If we only knew: Predictive Plant Phenomics at Iowa State€¦ · RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP P3 Program...

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

If we only knew:Predictive Plant Phenomics at

Iowa StateP3 Leadership Team

Julie Dickerson, PI Electrical and Computer Engineering

Ted Heindel, coPI Mechanical Engineering

Carolyn Lawrence-Dill, coPI Genetics, Development, and Cell Biology

Pat Schnable, coPI Agronomy

Nicole Scott Program Coordinator

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

Project Goals• New methods of graduate

training plant scientists.

• Better researchers who can address large-scale problems.

• Improve collaboration skills for faculty mentors.

2

Peterson Lab

www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

If we only knew,

• Students prefer active, hands on events!• NRT activities tend to be overplanned and overscheduled

• In classroom training efforts with lectures

• Data science: activities and contests work best

• Students are easier to train than faculty.

• Avoid using an administrative structure that a retiring dean recommends

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

P3 Program Boot CampTrainees participated in a 10-day intensive training prior to the start of the fall. The following topics were covered:• Introduction to Engineering, Plant Science, and Data

Science• Statistics and Hypothesis Testing• Two-Day Data Carpentry Workshop• Entrepreneurship and Leadership• Science Communication• Campus Facility Tours, Demonstrations, and Industry

Visits

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

Bootcamp Evolution

• Students rise and take over!

• Schedule: Focused on having ½ day in classroom, ½ day out and about in labs or hands on experience.

• 5 3 hour sessions on computing skills during boot camp-shorter and more hands on.

• Students liked this structure better and were more excited.

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

P3 Core CourseGDCB/ME/BCB 585: Fundamentals of Predictive Plant Phenomics (4 cr)

• Provides students with the necessary tools and vocabulary to tackle multidisciplinary problems

• Exposes students to engineering principles such as transport phenomena and sensor design, data science activities, and plant science fundamentals

• Hands on lab

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

P3 Core Course Activation• Sensor kits being used in teams to reduce anxiety of using

robots/plants sensors for first time• Emphasis is on exploring what can be done with the kit: failure is okay

if sensors don’t work out as planned (by students).

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

P3 Learning Community• Trainees meet two times each month

• Student led meetings• Professional development presentations

• Cohorts led by previous cohort

• Tried different formats: journal club, social outing, professional development, student presentations ….

• => Hard to come up with reasons for more senior students to attend

• Listening to students and working on creating hands on activities for outreach and Portals to the Public.

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

Summary

• Proposal process encourages us to go over the top with activities.

• It’s okay to scale back and prioritize.

• Avoid the classroom.

• Listen to the students.

RESEARCH TRAINEESHIP www.predictivephenomicsinplants.iastate.edu

Questions?

Collaboration,

Communication, and

Camaraderie: Building

Teams and CultureCHRISTOPHER KITCHENS CLEMSON UNIVERSITY

PI, RESILIENT INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS

Some RIES pillars 27 Students, 11 Departments, 4 Colleges

Collaboration space with a dedicated floor in the new Watt Family Innovation Center

Each student is co-advised in multiple disciplines

All students have at least one common course and project experience

Conferences:

Three RIES conferences each year (student-led)

A distinguished visiting speaker program

Foster (Push) Cross-disciplinary Collaboration

Communication strategy

Advisor signs an agreement (will fund, will co-advise, understands

his/her responsibilities, and those of the students)

Student signs an agreement understanding his/her responsibilities as

well, along with the specific RIES requirements

Pros

Clarifies expectations

Gives them a document to refer to

Gives the Director “leverage”

Sends a message that you’re serious!

Cons

Students forget this in 20 seconds

Faculty forget this in 2 seconds

Rules and guidelines can change

Some requirements have long runways

Like any program,

a graduate

handbook

NEEDS:

Like any project, a

visual timeline and a

progress indicator

Survey students on

how they would like

to communicate

(then,

hold them

to it)

Collaboration

In the first RIES class they take,

students are forced to collaborate

with each other

We emphasize team-building and

collaboration through special

lectures, activities, surveys and

professional development courses

We co-locate students and give

them an open, collaborative

environment

And that works!?

Yes…and no

Still have to overcome faculty not buying in (“ownership”

of their PhD student time)

Bigger problems:

If students control the research agenda, do they know what is

publishable, really?

Do your technical experts get used as collaborators or “tools”?

The issue is one of deep collaboration and changing the

mindset of the normal PhD experience

Address this head-on. Show the difference between consulting an

expert and a deep collaboration. Spread this message to faculty!

Camaraderie

By co-locating the students and involving them in

conferences, do you get them to buy in as a “family”?

Of course not. But…

Checklist:

Be intentional: Let them know you’re engaging in team-building

Leadership matters: Treat the students well, take the time to listen, set the culture

Let them lead too: Allocate funds for them to set up their own fun events

Be there: Show up and engage; be enthusiastic about your own research

What I wish I knew It will go well. It will not go smoothly.

When you pay attention and engage, people notice

When you take your eye off the ball, people notice that too

Early on, get good at:

Setting a positive, inclusive, and intellectual environment

Over-communicate (just try…you probably cannot!)

Develop leadership and entrust others to take real responsibility

Understanding the needs and workloads of the students!

Keeping it Fun and Entertaining!!!

Questions,

on or off the record? ckitche@clemson.edu

Supporting Transdisciplinary Collaborations in Research Teams

Research and Traineeship Program

Lorenzo Ciannelli, Flaxen Conway, Ana Spalding, Cynthia Char, Julia Jones, Michael Banks, Katherine Hoffman, Alix Gitelman

Risk and Uncertainty Quantification and Communication in Marine Science and Policy

Session 1: Thursday, September 26

10:15 – 11:00 am

OSU NRT Trainee

Cohort 4

Num

berofstudents

0

5

10

15

Cohort1 Cohort2 Cohort3 Cohort4

CollegecompositionofNRTtrainee(n=44)

CEOAS FWEnvScience ScienceEngineering LiberalArts

0

5

10

15

Cohort1 Cohort2 Cohort3 Cohort4

Degreeprogram

MS PhD

Third cohort: 2018-19

CNH in Mo’orea Island

• Adriana Messyasz

• Risako Sakai

• Kaitlin McConnell

• Aaron Weinstock

• Bran Black

Marine Reserves

• Adrian Laufer

• Erin Howard

• Jenn Wong

• Megan Wilson

Sea Otter Reintroduction

• Benjamin Wickizer

• Dominique Kone

• Lorne Curran

Student Impacts: preparedness and motivation for transdisciplinary research projects

I am more prepared because I know how difficult it can be, and have some sense of what I can do to avoid the difficulties in the future.

2

6

5

7

6

6

1

1

3

1

1 1Cohort 1 (n=11)

Cohort 2 (n=9)

I am now ___ motivated.

Cohort 1 (n=11)

Cohort 2 (n=9)

I am now ___ prepared.

More Slightly more Equally Slightly less Less

The experience of working in a team, and the information in the Collaboration class has made me more aware of the challenges and benefits of trans research. It wasn’t always a positive experience though, which is why my motivation hasn’t really increased. I would almost say I am slightly less motivated, except that I really do think that collaborative transdisciplinary projects are important and valuable.

Student Impacts: preparedness and motivation for transdisciplinary research projects

2

6

5

7

6

6

1

1

3

1

1 1Cohort 1 (n=11)

Cohort 2 (n=9)

I am now ___ motivated.

Cohort 1 (n=11)

Cohort 2 (n=9)

I am now ___ prepared.

More Slightly more Equally Slightly less Less

Student impacts: knowledge & skills

Cohort 1 (n=11) Cohort 2 (n=9)

Sources of support: training elements

Cohort 1 (n=11) Cohort 2 (n=9)Collaborations

Coursework

Professional

Sources of support: human capital

Cohort 1 (n=11) Cohort 2 (n=9)

Fe

llow

train

ee

Fa

cu

lty

Lessons learned

Time constraint for researchMy NRT team did not have a research project outlined, nor had selected our team, when we started the project, and were only given one year to complete it. This was one of the most challenging aspect of the NRT program–completing meaningful research with thisgroup in less than a year.

Research specificationNot having a more defined goal for a project. We spent tons of time just brainstorming and it felt like we were going in circles.

Alignment between coursework and researchThe courses required didn't apply very well to the process of creating the transdisciplinary report. And the required work load of the courses took away from both NRT research and thesis research.

Team dynamic and interpersonal skillsAnother one of the largest challenges that I faced as an NRT student was poor team dynamics.…

Mentor involvementMentor motivation and involvement are key to the team’s success

Questions?

Artwork by Samm Newton, NRT Trainee, Cohort II, 2017-18

Research and Traineeship Program

Creating Classes for Training Cyber-Physical System(CPS) Researchers and Engineers

Yuan Tian

Computer Science, University of Virginia

yuant@virginia.edu

NRT: A Graduate Traineeship in Cyber Physical Systems• JOHN STANKOVIC

HOMA ALEMZADEHBRAD CAMPBELLCODY FLEMINGJON GOODALLDAN QUINNLU FENGTOLU ODUMOSUYUAN TIAN

Creating classes, sounds simple!

Wait, what if you need to cover a very diversified background of students?• How to make sure we can help all the students in the program?

• 6 Different Departments

• How to design the pre-requirements?

Principles of designing the classes

• To provide exposure to principles, skills, analytics, and tools required to work in or perform research in CPS

• To emphasize the interaction of the physical and cyber rather than typical materials on these topics

Slides by Jack Stankovic

Who should be teaching these classes?

• How to have sustainable instructors?

Coordination with administrators, other programs• How to comply with other degree requirements?

• How to coordinate with different departments?

How to evaluate these classes?

• What kind of metrics should we use given the different background of students?

Our final structure of classes

• 5 core classes

• 6 in-depth classes

• Students sign up for a core class which has 2 “fixed” modules in it

• There is no crossing over between modules in a semester (simplifies logistics/grading/ assigning instructors, etc.)

• Classes are offered across 6 Departments

5 Core Classes (semester = 2 modules)Bootcamp Bootcamp

Embedded Programming

Wireless Sensor Networks

Signal Processing+ ML Feedback Control

Solids Fluids

Formal Methods Safety + Security

Fall

Fall

Fall +Spring

Spring

Spring

REQ.

Slides by Jack Stankovic

In-depth Classes

• It is expected that Depts will be offering classes that meet CPS in-depth (perhaps with some tweaking by the CPS instructor)• To emphasize the Cyber – Physical Interaction

• Ideally – no extra teaching load in terms of classes, but perhaps in enrollment

• Cur. Requirement is 2 in-depth classes in Fall and 1 in Spring, but offer more than this to present choice

Slides by Jack Stankovic

Take-aways

• It’s a challenging and rewarding experience!

• Tips:• Plan early, coordinate more

• Get non-PIs involved

• Communicate more with each other

• Keep in mind the diversity of students

Thank you!

• Questions?

yuant@virginia.edu

Widening the Web of the Individual Development Plan

Debra Fowler

Center for Teaching Excellence

NSF-DGE-1545403

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02586-5

https://www.chronicle.com/article/Columbia-Had-Little-Success/246989

Academia Industry

WorkValues

Help Society

Help Others

People Contact

Teamwork

Friendships

Congenial Atmosphere

Competition

Make Decisions

Fast Pace

Supervision

Influence People

Work AloneIndependence

Intellectual Challenge

Work on Frontiers of Knowledge

Expert Status

Creativity

Aesthetics

Predictability

Variety

Job Security

Benefits Available

RecognitionRisk Taking

Earning Potential

Location

Physically Challenging

Not Physically Challenging

Flexible Schedule

Status and Prestige

Professional Development

Job TranquilityWork/Life Balance

Family Friendly

Exercise Competence

High Demand

Learn New Things

Informational Interview

Questions?

NSF-DGE-1545403

Acknowledgement:

Lessons learned in developing

an interdisciplinary training

program at the nexus of food,

energy, and water systems

ANDREW C. WILCOX DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCESUNIVERSITY OF MONTANA

UM BRIDGES: Graduate Training at

the Food-Energy-Water Nexus

UM BRIDGES trains future leaders from diverse backgrounds to advance societally relevant science toward more sustainable food-energy-water systems

Poster session 2: 3-3:45 pm (J. Vanderwall et al.)

Developing next-generation leaders to tackle challenges at the nexus of food, energy, and water systems

Train future leaders from diverse backgrounds to advance societally-relevant science toward more sustainable food-energy-water systems

Students: Prepare diverse graduate students to transform FEW research systems

Research: Generate and disseminate new FEWS knowledge

Faculty: Positively impact FEW faculty careers and highlight leadership in FEW nexus research

Goal

Objectives

University of Montana INFEWS NRT: UM BRIDGES

NSF Funding

Trainees

BRIDGES PIs

Program Coordinator

BRIDGES Faculty

Steering Committee

External Advisory

Committee

UM Grad Students

External Evaluator

UM Faculty

Tribal/ Community

Partners

Mentoring & IDPs

Resources Activities*

Core Course

Speaker Series

Seminar: Science to Practice

Seminar: Science Comms I

Workshop: Numeracy

Internships

Co-Labs

External Trainings & Conferences

International Experience

Retreats

External Evaluation

Cohort Recruitment/Building

Tribal Interface/Broader Impacts

FEWS Networking

EAC Interface

Disciplinary Research/Training

Trai

nin

g

Res

earc

h

Eval

uat

ion

/Co

mm

un

ity

Outputs

14 Individual Development Plans

1 course updated, 2 seminars developed,

1 workshops held, 2 multi-day speaker events held

Attended by:19 NRT-funded trainees

7 Non-NRT funded trainees>~100 non-BRIDGES graduate students

>30 faculty>50 community members

8 trainees and 6 faculty attend conferences & trainings

5 trainees complete internships & 5 in progress

2 co-labs held with 7 trainees & 2 grad students & 7 faculty

38 published manuscripts, 56 conference presentations

1 orientation and retreat held

Continued contact with INFEWS workshop attendees and manuscript in preparation

3 trainees & 2 faculty travel internationally

Cohort 1: retained 11 of 14 traineesCohort 2: retained 14 of 14 trainees

Cohort 3: 7/4 NRT-/non-NRT funded recruited, 55% women, and additional trainees to be added soon

13 evaluation instruments distributed to trainees, faculty, or mentors

Multiple Broader Impacts activities completed

Culture of interdisciplinary and systems thinking

Pro

gram

Trai

nee

STEM students prepared for multiple career paths

Vibrant intellectual FEW community

Diverse, high-quality trainees recruited and retained

Broader STEM participation

Innovative research catalyzed

Early-career faculty supported

UM is a leader in FEWS

Understand FEW science, society, and ethics across

disciplines

Innovate and problem solve toward sustainable FEWS

Facile with interdisciplinary methods and skills

Ability to bridge science-practice-policy

Engaged in communicating science within and beyond

discipline

Outcomes

Logic Model for AY 2018-2019

Res

earc

h

1 meeting with 4 EAC members and 6 faculty

Training elements / lessons

learned

“Core course”: The Food-Energy-Water Nexus

Science communications

Numeracy

Co-labs

Winemiller et al.

(Science, 2016)

Challenges

Governance

Sustaining faculty engagement

Limits to / challenges of interdisciplinarity

Numeracy / computational training

Incentives

Program sustainability: BRIDGES 3.0?

Questions?

andrew.wilcox@umontana.edu https://www.umt.edu/bridges/