Download Report

Page 111In Proceedings
SciPro Idea Bank:
Post conference
work shop
Matchmaking ideas, people and organizations
to facilitate innovative theses
Henrik Hansson, Jan Moberg, Ranil Peiris
Department of Computer and Systems Sciences
Stockholm University, Sweden
ICTER International conference,
14th December 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka
Matching
1. Create, develop or find idea. Use the Idea bank:
proposals from industry, public sector organisations and
supervisors. 2. Student’s project idea is matched with
supervisor based on key words and availability
Project plan
Peer-review
1. Upload manuscript/find
manuscript for review, 2.
Review according to prewritten checklists, 3 Author
feedback on reviewer’s analysis
Mid seminar
Peer-review
1. Announce date, room, finished theses,
2. Select opponent, participants, communicate,
3.Distribute thesis to readers and supervisors,
4. Automatic anti-plagiarism check
Individual supervision
supported by: 1. Dynamic
checklists, 2. Screening &
commenting feedback, 3.
Activity plan, 4. Auto-dated
manuscripts. 5. Intersubjective quality ratings
Final seminar
Report grade
R report
Stable matching: Theory, evidence, and practical design
Alvin Roth and Lloyd Shapley
The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences
in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2012
Pairwise matching: how individuals can be paired
up when they all have different views regarding
who would be the best match.
The main challenge involved designing a simple
mechanism that would lead to a stable matching,
where no couples would break up and form new
matches which would make them better off.
Pre-Process
• 550 students need to develop their project
ideas:
– 400 bachelor ( mainly Swedish students)
– 150 master (mainly international students)
• Approximately 70 supervisors need to present
themselves, their research topics and
preferred mode of supervising.
• Matching between students and supervisors
Point of departure
A good idea!
Match: student and supervisor
Creativity and methods
Open minds
New ideas/knowledge
New products
New services
Closed minds
Closed eyes
Open eyes
How to get a good idea?
Supervisor introduction videos
• Who
• Research topics
• 3-5 minuter
Balance interests
Phase 1: Research plan
Instructions to student
Write 1 ½ - 3 pages research plan. Structure the plan according to the following headings:
• Title
• Background
• Aim and research questions
• Methods and material
• Expected results
• Significance
• Time and activity plan
• References
Checklist for your research plan:
1. Provide a preliminary title. This is the most abstracted way of presenting the study. What is it
about? Maybe add a subtitle either explaining a catchy title more scientifically or specify the
methods used?
1. Describe the context of the study. The background information needed to motivate the
study. Use previous research and your own analysis.
2. What is the problem? Have you captured the actual problem?
3. Provide 3-7 preliminary core concepts.
Self evaluation
4. What is the overall aim of the study?
5. What issues will the study not include (i.e. limitations)?
Peer review
6. Which specific research questions will you study?
Supervisor
7. a) What method(s) and theories will be used? b) why?
8. a) What kind of data will be collected? b) Why?
9. a) How is the sample selected? b) why?
10. What size is the sample?
11. Provide a time and activity plan. What will be completed and when?........
Questions?
Problems related to theses and supervision
• Negative economies of scale
- time consuming (supervisor)
•
•
•
•
•
Great need of constant feedback (student)
Lack of student motivation
High drop-out rate
Bachelor thesis, 3-year, 10 weeks
Master thesis, 4-year, 20 weeks
Low completion rate
PhD thesis, + 4 year, 2 years
Slow completion rates
Aims
• Increase theses quality
• Increase completion of theses
• Increase completions of theses
within the time frame
• Decrease thesis administration for all
involved: students, supervisors,
examiners and administrators
Title, Abstract
Chapter 1
Introduction
Chapter 1.1
Background
Chapter 1.2
Research question/
problem statement
Chapter 2
Theoretical
Level
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Empirical
Level
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Theoretical
Level
Extended
background
Why?
Reader curiosity
Broad statement
What? Domain-related
scientific base
Previous work/studies
Aim/Goal/Purpose
Task/Objective
Literature review/state of the art
Extended domain, theories, concepts
Current technologies and procedures
How? Method/Approach
Result/Implementation
Analysis/Discussion/Conclusions
Concluding remarks/Future work
References, Appendices
Preparations
First I'd like to say that the Scipro website is a
great resource and help for students working
on their thesis, good work! (student, 2012)
Utbildningsinsatser:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
FAQ
Supervisor FAQ
Supervisor info
Student info
Thesissupport@dsv.su.se
Supervisorsupport@dsv.su.se
Filmer
Bokade seminarier del 1 och del 2 HT
Drop in hela veckan innan kursstart
Drop in varje tisdag eftermiddag
Uppsökande rumsservice – hands on
Kompetensutvecklingsseminarium 1 gg/mån
• Inspelade
Meta-metodseminarium för studenter
• Inspelade
E-mail utskick
Notice-board
Hisstavlan
Kick off: studenter
Kick off DSV personal
Öppen dörr
Lunchmöten
Supervisor introduction videos
• Who
• Research topics
• 3-5 minuter
Motivation videos
PROJECT STATE
PROGRESS INDICATOR
Valbart schema
- Kandidat helfart
- Kandidat halvfart
- Master helfart
Activity Plan
Empirisk forskningsansats
Två forskningsansatser
- Innehåller deadlines
- Inlämningsfunktion/datum
- Checklistor: To do
I ett paket
Handledaren måste aktivt välja
Activity Plan för studenten
Samt anpassa datum
Utvecklingsbehov:
Handledaren vill kunna spara
sin specialbyggda Activity plan
till nästa kursomgång
Activity Plan
Artefact Design
Date
2012-03-19
2012-03-20
2012-03-23
Activity
Meeting - Uppstartsmöte
Meeting – Första handledarmötet
Deadline – Lämna in projektplan
Checklist
2012-04-04
Deadline – Lämna in bakgrund, syfte, metod och
etiska ställningstaganden
Deadline – Lämna in “Explikera problem”
To do: Background, aim, methods and ethics
Part I-III
To do/Questions: Problem Explication
Part I-IV
Deadline – Lämna in “ Definiera mål och krav på
artefakten”
Deadline – Lämna in “ Utveckla artefakten”
To do: Outline Artefact and Define
Requirements
To do: Design and Develop Artefact
Part I-IV
Deadline – Lämna in “ Pröva artefakten”
Deadline – Lämna in “ Utvärdera artefakten”
Deadline – Lämna in komplett examensarbete för
granskning inför slutseminarium
To do: Demonstrate Artefact
To do: Evaluate Artefact
To do: Analysis, discussion and conclusions
Part I-IV
Part I-V
Part I-VI
2012-05-16
2012-05-25
2012-06-01
2012-06-01
Deadline – Lämna in för slutseminarium
Deadline – Lämna in oppositionsrapport
Meeting- Slutseminarium
Thesis Part
First meeting
To do: Research plan/Project plan
Part I-IV
Part I-VI
To do: Oral defence and opposition
Alignment: Goals
Higher education act
Student
Supervisor
Reviewer
Dep. Course objectives
Evaluation critera
Macro level
Meso level
Micro level
SciPro Surveys
Mobile Phone Integration
• Android and Iphone apps
Confident
Confused
Time saved (h=hour, min=minutes) with SciPro. Estimations per individual supervisor
and for the department of computer and systems sciences (DSV) with
approx 200 bachelor students writing in pairs, 150 master students and
80 supervisors yearly.)
Feature
Without
SciPro
With
SciPro
Time saved:
Department (D)
Supervisor (S)
Matching: Idea Bank
0-40 h/Supervisor
0h
D: 0-3200 h
S: 0-40 h
Matching: Supervisor bank
8 h/new supervisor
5 min
D: 160 h if 20
missing supervisors
Matching: Co-author
0-1 h/Student
0h
D: 0 - 200 h
S: 0 -1 h/Student
Matching: Supervisor
Equal
Equal
Easier
Matching: Administration
480 h (selection)
+ 120 h (follow up)
120 h
(follow up)
D: 480 h
Meta-management: Monitoring
1h
15 min
D: 262 h
S: 45 min
Process:
1h
Process: Peer-review system
4 h/Student
15 min/
Thesis
0h
D: 262 h
S: 45 min/student
D: 1400 h
S: 4 h/Student
D: 500 h - 9000 h
S: 2-36 h/Thesis
Process: Dynamic checklists
Self-evaluation
Peer review
Supervisor feedback
6 – 40 h/student
4h
Process: integrated communication
1h
30 min
D: 175 h
S: 30 min/Student
Process: Administration of mandatory presence/
assignments
1h
30 min
D: 175 h
S: 30 min/Student
Process: Final seminar administration
1h
30 min
Process: Anti-plagiarism check
1 h/Thesis
15 min/
Thesis
Finalising: Grading and reporting
2 h/Thesis
15 min/
Thesis
Meta-support:
?
Meta-management: Documentation, statistics,
evaluation
40 h
15 min/
Thesis
20 h
D: 175 h
S: 30 min/Student
D: 188 h
S: 45 min/Master T
22 min/Bachelor T
D: 188 h
S: 45 min/Master T
22 min/Bachelor T
Quality . Increased
completion rate
D: 20 h
Process: Mobile device support
Sum individual supervisor saved hours. Min = one student, max = for example ten students, S: 10,5 - 432 h
more student = more savings
Sum DSV saved hours
D: 3985 – 15885 h
In total 200 bachelor theses and 150 master
theses at DSV is worth 10,8 million SEK
(1,2 million Euro/1,7 million US Dollar).
New bottlenecks
Project idea Matching
Information Supervisors communication
Reviewer
Contact:
E-mail: Henrik.Hansson@dsv.su.se
Department URL: www.dsv.su.se