Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Lunchmee)ng6October2016FreekKapteijn‘HouserulesCE’
CatalysisEngineering-ChemE
• Newhousing– Mee)ngs:
• Thursdaylunchmee)ng12:00–13:30 – Allexpected–introduc)on,workpresenta)ons,inducediscussions– YixiaoWangorganiser
• People– Intake,introduc)on
• Facili)es– Toothingproblems–makethebestoutofit
• Issues:makeservicecall
• Safetyrules• Workinghabits
SecondfloorN
Largelab(E2.190)
Mul)Tracklab(E2.290)
Texturelab(E2.530)
4x Technicians (E2.200)
PPE (12x PhD) (E2.320/340)
Michiel Makkee” (E2.260)
3x PhD/ Postdoc (E2.280)
6x MSc / Guest (E2.300)
5x PhD (E2.360)
16x MSc (E2.380)
12x PhD / Postdoc (E2.220 / 240)
TAP-II/ IR/ TGA TEOM (E2.290) Bart
16x MSc (E2.380) students
5x PhD (E2.360)
6x MSc / Guest (E2.300)
3x PhD/ Postdoc (E2.280)
Large Lab (E2.190)
STAIRS
Coffee STAIRS
LocalGassupplyboxes
4x Technicians (E2.200)
PPE (12x PhD) (E2.320/340)
Michiel Makkee” (E2.260)
3x PhD/ Postdoc (E2.280)
6x MSc / Guest (E2.300)
5x PhD (E2.360)
16x MSc (E2.380)
12x PhD / Postdoc (E2.220 / 240)
TAP-II/ IR/ TGA TEOM (E2.290) Bart
16x MSc (E2.380):
5x PhD (E2.360)
6x MSc / Guest (E2.300)
3x PhD/ Postdoc (E2.280)
12x PhD / Postdoc (E2.220 / 240)
4x Technicians (E2.200)
Large Lab (E2.190)
STAIRS
Coffee STAIRS
Freek Kapteijn (E2.100)
Jorge Gascon (E2.120)
12x PhD/ Postdoc (E2.140 / 160)
Monique vd Veen Jacob Moulijn (E2.180)
Els / Caroline + Mieke (OMI) (060/080)
Textuurlab (E2.530) Willy
12x PhD/ Postdoc (E2.140 / 160)
STAIRS
Coffee STAIRS
People–PhD,Post-Doc
– ArrangementsthroughElstoobtainNETID,campuscard• HRforregistra)on,salaryetc.
– Informa)onpackage• Department,building,safety,houserules,workingoutsideofficehours
– Dosafetytest(campuscard,accesstoroom(s),lab(s))• h`ps://labservant.tudelb.nl/index.php/login/index
– Introduc)onbysupervisorto• Faculty,techniciansandareasupervisors
– Preparetextforwebsite(seeothers)• h`p://cheme.nl/ce/people/
– Timeregistra)oninTIM• Beforeendofeachmonth!
– Chemicals– Gases
People-PhD– RegisterGraduateSchool(research,disciplineandtransferrableskills)
• h`ps://intranet.tudelb.nl/en/targeted-info/graduate-school/– Planyourproject,GScreditswithsupervisor(3x15)– Thesisproposal&Go/Nogoevalua)onwithin1year
• Month11:writeproposal• Monthearly:selectexternalevaluator
– FinalizewithPhDThesisandproposi)ons• Thesisusuallybasedonpublishedpapers(peerreviewedalready)• Willbecheckedforplagiarism• Proposi)ons
– Mustbereadyandapprovedtogetherwiththesis– Startalreadyformula)ngproposi)ons(costs)me!)
• Read‘DoctorateRegula)ons2015’and‘Implementa)onDecree2015’– Contributetoeduca)on
• PBV,LO,TA,onanequalsharebasis– Otherac)vi)es
People-MScandBScstudents
• Aberselec)ngyourprojectwithsupervisingPhDorPD:– Registerwithsecretariat– Makea)mescheduleoftheresearchperiod
• Allowforcoursestobedone(orholidays)– Dosafetytesttogainaccesstolabs– Supervisorintroducesyoutotechniciansandareasupervisors
• Supervisoristhefirsttoaddressforques)ons,issuesetc.– Ifnecessary:gettrainingofequipmentowner(PFO)– MSc
• Aber2-4weeksprojectoutlinepresenta)on• Midway1stpresenta)on• 2-4weeksbeforeend2ndpresenta)on–collectdiscussioninfoetc.• AtendPublicpresenta)onandthesisdiscussion
– BSc• Presenta)onatend
– Startwri)ngreportfrombeginning–seeh`p://cheme.nl/ce/educa)on-2.html
– Evalua)oncriteria–seegradingschemesh`ps://blackboard.tudelb.nl/webapps/blackboard/content/listContent.jsp?content_id=_820146_1&course_id=_19299_1&mode=view#_1004272_1
YixiaoWang
MEPgradingscheme
Thesis Administration TNW E: [email protected] | T: 015 – 278 5995 | Visiting address: Lorentzweg 1, room A208 2628 CJ Delft | Mailing address: P.O. Box 5046 2600 GA Delft
TNW Master Thesis (MEP) grading Scheme Student Name: Student number: Course program: AP/CE/SEC/SET
Learning Outcomes fail 6 7 8 9 10
1.Th
eore
tical
kn
owle
dge
&
unde
rsta
ndin
g Theoretical
knowledge
Does not understand and can not reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of MSc textbooks
Understands and can reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of MSc textbooks
Understands and can reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of MSc textbooks
Understands and can reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of MSc textbooks and scientific literature
Has independently collected, processed and integrated theory from different fields or sources
Has independently developed a new piece of theory
Application of
theory
Is not able to relate theory to the performed research
Has difficulties applying this theory to the performed research
Can apply this theory to the performed research, after being shown how to do so
Has independently applied this theory to the performed research
Has independently and very skillfully applied this theory to the performed research
Has independently integrated existing theory from different fields or sources into a new original theoretical description.
2. M
etho
d an
d sc
ient
ific
appr
oach
Responsibility Showed no responsibility for the proper progress and completion of the project
Showed little responsibility for the proper progress and completion of the project
Did take and show responsibility for the proper progress and completion of the project
Was project manager of his/her research project
Was project manager of his/her research project and was actively involved in related projects and initiatives
Was project manager of his/her research project initiated new related projects and initiatives
Own contribution
Was not able to execute a prescribed research program, following methods and approaches suggested by the supervisor
Has executed a prescribed research program, following methods and approaches suggested by the supervisor
Did occasionally take initiative to extend or modify the research plan or to suggest an alternative method or approach
Did have a significant own input into research plan or the followed method and approach
Research plan, followed method and approach were essentially selected and defined by the student
Problem formulation, research plan, followed method and approach were selected and defined by the student
Communication Did not or seldom communicated the progress of the project with the supervisor
Adequately communicated about the progress of the project with the supervisor
Actively communicated about the progress of the project with various members of the research group
Actively sought for information, contacts and advice with various experts inside and outside of the research group
Has created new contacts or has collected new information not previously available to the research group
Has created new contacts and has collected new information not previously available to the research group
Literature study Can not study literature as suggested by the supervisor
Has studied literature as suggested by the supervisor
Has found some new literature, in addition to the literature suggested by the supervisor
Has independently found and studied a significant amount of relevant literature
Has independently performed a thorough literature study
Has independently performed a thorough literature study at the level of a comparative literature review
Critical attitude Has no critical attitude towards own results Limited critical attitude towards own results Sufficient critical attitude towards own results, limited critical attitude towards literature and specialists
Sufficient critical attitude towards own results, literature and specialists
Well-balanced critical attitude towards own results, sufficient critical attitude towards literature and specialists
Well-balanced critical attitude towards own results, literature and specialists
Time planning
Is not able to make a time planning; nominal project time was exceeded by more than 70%
Time planning should be improved, nominal project time was exceeded by more than 50%
Time planning could be improved, nominal project time was exceeded by more than 30%
Good time planning, nominal project time was exceeded by no more than 20%
Very good time planning, nominal project time was exceeded by no more than 10%
Excellent time planning, nominal project time was exceeded by no more than 5%
3. C
ompe
tenc
e in
doi
ng
rese
arch
wor
k
Extension/gene-
ration of methods
Has not verified nor extended knowledge, data or methods available in the group
Has extended or verified knowledge, data or methods available in the group
Has extended existing knowledge, data or methods available in the group
Has produced new methods, insights or understanding not previously available in the group
Has produced new methods, insights or understanding not previously available in the world
Has produced new methods, insights and understanding not previously available in the world
New ideas Has not made any original contribution to the project
Has not really made an original contribution to the project
Has not really made an original contribution to the project
Has had at least one original contribution to the project not initiated or thought of by the supervisor
Has had several original ideas not initiated or thought of by the supervisor
Has surprised us all with some brilliant new ideas
Performing
experiments
Should improve considerably on practical (experimental/computer) skill, but is always aware of safety and operate accordingly
Should improve on practical (experimental/computer) skill , but is always aware of safety and operate accordingly
Could improve on practical (experimental/computer) skills, but is always aware of safety and operate accordingly
Good practical (experimental/computer) skills. Works safe, careful and precise.
Very good practical (experimental/computer) skills; is always aware of safety issues.
Exceptional practical (experimental/computer) skills; is always aware of safety issues.
Scientific
significance
Work is not reliable and should be redone before results can be communicated to the outside world
Work should be checked and possibly redone before results can be communicated to the outside world
Work has to be checked before it can be included in external reports or publications
Results can be communicated without hesitation to the outside world. Work has significantly contributed to a conference paper, a journal publication, a patent or a new computational or experimental technique not previously available in the group
We are proud to communicate the results to the outside world. The work has directly led to a conference paper, a journal publication, or a patent
We are proud to communicate the results to the outside world. Work has directly led to a publication in a top journal, or a patent
4. R
epor
t
Quality of the
report
Report does not fulfills basic requirements or contains large scientific errors;
Report fulfills basic requirements and is free of large scientific errors
Report fulfills all basic requirements and is free of scientific errors
Report is free of scientific errors and fulfills all requirements in terms of contents, structure and clarity
Very good report in terms of contents, structure and clarity
Excellent report in terms of contents, structure and clarity
Independence in
writing
Is not able to write a report without significant support of the supervisor.
Significant corrections made by supervisor, in various iterations Important corrections made by supervisor Report was written by the student with
limited corrections by supervisor Report was written by the student with virtually no corrections by supervisor
Report was written by the student without any corrections by supervisor
Usefulness of the
report
Report is not suited to used as input for other research students
Report is not suited to be sent directly to customers or third parties Report could be sent out to third parties
(parts of) The report can be incorporated into a PhD thesis or scientific publication with little modification
(parts of) The report can be incorporated into a PhD thesis or scientific publication with virtually no modification
(parts of) The report can be incorporated into a PhD thesis or scientific publication without modification
5. P
rese
ntat
ion
& d
efen
ce
Quality of
presentation
Presentation at the level of a very poor speaker at national conferences
Presentation at the level of poor speakers at national conferences
Presentation at the level of average speakers at national conferences
Presentation at the level of average speakers at international conferences
Presentation at the level of the better speakers at international conferences
Presentation at the level of the best speakers at international conferences
Handling
questions
Is hardly able to deal with the most basic questions
Is able to deal with basic questions, depends on supervisor for advanced questions
Is able to deal with part of the advanced questions, rarely depends on supervisor
Deals with advanced questions efficiently and comfortably, interacts very well with questioners
Offers new insights during discussion Scientific debate worthy of a conference Sparkling scientific debate
Depth of
argumentation in
oral defense
Is hardly able to provide basic arguments Is able to provide basic arguments, absence of detailed argumentation
Provides detailed argumentation only for a limited set of questions
Detailed argumentation for most questions, interesting scientific meeting
In-depth argumentation, leading to a very interesting scientific meeting Excellent scientific meeting
6. C
ompe
tenc
es Level of English
The English writing skills have to be improved considerably; English speaking skills need to be improved considerably
Adequate English writing skills Adequate English speaking skills
Sufficient English writing skills Sufficient English speaking skills
Good English writing skills Good English speaking skills
Very good English writing skills Very good English speaking skills
Excellent English writing skills Excellent English speaking skills
Independency Needs continuous steering and supervision Needs very regular steering and supervision Performs well with regular steering and supervision
Can work independently, with little steering or supervision Needs no steering Needs no steering and supervision
(Inter)personal
skills
Has difficulties functioning in a team; has conflicts with coworkers Has difficulties functioning in a team Has no difficulties functioning in a team Is a good team player Is a very good team player or an excellent
individualist Excels as team player or is an exceptionally competent individualist
Creativity
Not creative Not very creative Some creativity Creative researcher Very creative researcher Exceptionally creative researcher
Open-mindedness
Non-responsive to criticism, or responds to criticism in an aggressive , defensive way, or gets demotivated by criticism
Non-responsive to criticism, or responds to criticism in a defensive way, or looses motivation by criticism
Responds to criticism in a defensive way Can handle criticism in a positive way Uses criticism to improve him/herself Is actively seeking for criticism to improve him/herself
Note: the minimum requirements (grade 6) allows one learning outcome (1 till 6) to be marked as a 5. The grade does not have to be the mathematical average of the criteria. A precision of .5 is allowed.
MEPgradingscheme2013-2014.pdf
BEPgradingscheme
Thesis Administration TNW E: [email protected] | T: 015 – 278 5995 | Visiting address: Lorentzweg 1, room A208 2628 CJ Delft | Mailing address: P.O. Box 5046 2600 GA Delft
TNW Bachelor Thesis (BEP) grading Scheme Student Name: Student number: Course program: MST / LST / TN / NB
Learning Outcomes fail 6 7 8 9 10
1. T
heor
etic
al
know
ledg
e &
un
ders
tand
ing Theoretical
knowledge
Does not understand and cannot reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of BSc textbooks
Understands relevant theory at the level of BSc textbooks
Understands and can reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of BSc textbooks
Understands and can reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of BSc textbooks, understands relevant theory from more advanced literature, such as MSc textbooks
Understands and can reproduce directly relevant theory at the level of BSc textbooks and more advanced literature, such as MSc textbooks
Has a theoretical understanding of the relevant theory at the level of an MSc graduate.
Application of theory
Is not able to relate theory to the performed research
Has difficulties applying this theory to the performed research
Can apply this theory to the performed research, after being shown how to do so
Can independently apply this theory to the performed research
Has independently and very insightful applied this theory to the performed research
Has independently integrated existing theory from different sources into an original theoretical description.
2. M
etho
d an
d sc
ient
ific
appr
oach
Responsibility Showed no responsibility for the proper progress and completion of the project
Showed little responsibility for the proper progress and completion of the project
Did take and shows responsibility for the proper progress and completion of the project
Was project manager of his/her research project
Was a pro-active project manager of his/her research project
Was a pro-active project manager of his/her research project and was actively involved in related projects
Communication Did not properly communicate the progress of the project with the supervisor
Adequately communicated about the progress of the project with the supervisor
Communicated timely and adequately about the progress of the project with the supervisor
Actively sought communication about the progress of the project with the supervisor
Actively sought for information, contacts and advice with various experts inside the research group
Actively sought for information, contacts and advice with various experts inside and outside the research group
Literature study Cannot study literature as suggested by the supervisor
Has adequately studied literature as suggested by the supervisor
Has properly studied and understood literature as suggested by the supervisor
Has found some new literature, in addition to the literature suggested by the supervisor
Has independently found and studied a significant amount of relevant literature
Has independently performed a thorough literature study
Critical attitude Has no critical attitude towards the validity of own results Limited critical attitude towards own results Adequate critical attitude towards own
results Good critical attitude towards own results, and that of his predecessors and colleagues
Good critical attitude towards own results, and that of his predecessors, colleagues, literature and supervisor
Excellent critical attitude towards own results, literature and supervisor
Time planning
Has not learned to think ahead in order to adequately plan experiments. As a result nominal project time was exceeded by more than 50%
Time planning should be improved, nominal project time was exceeded by more than 30%
Time planning could be improved, nominal project time was exceeded by more than 20%
Very good time planning, nominal project time was exceeded by no more than 10%
Excellent time planning. Project was finished within schedule.
Excellent time planning. Project was finished within schedule. Work done was more than expected
3. R
esea
rch
wor
k
New ideas n.a. Did not produce any own idea during the course of the project
Suggested at least one own, but not really original, idea during the course of the project
Suggested at least one original idea during the course of the project
Has had at least one original contribution to the project not initiated or thought of by the supervisor
Has had several original ideas not initiated or thought of by the supervisor
Experimental skills
Should improve considerably on practical (experimental/computer/design) skills, or is not always aware of safety issues.
Should improve on practical (experimental/computer/design) skills, but is always aware of safety and operates accordingly
Could improve on practical (experimental/computer/design) skills, but is always aware of safety and operate accordingly
Good practical (experimental/computer/design) skills. Works safely, carefully and precisely.
Very good practical (experimental/computer/design) skills; actively seeks to improve safety.
Exceptional practical (experimental/computer) skills; actively seeks to improve safety
Significance Work/design is not reliable and should be redone before it can get a follow-up
Work/design should be checked before it can get a follow-up
Work/design forms a solid basis for follow-up research, but needs further extension, verification or improvement before it can be included in external reports or publications
Work/design can be included in external reports or publications.
We are proud to communicate the results externally
We are proud to communicate the results externally. The work has directly led to a conference paper, a journal publication, or a patent
4. R
epor
t
Independence in writing
Is not able to write a report without significant support of the supervisor.
Significant corrections made by supervisor, in various iterations Important corrections made by supervisor Report was written by the student with
limited corrections by supervisor Report was written by the student with virtually no corrections by supervisor
Report was written by the student without any corrections by supervisor
Quality of the report
Report does not fulfill basic requirements or contains large scientific errors;
Report fulfills basic requirements and is free of large scientific errors
Report fulfills all basic requirements and is free of scientific errors
Clear, well-written, well-structured report free of scientific errors
Very good report in terms of contents, structure and clarity
Excellent report in terms of contents, structure and clarity
Usefulness of the report
The report is full of errors and cannot be understood
The report cannot be used as a basis for follow-up research
The report documents the performed work in such a way that it can be used as the basis for follow up research
The report could be send to third parties Parts of the report can be incorporated in a scientific paper after modification
Parts of the report can be incorporated in a scientific paper without modification
5.Pr
esen
tatio
n
& d
efen
ce
Quality of presentation Fails to give an intelligible presentation The presentation is poorly structured The presentation is reasonably structured. The presentation is well-structured and
conveys a clear message The presentation is well-structured, conveys a clear, motivating message
The presentation is at the level of the better speakers at national conferences
Depth of argumentation in oral defense
Is not able to provide basic arguments Is able to provide basic arguments, absence of detailed argumentation
Provides detailed argumentation basic questions and basic argumentation for more advanced questions
Detailed argumentation for most questions In-depth argumentation, leading to an interesting scientific discussion
The entire committee enjoyed the in-depth discussions with the student
Handling questions
Is not able to deal with the most basic questions
Is able to deal with basic questions, depends on supervisor for advanced questions
Is able to deal with part of the advanced questions, rarely depends on supervisor
Deals with advanced questions efficiently and comfortably.
Deals with advanced questions efficiently and comfortably, interacts very well with questioners
Offers new insights during discussion
6. C
ompe
tenc
es
(Inter)personal skills
Has difficulties functioning in a team; has conflicts with coworkers Has difficulties functioning in a team Has no difficulties functioning in a team Is a good team player Is a very good team player or an excellent
individualist Excels as team player or is an exceptionally competent individualist
Creativity Not creative Not very creative Some creativity Creative researcher Very creative researcher Exceptionally creative researcher
Open-mindedness
Non-responsive to criticism, or responds to criticism in an aggressive , defensive way, or gets demotivated by criticism
Non-responsive to criticism, or responds to criticism in a defensive way, or loses motivation by criticism
Responds to criticism in a defensive way Can handle criticism in a positive way Uses criticism to improve him/herself Is actively seeking for criticism to improve him/herself
Language
The English/Dutch writing skills have to be improved considerably; English/Dutch speaking skills need to be improved considerably
Adequate English/Dutch writing skills Adequate English/Dutch speaking skills
Sufficient English/Dutch writing skills Sufficient English/Dutch speaking skills
Good English/Dutch writing skills Good English/Dutch speaking skills
Very good English/Dutch writing skills Very good English/Dutch speaking skills
Excellent English/Dutch writing skills Excellent English/Dutch speaking skills
Note: the minimum requirements (grade 6) allows one learning outcome (1 till 6) to be marked as a 5. The grade does not have to be the mathematical average of the criteria. A precision of .5 is allowed.
BEPgradingscheme2013-2014.pdf
TexturelabE2.530 Areasupervisors:• FreekKapteijn• WillyRook
Facili)es
Areasupervisors:• JorgeGascon• BartvanderLinden
LargelabE2.190E2.290
Nochemicalsindrawersandcabinets!• Storechemicalswheretheybelong• Putthembacka9eruse
Usepointsuc<on
SASsheets
Usepointsuc<on
UseSASsheets
Nochemicalstorage
Keepwindowsclosed
Fumehoods CMRonlyhere
Ven<latedcabinets• noCMR• arenotfumehoods!• Equipmentsafetyreports• PFO
Keepwindowsclosed
Drive-inboxes• Safetyreports• PFO
Safety
• Introduc)ontesth`ps://labservant.tudelb.nl/index.php/login/index– Access,basicawareness
• Uselabcoats,glove(s)
• General,gasteam– h`ps://teams.connect.tudelb.nl/misc/arbo-milieu/sitepages/home.aspx
• Areasupervisors(AS)– Overnight,weekendexperimenta)onapproval–beforelunch)me– Approvalsafetyreports(EquipmentOwner,EO),SASsheets
• ‘What-if’!• Then" • Emergencycard
– NoSAS–experimentstopped– Unlabelledsamples-disposed
Workinghabits
– Uselogbook• Private–noteyourdailyac)vi)esanddetails• Equipment–notewhatyou’redoing(condi)ons,sample,..)
– Chemicals• Incupboard,putbackaberuseatright(original)place• Notransporta)onbetweenbuildings• Workclean• Wasteinthecorrectbins
– Cleanup(alsoaberspills…)• Reportfailures–learning
– Experimenta)on-permissions• PermitforOpera)on(PFO-EO)• SASsheets(AS)• Label-iden)fyyoursamples
– Unlabelledwillbedisposedoff• Workingoutsideofficehours(AS)
– Beforenoon– SeeleafletRectorMagnificus
Thanksfora`en)on
Successwithyourprojects
