|
Essential Components |
|
| Task Assignment Methodology |
|
Based on the feedback from the evaluation of the model, we recognized the importance of demonstrating the significance of assigned tasks by tying tasks to the mission and goals of the research project. Our experience shows that structuring accountability into project management is also essential. The faculty mentors clearly define the mission statement, the goals, the tasks that are needed to complete these goals, and the dependencies among tasks; the student is required to define the activities that are needed to complete an assigned task and to construct a time line. In addition, a task has deliverables, e.g., a product, documentation, presentation, summary, critical review, literature review, or publishable paper. It is important that an assigned task meets the level of the student; successful completion of a task is necessary for building commitment, interest, and confidence.
These project management techniques benefit both the students and faculty mentors. The students develop in the following ways:
- learn how a research project is managed,
- understand the importance of their work toward completion of the project,
- build positive interdependencies among research group members through defined task dependencies,
- learn how to tackle tasks (students who are new to research do not have a clear understanding of the steps required to complete tasks),
- learn and practice goal setting and time management between course work and research,
- develop domain expertise,
- hone oral and written communication skills through critiques of deliverables by students and faculty mentors, and
- tangibly contribute to the research via completion of tasks.
For the faculty mentors, these techniques facilitate the following:
- examination of student workloads, especially when a student is assigned to more than one task,
- assurance that students understand the steps needed to complete a task, and
- ability to track progress of the research through deliverables.
|
| Meeting Structure |
|
Structured weekly meetings of each subgroup, i.e., a group of students that work on a common research project, are used to report progress, promote the refinement of weekly goals, solve problems, discuss research, and promote role models. Under the supervision of faculty mentors, the students are required to discuss the status of their assigned tasks and problems encountered. This is important because the progress or results of members, unforeseen events, and fruitless pursuits may cause a change in the direction of the research. Group discussion helps relieve some of the frustration that a student feels when a task changes, and through constructive criticism and brainstorming, problems are identified and solutions discovered. At these meetings, students may be required to teach new concepts, present technical paper summaries, present research contributions that have been identified as milestones, and explain technical issues relevant to completing their tasks. Students alternate recording the minutes of each meeting. Clearly, the benefits of the meetings are development of domain expertise, individual accountability, and cooperative and communication skills.
In contrast, the monthly meetings bring together members of all subgroups in an effort to integrate research results, practice and critique presentations, and develop higher-level group skills. At the beginning of these meetings, faculty mentors recognize students who have published or presented papers, participated in outreach projects, and received awards. Next, a member from each subgroup summarizes his/her group's progress and achievements toward short-term goals. In addition, a higher-level skill, such as critical thinking, comparative evaluation, or justification is taught and practiced. In addition to the benefits of the weekly meetings, the monthly meetings foster cooperation among the research groups by highlighting transferable areas of expertise. |
| Technological Support |
|
The management and functioning of large, integral research groups must be supported by technology. Towards this end, an electronic framework is in the process of being developed to assist SSEAL project management. The framework includes: 1) an interactive literature tracking system that maintains a knowledge base of extended abstracts of technical papers and related discussion/critique summaries, and permits retrieval of information based on keywords, author name, or title, 2) a project management tool, called Project Coordination, Communication & Common Goal Tool for Teams (PC3), that permits the association of students with projects, mission and goals of a research project with tasks and activities, dependency graphs with tasks, changes with justifications, warning messages with upcoming deadlines, and students' progress with assigned tasks, 3) a seamless computing environment with a shared directory hierarchy, which includes software, hardware, and in house library tracking systems, and 4) a web page that supports dissemination of the model and research, documentation of outreach and orientation activities, and project management. |
| Annual Orientation |
|
To facilitate the assimilation of new students into SSEAL and increase student ownership of the SSEAL model, an orientation is given annually. The following briefly describes SSEAL's fall 1997 orientation.
The 6-hour orientation is comprised of four major sections: the SSEAL philosophy and goals, cooperative group skills, research activities and skills, and student/faculty concerns. Through activities defined by the faculty mentors, the participants learn the goals of the group, become familiar with available resources, learn the basic elements of cooperative groups, discuss the research process, and become aware of the expectations of the group. The orientation is key to the members' understanding of basic group and research skills, and in building positive interdependence among old and new group members. In addition to reinvigorating students and faculty mentors, the orientation provides a venue, through group processing, to reevaluate the model, to assess the success of the model, and to identify adjustments that are needed due to changes in the group's composition and attitude. |
|