70% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern…………………………………………………… Mentor…………….………..…………..… Deadline: Week 7- 07.29.16……. Total Score……..……/100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s Score
1 Hypothesis is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the study
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
2 Sufficient background is presented for understanding of the research question * displays clear understanding of the current literature and background for the study and research question
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
3 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
4 Experimental design is valid for question addressed * demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner
BRPG 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Friday (July 29, 2016)
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
5 Results are clearly stated * demonstrates an understanding and ability to analyze the results
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
6 Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information * demonstrates skills to present the data with figures and tables
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
7 Conclusions are clearly described * shows ability to draw accurate conclusions based on the study findings
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
8 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
BRPG 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Friday (July 29, 2016)
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
9 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills
Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 10 marks
Good (time ± 1 min) 8 marks
Fair (time ± 2 min) 6 marks
Poor (time ± 3 min) 4 marks
Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min) 2 marks
10 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
TOTAL
COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Evaluationstobedonebymentor3timesoverthecourseoftheinternshipbythefollowingdeadlines:1) WEEK3–Friday,July1,20162) WEEK4–Friday,July8,20163) WEEK6–Friday,July22,2016
EVALUATION OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (NOT GRADED)
Intern Mentor Date:_________________________________________________
Criteria Mentor’s Comment
1 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
2 Experimental design is valid for question addressed
* demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
3 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)
Excellent Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
4 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills
Excellent (time ± 30 seconds)
Evaluationstobedonebymentor3timesoverthecourseoftheinternshipbythefollowingdeadlines:1) WEEK3–Friday,July1,20162) WEEK4–Friday,July8,20163) WEEK6–Friday,July22,2016
Good (time ± 1 min)
Fair (time ± 2 min)
Poor (time ± 3 min)
Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min)
5 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate
manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions
Excellent Good
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
COMMENTS:
SWP1stevaluationWEEK3(Monday,June27,2016)
1st ASSESSMENT OF PRESENTATION SKILLS (SCIENTIFIC WRITING) (20% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: Week 3- 06/27/16 Total Score /100 marks
Criteria
Mentor’s
Score
1
Organization/Structure/Clarity
* Was the presentation properly structured and did it have a logical flow?
/20
2
Knowledge of Topic
* Did the Intern master/understand the topic and showed insight?
/20
3
Delivery Style
* Speak clearly, voice projection, eye contact, engaging the audience
/20
4
Timing
* Adequate distribution per section, proper utilization of allotted time
/20
5
Questions
* Answered questions logically, showed insight
/20
TOTAL /100
COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SWP2ndevaluationWEEK6(Monday,July18,2016)
2nd ASSESSMENT OF PRESENTATION SKILLS (SCIENTIFIC WRITING) (30% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 6- 07/18/2016 Total Score _____/100 marks
Criteria
Mentor’s
Score
1
Organization/Structure/Clarity
* Was the presentation properly structured and did it have a logical flow?
/15
2
Knowledge of Topic
* Did the Intern master/understand the topic and showed insight?
/20
3
Delivery Style
* Speak clearly, voice projection, eye contact, engaging the audience
/20
4
Slide Quality
* Appearance, appropriate use of visuals, general appeal, quality, neatness
/15
5
Timing
* Adequate distribution per section, proper utilization of allotted time
/10
6
Questions
* Answered questions logically, showed insight
/20
TOTAL /100
COMMENTS: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
SWP 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Thursday (July 28, 2016)
FINAL ASSESSMENT (3rd evaluation) OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING PRESENTATION (50% goes towards the Final Score)
Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline Week 7- 07/28/16 Total Score……..……/100 marks
Criteria Mentor’s
Score
1 Rationale of scientific writing project is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the topic
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
2 Literature review is presented for understanding of the scientific writing project * displays clear understanding of the current literature and background of the topic
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
3 Significance of the topic under investigation is clearly defined * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
4 Design of structure and outline for scientific writing project is valid for the topic * demonstrates competency in explaining the topic in a clear and concise manner
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
5 Displays analytical skills in reporting findings of existing literature * demonstrates an understanding and ability to analyze the literature findings
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor
2 marks
6 Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information * demonstrates skills to present the data with mechanistic figures and tabulation of existing results
Excellent 10 marks
SWP 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Thursday (July 28, 2016)
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
7
Interpret findings, draw conclusions, and make recommendations for future research * shows ability to interpret the existing literature, draw accurate conclusions, and make recommendations for further research
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
8 Overall style of presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
9 Presenter uses time effectively
* demonstrates time management skills and presentation is spaced appropriately
Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 10 marks
Good (time ± 1 min)
8 marks
Fair (time ± 2 min)
6 marks
Poor (time ± 3 min)
4 marks
Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min)
2 marks
10 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions effectively
Excellent 10 marks
Good 8 marks
Fair 6 marks
Poor 4 marks
Very Poor 2 marks
TOTAL
This document reflects the performance of the intern during the 9th Annual Summer Internship From: Jun 13 – Jul 29, 2016
This is to certify that the intern,
Devin Ta Northeast Ohio Medical University, Canton, Ohio
SCIENTIFIC WRITING Completion of 1st
Draft/ Plagiarism
Report
Figures/Tables/ Flow Diagram
Complete References &
EndNote Library
Innovative Writing
Skills
Quality of Article
Overall Grade
100 100 100 95 95 98 A+ A+ A+ A A A+
BENCH RESEARCH Skills and Accuracy
Project Knowledge
Teamwork Data Entry Interpretation of Data
Overall Grade
90 90 90 90 90 90 A- A- A- A- A- A-
PRESENTATION SKILLS Organization/
Structure/ Clarity
Knowledge of Topic/
Questions
Delivery Style Slide Quality Timing Overall Grade
89.52 89.82 91.07 82.86 100 89.64 A- A- A B+ A+ A-
Grading Scale: A+ (>96%), A (91-95%), A- (86-90%), B+ (81-85%), B (76-80%), B- (71-71%), C (70% is a fail)
Dr. Rakesh Sharma Dr. Rakesh Sharma Mentor, Scientific Research Mentor, Bench Research
July 29, 2016 Dr. Ashok Agarwal Date Program Director
The Cleveland Clinic
American Center for Reproductive Medicine