ASSET 2016 Report

a s s e ta g r i c u l t u r a l s c i e n t i s t

S u p p o r t E x c h a n g e T e a m

2015 - 2016

Table of Contents

Programme Outline 1

Application & Selection Processes 5

The Participants 12

Activities 30

Feedback & Evaluation 48

Appendix 66

“We all do better when we all do better”

- Paul Wellstone

Programme Outline

The 2015/16 Agricultural Scientist Support & Exchange Team (ASSET) was part of a JIC initiative to increase collaboration and exchange between our region and sub-Saharan Africa as supported by the BecA-JIC Alliance (coordinated by Christopher Darby, Director of International Strategy and Liaison). It was one of several activities outlined in the Alliance’s initial work-programme centered on developing relationships between scientists in the two regions early in their careers. With approval from the JIC leadership, ASSET was devised and coordinated by a postdoc in Professor Giles Oldroyd’s team, Jodi Lilley. The programme was part of the Crop Engineering Consortium (CEC) developed by Christian Rogers to mobilize in areas of technology transfer and scientific community building. The programme was also supported by the JIC’s BBSRC 2015 Impact Acceleration Account.

Participation in ASSET was subject to approval by the primary supervisor/line-manager. Due diligence for the safety of the programme’s participants was coordinated by Chris Darby and HR. Every effort was made to ensure fair and impartial selection using best practices as advised by HR.

ASSET Facilitators

• Jodi Lilley - JIC International Development Coordinator (People Partnerships) & JIC Postdoc

• Christian Rogers - ENSA Scientific Programme Manager• Matt Heaton - ENSA Communications Specialist

Programme Assistance Provided by:

• Valerian Aloo - BecA-ILRI Hub Capacity Building Officer• Jonathan Clarke - JIC Head of Business Development• Christopher Darby - JIC Director of International Strategy and Liaison• Appolinaire Djikeng - BecA-ILRI Hub Director• Tilly Eldridge - ENSA Connections Liaison, JIC Postdoc, BecA-ILRI Hub Visiting Scientist• Jagger Harvey - BecA-ILRI Hub Senior Scientist• Lynne Mayne - Norwich Research Park Doctoral Training Partnership Director• Vanda Morgan - NBI Learning and Development Specialist• Giles Oldroyd - ENSA Project Leader & JIC Group Leader• Eleni Soumpourou - ENSA Research Assistant

1

GoalBuild agricultural development capacity by increasing early career scientist effectiveness through international feedback exchange, coaching, and leadership training.

Targeted Outcomes• Leadership and management skills improved• Witten productivity increased• Feedback skills improved• Productive international peer relationships established• African Agricultural Development potential increased

MethodProfessional development of Ag scientists in UK and Sub-Saharan Africa through leadership training and the formation of a peer-review exchange network.

Participation PrinciplesAll participants are;

1. Students of the peer review process2. Leaders of their professional success3. Experts in their own backgrounds and project areas

The challenges of today’s agricultural scientists are increasingly ambitious, complex and worldwide. Many of these challenges were presented by members of the C4 Rice, ENSA and RIPE projects at the 2015 Crop Engineering Consortium (CEC) conference. As was evident at the conference, our solutions and strategies must also be increasingly effective, integrative and international.

These types of solutions require a new level of connectedness and collaboration.

We can create a collaborative and productive community by giving the future leaders of

our fields strong foundations in relationship building and cultural translation.

The peer-review process itself brings people together. Review and constructive criticism are fundamental skills required for integration into the scientific community that are not necessarily taught in grad school. The processes build other skills such as critical evaluation, problem solving and effective communication.

When these skills are then underpinned by strong characters such as leadership and self-management the result is a highly effective agent of change.

Mission Statement

3

2 Core Activities

Leadership TrainingA workshop was held in Kigali, Rwanda November 23-27, 2015 at the Serena Hotel (http://www.

serenahotels.com/serenakigali/default-en.html). The training was conducted by HFP Consulting (http://www.hfp-consulting.de). At the end of the workshop, participants visited a Kigali

marketplace and the Kigali Genocide Memorial with the professional tour guide Magezi Sauveur. All expenses for attending the workshops including travel, accommodation and workshop

registration were covered.

After the workshop, the JIC participants had two additional lunchtime development workshops with Vanda Morgan exploring Appreciative Inquiry, Active Listening and the Myer’s Briggs Type

Indicators.

Digital Peer-review Network Peer-review was exchanged between participants from January to June 2016. Participants identified a written document crucial for their professional success during the application

process and dedicated to its development during the course of the programme. This could be a grant proposal, manuscript, or thesis chapter. Contents were be kept confidential within the group. The document was specified in each application and the participant’s advisor was

contacted to approve the choice if selected for the programme.

At the end of the leadership training workshop in November, each participant developed a strategy for their document with their primary review partner. The primary review partners were

selected by the Team Facilitator.

During the programme there were 3 rounds of peer-review for each participant’s document. Each round consisted of 2 reviewers per document, one from the primary partner and one

from a secondary partner. Primary partners were the same for each round while the secondary partners changed.

Motivational MaterialsDuring the programme, participants were sent materials designed to motivate and encourage them through the process. Shortly after the initial meeting in Kigali, they were sent a custom postcard in the mail (example pg. 45). During the review rounds they were emailed a participant map poster (pg. 13) and profile pages for each participant (pgs. 14 – 29). At the end of the programme, each participant was sent a completion certificate (example pg. 46).

1

2

4

Application ProcessThe participant pool from the JIC included students who registered their interest after being provided information about the programme.

Participant pool from inside Africa included scientists put forth by the BecA-ILRI Hub capacity building team.

8 participants from outside Africa and 8 from inside Africa were to be selected from the 33 applications received. However, logistical constraints necessitated the selection of 7 JIC participants and 9 participants from Africa. The online application can be seen on pages 8-10.Selection process

The selection panel consisted of Valerian Aloo, Jodi Lilley and Christian Rogers.Each panel member received the applicant responses without names or country of origin.Within online surveys, panelist chose either ‘strongly agree’, ‘agree’, or ‘disagree’ for the hyphened points within each selection criterion for each applicant:

Criterion 1: The Programme will have an Immediate Impact on the Applicant’s

Success.

• Selected document is appropriate, crucial and timely• The applicant is at a turning point in their development where new skills are required• An achievable goal to strive for during the programme has been identified• The applicant is at an optimal career stage for the programme

Criterion 2: The Applicant will have a Positive Impact on the Team.

• Applicant has demonstrated a keen interest in developing relationships with early career scientists in the counterpart group

• Identified strength is likely to improve team effectiveness• Selected document will have at least one other of its type in the pool• Writing skills are at an appropriate level for meaningful exchange• The applicant’s participation builds capacity for agricultural development• The applicant’s science will likely contribute to African agriculture in the future• The applicant views the ASSET experience as a possibility to enter or progress in

translational or applied science

The choices were automatically recorded on a spreadsheet and converted to a points total (Strongly agree = 2 points, agree = 1 point, or disagree = 0 points).

The applicants were then ranked based on their total points resulting in a list for either UK or SSA applicants. The applicant numbers were then matched back to their names and the applicants were notified of the selection result.

We had thought there could be a meeting to discuss any major discrepancies between individual panelist rankings but that ended up not being necessary.

5

6

The Following Pages Contain the Online Application Form for the 2015 ASSET Cohort

7

2015/16 ASSET cohort ApplicationDue September 15th 2015

* Required

1. Surname *

2. First name(s) *

3. What country are you from? *

4. Please indicate any degrees you have completed beginning with Bachelor’s degrees *Indicate when and where they were obtained.

5. Where is your current position? *Provide the name of the University, Institute,Station, etc

6. In what country is your current Institution? *

7. In what city is your current Institution? *

8. What is your current position? *Mark only one oval.

PhD Student

MSc Student

Research Assistant/technician

Postdoc

Other:

8

9. If you currently a PhD or MSc student, how far into your program are you?Please provide the year of your expected completion

10. If you plan to enter a PhD or MSc in the near future please provide the details and timingof your plan.

11. If you have recently completed a PhD orMSc, when did you complete it?

12. Who is your current adviser or manager? *

13. What is the email address for your currentadviser or manager? *

14. Please summarize your current area of research *1000 character limit

15. Please indicate why you would like to join this year’s ASSET cohort *2000 character limit

9

Powered by

16. What is your best developed strength you will contribute to the team? *1000 character limit

17. What professional advancement documentwould you commit to developing over thecourse of this year’s programme? *grant proposal, manuscript, thesis chapter, etc.

18. Why is the document indicated above crucial for your professional success? *1000 character limit

19. Can you attend the workshop in late November 2015 in Rwanda?Mark only one oval.

Yes

No

Not sure

20. Can you attend a workshop in June 2016 (African location and timing unconfirmed)?Mark only one oval.

Very Likely Yes

No

Not sure

10

11





a s s e tagricultural scientist

Support Exchange Team

Participants

12

13 Nationalities



16 Participants

Sandra Uganda

Nadia Malaysia

Olu Nigeria

Ihuoma Nigeria

Kenneth Ghana

Jodi California

Biniam Eritrea

Leonie SwitzerlandDonna UK

Nuno Portugal Dawit Ethiopia

Guru India

Godfrey Kenya

Anne Kenya

Samwel Kenya

Mercy Nigeria

Javier Spain

“Don't aim at success. The more you aim at it and make it a target, the more you are going to miss it. For success, like happiness, cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as

the unintended side e�ect of one's personal dedication to a cause greater than oneself or as the by-product of one's surrender to a person other than oneself. Happiness must happen, and the same holds for success: you have to let it happen by not caring about it. I want you to listen to what your conscience commands you to do and go on to carry it out to the best

of your knowledge. Then you will live to see that in the long-run—in the long-run, I say!—success will follow you precisely because you had forgotten to think about it”

- Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning

13

I'll always do my best, and in so doing keep making my best even better.

Passionate mentor; Team player

Molecular Plant Virology & Biotechnology

Eliminate hunger from Africa through biotechnology

Anne Ndanu MuiaJomo Kenyatta University, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength

Future Goals & Interests

Current Research Area

ASSET 2015 was sponsored by the Engineering Nitrogen Symbiosis for Africa program funded by the Bill & Malinda Gates Foundation. ASSET is supported and hosted by the John Innes Centre in collaboration with Biosciences Eastern Central Africa.

2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesAnne

Anne focused on developing a strategy to control the Maize Lethal Necrosis Disease. The disease, caused by two viruses working synergistically, threatens this important food crop in Africa. Her current project aimed to clarify the molecular mechanism of the disease. This is of significant importance in the on going efforts, at different levels, to curb the disease and its spread.

[email protected] Anne

I'll always do my best, and in so doing keep making my best even better.

Passionate mentor; Team player

Molecular Plant Virology & Biotechnology

Eliminate hunger from Africa through biotechnology

Anne Ndanu MuiaJomo Kenyatta University, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesAnne

Anne focused on developing a strategy to control the Maize Lethal Necrosis Disease. The disease, caused by two viruses working synergistically, threatens this important food crop in Africa. Her current project aimed to clarify the molecular mechanism of the disease. This is of significant importance in the on going efforts, at different levels, to curb the disease and its spread.

[email protected] Anne

14

Biniam Mesfin Ghebreslassie

In responding to today's agriculture and food security challenges, building an internationally composed team such as ASSET is of

paramount importance.

Experienced horticultural leadership with a confident people-approach

Crop Molecular Biology

Plant molecular and nutritional characterisation

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesBiniam

Biniam characterised Eritrean potato accessions using molecular markers. Accessions from Eritrea, Kenya and Rwanda were examined for genetic diversity. Data analysis employed a variety of bioinformatics tools.

[email protected] Biniam

15

Biniam Mesfin Ghebreslassie

In responding to today's agriculture and food security challenges, building an internationally composed team such as ASSET is of

paramount importance.

Experienced horticultural leadership with a confident people-approach

Crop Molecular Biology

Plant molecular and nutritional characterisation

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesBiniam

Biniam characterised Eritrean potato accessions using molecular markers. Accessions from Eritrea, Kenya and Rwanda were examined for genetic diversity. Data analysis employed a variety of bioinformatics tools.

[email protected] Biniam

Dawit Kidanemariam

“It always seems impossible until it’s done.” – Nelson Mandela

Dedicated Team Player

Molecular Plant Virology

Enhancing plant (taro) resistance to viruses through molecular biology, establishing and leading my own dedicated research team and teaching students

Queensland University of Technology, Australia & BecA-ILRI Hub, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesDawit

Dawit focused on identification and characterization of viruses infecting taro in East Africa. Taro is one of the staple root crops in sub-Saharan Africa. Dawit aims to develop highly sensitive and reliable diagnostics tools for the detection and management of taro viral diseases.

[email protected] Dawit

16

In order to achieve agricultural sustainability, the health of the soil must be paramount; optimising crops alone cannot achieve it.

Passion for crops and soil research

Plant Symbiosis

I am entering a teaching career. I would like to use what I have learned to make plant science relevant to students.

Donna Cousins John Innes Centre, United Kingdom

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesDonna

Donna worked with the model legume Medicago truncatula and its interaction with both nitrogen fixing rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhiza. Donna hopes this knowledge will be used to develop crops with optimised symbiotic relationship alongside sustainable farming practices.

[email protected] Donna

Godfrey Mutero Ngure

There are problems where I come from, there are problems where you come from, but if we work together there will be less problems where we

come from.

Effective Presentation

Crop Biotechnology

Elucidation of protein-protein interaction between plants and their biotrophic parasites in an effort to unravel better controls to various crop parasitism.

Jomo Kenyatta University, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesGodfrey

Godfrey's work centered on bio-engineering tomato crop for resistance against the sedentary plant parasitic nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) by effector protein function inhibition.

[email protected] Contact Godfrey

17

In order to achieve agricultural sustainability, the health of the soil must be paramount; optimising crops alone cannot achieve it.


Plant Symbiosis

I am entering a teaching career. I would like to use what I have learned to make plant science relevant to students.

Donna Cousins John Innes Centre, United Kingdom

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesDonna

Donna worked with the model legume Medicago truncatula and its interaction with both nitrogen fixing rhizobia and arbuscular mycorrhiza. Donna hopes this knowledge will be used to develop crops with optimised symbiotic relationship alongside sustainable farming practices.

[email protected] Donna

Godfrey Mutero Ngure

There are problems where I come from, there are problems where you come from, but if we work together there will be less problems where we

come from.

Effective Presentation

Crop Biotechnology

Elucidation of protein-protein interaction between plants and their biotrophic parasites in an effort to unravel better controls to various crop parasitism.

Jomo Kenyatta University, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesGodfrey

Godfrey's work centered on bio-engineering tomato crop for resistance against the sedentary plant parasitic nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) by effector protein function inhibition.

[email protected] Contact Godfrey

18

Guru Radhakrishnan

The best way to tackle the challenges we face in agriculture is through collaboration. The variety of problems we face makes it all the more important that we solve these

problems by embracing our diverse set of skills, backgrounds and experiences.

'Big-Picture' dedication to the greater goal

Plant Biotechnology & Evolution

Using a combination of informatics and experimental approaches to solve agricultural challenges

John Innes Centre, United Kingdom

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesGuru

Guru has focused on understanding the mechanisms involved in symbiosis signalling with the goal of engineering nitrogen fixing symbiosis in cereals. Guru addressed this issue by analysing the evolution of the symbiosis signalling components across all plants.

[email protected] Guru

Ihuoma Chizaram Okwuonu

A strong collaborative network amongst scientists from different parts of the world is the mainstay for agricultural, environmental and economic

sustainability.

Dedicated Mentor

Improvement of Root and Tuber Crops

I wish to study more on plant-microbial relationships to understand the mechanism underlying susceptibility and resistance to most diseases of root and tuber crops and to develop/apply novel genome editing tools in engineering disease resistant root and tuber crops.

National Root Crops Research Institute, Nigeria

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesIhuoma

Ihuoma worked toward engineering resistance to Cassava Bacteria Blight. Methods of developing safe GM products are essential for the development of cassava varieties with improved agronomical traits. Ihuoma’s approach used CRISPR technology which is safer, faster and overcomes many limitations of conventional transgenic technology.

[email protected] Ihuoma

19

Ihuoma Chizaram Okwuonu

A strong collaborative network amongst scientists from different parts of the world is the mainstay for agricultural, environmental and economic

sustainability.

Dedicated Mentor

Improvement of Root and Tuber Crops

I wish to study more on plant-microbial relationships to understand the mechanism underlying susceptibility and resistance to most diseases of root and tuber crops and to develop/apply novel genome editing tools in engineering disease resistant root and tuber crops.

National Root Crops Research Institute, Nigeria

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesIhuoma

Ihuoma worked toward engineering resistance to Cassava Bacteria Blight. Methods of developing safe GM products are essential for the development of cassava varieties with improved agronomical traits. Ihuoma’s approach used CRISPR technology which is safer, faster and overcomes many limitations of conventional transgenic technology.

[email protected] Ihuoma

20

"The reality today is that we are all interdependent and have to co-exist on this small planet. Therefore, the only sensible and intelligent way of resolving differences and

clashes of interests, whether between individuals or nations, is through dialogue." - The Dalai Lama

Innovation fostered by wide-ranging cultural and scientific experiences

Plant Development

I plan to learn as many skills as possible, exploring different fields to have a taste of the different opportunities ahead. I have a keen interest in International Agriculture and I would love my job to have some degree of involvement in this field.

Javier Galdon-ArmeroJohn Innes Centre, United Kingdom

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesJavier

Javier worked to discover QTLs controlling the formation and specification of trichomes in tomato. Trichomes are relevant due to the wide range of secondary metabolites they secrete and also due to their multiple physiological roles. Especially, they can provide resistance to pests and drought.

[email protected] Javier

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me

Tenacious trail-blazing with humility

Plant Breeding

Focused on plant breeding research and teaching. Vision of developing a botanical garden with multi-purpose recreational facility in the next ten years.

Kenneth Fafa EgbadzorCSIR - Plant Genetic Resources Research Institute, Ghana

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesKenneth

Kenneth used marker assisted breeding in developing high yielding, consumer accepted cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) varieties tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses. Cowpea is the most cultivated and consumed legume in sub-Saharan Africa feeding millions of families.

[email protected] Kenneth

21

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me

Tenacious trail-blazing with humility

Plant Breeding

Focused on plant breeding research and teaching. Vision of developing a botanical garden with multi-purpose recreational facility in the next ten years.

Kenneth Fafa EgbadzorCSIR - Plant Genetic Resources Research Institute, Ghana

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesKenneth

Kenneth used marker assisted breeding in developing high yielding, consumer accepted cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) varieties tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses. Cowpea is the most cultivated and consumed legume in sub-Saharan Africa feeding millions of families.

[email protected] Kenneth

22

Leonie Luginbuehl

Science and art belong to the whole world, and before them vanish the barriers of nationality.

- Goethe

Scientific Writing

Plant Molecular Biology - Symbiosis

In the future, I would like to learn more about the process of scientific publishing and how it can be improved to make science more effective.


Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesLeonie

Leonie investigated how mutually beneficial symbioses between plants and microbes are established. She particularly focused on the role of transcription factors during both mycorrhization and nodulation.

[email protected] Leonie

23

I like to think of the soil as one of the world's greatest agricultural resources - a natural sustainable system for food production. Addressing food insecurity issues MUST include a program for soils. With the words of Franklin D. Roosevelt 'The Nation that destroys its soil

destroys itself'.


Agronomy - Soil Chemistry

Areas of interest include and is not limited to Plant Nutrient Dynamics in Natural and Managed Ecosystems, Horticulture and forest soils management, molecular technique application in Soil and Plant research, Green economy; Environmental chemistry.

Mercy AnetorPhD Awarded from the University of Ibadan, Nigeria

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesMercy

Mercy's research centered on improving plant nutrient availability in farmed soils, soil phosphorus fertility, and the effectiveness of organic and/or inorganic soil amendment in modifying the chemistry of infertile soils. In her research she focused on rural farms (arable and tree) in the Southwestern part of Nigeria to address phosphorus fertilizer unresponsiveness and nutrient deficiencies .

[email protected] Mercy

24

Nadia Radzman

If we want to change the world, we need to start changing how we produce our food -- as the great botanist, Norman Borlaug once said, "You can't build

a peaceful world on empty stomachs and human misery."

Lateral thinking to solve problems

Root Development

Nadia aspires to continue her research in lateral organ development on roots, which includes tubers and galls, using interdisciplinary approach that includes mathematical modelling and synthetic biology.


Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesNadia

Nadia focused on lateral organ development in plant roots. This included lateral roots and nodules using the model plants Arabidopsis and Medicago. Understanding the developmental mechanism of these structures could provide an insight for improving root architecture. Nadia is passionate about utilizing this information to improve agriculture in developing countries.

[email protected] Nadia

25

Nadia Radzman

If we want to change the world, we need to start changing how we produce our food -- as the great botanist, Norman Borlaug once said, "You can't build

a peaceful world on empty stomachs and human misery."

Lateral thinking to solve problems

Root Development

Nadia aspires to continue her research in lateral organ development on roots, which includes tubers and galls, using interdisciplinary approach that includes mathematical modelling and synthetic biology.


Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesNadia

Nadia focused on lateral organ development in plant roots. This included lateral roots and nodules using the model plants Arabidopsis and Medicago. Understanding the developmental mechanism of these structures could provide an insight for improving root architecture. Nadia is passionate about utilizing this information to improve agriculture in developing countries.

[email protected] Nadia

Nuno Leitão

We face global challenges that require a global, coordinated effort. If we want to be successful in responding to this call, we must learn to effectively hear and communicate

across language barriers, as well as cultural and political borders.

International Community Building

Molecular Biotechnology

I am really interested in biotechnology and in all the possibilities that plant biotechnology offers. I want to focus on immediate applications, so industry/startup is most likely my next step.


Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesNuno

Nuno investigated mechanisms of intra- and intercellular signalling that occur through the modulation of the calcium concentration in the cytoplasm. Nuno aimed to identify and understand the mechanism of action of the encoders of the calcium signal elicited upon innate recognition of pathogens by plants.

[email protected] Nuno

26

Oluwaseyi Shorinola

Science in its purest form is simple, engaging, beautiful, practical, collaborative and public (for all).

Experienced and knowledgeable bridge-builder

Research for Development

Development of genomic, genetic and germplasm resource for the African cereal crop. Participatory breeding for drought tolerance.


Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesOlu

Olu researched the genetic improvement of wheat. His work used genetic, physiological, genomic and bioinformatic approaches to develop a resistance to a grain defect in wheat called pre-harvest sprouting. This yield-diminishing defect is characterised by too early germination of grains while still on the mother plant.

[email protected] Olu

27

Oluwaseyi Shorinola

Science in its purest form is simple, engaging, beautiful, practical, collaborative and public (for all).

Experienced and knowledgeable bridge-builder

Research for Development

Development of genomic, genetic and germplasm resource for the African cereal crop. Participatory breeding for drought tolerance.


Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesOlu

Olu researched the genetic improvement of wheat. His work used genetic, physiological, genomic and bioinformatic approaches to develop a resistance to a grain defect in wheat called pre-harvest sprouting. This yield-diminishing defect is characterised by too early germination of grains while still on the mother plant.

[email protected] Olu

Samwel Kariuki

Success of a scientist is measured by the number of mentees

Idealistic and critical thinker

Crop Biotechnology and Genetics

Application of genetics, molecular biology and biotechnology to fight plant diseases

University of Nairobi, Kenya

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesSamwel

Samwel worked on a proposal to knock-out viruses integrated in yam (Dioscorea spp) genome using CRISPR-Cas9 gene constructs. Yams with silenced viruses are hoped to produce more and be easily moved within growing regions without fear of spreading viruses.

[email protected] Samwel

28

Sandra Ndagire Kamenya

Peer-mentoring is invaluable in building a scientific career. It has provided an extra set of eyes and mind which has given direction and

speed towards achieving my goals.

Independent initiative

Genomics

Capacity building scientist. To mentor, encourage and guide young scientists in their areas of research. Develop my skills in genomics and bioinformatics

Uganda Christian University, Uganda

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesSandra

Sandra developed genomic tools for two different cultivars Shum and Gilo of African eggplant (Solanum aethiopicum) breeding programs. Sandra's work helps move this important indigenous plant into the global genomics arena.

[email protected] Contact Sandra



29

Sandra Ndagire Kamenya

Peer-mentoring is invaluable in building a scientific career. It has provided an extra set of eyes and mind which has given direction and

speed towards achieving my goals.

Independent initiative

Genomics

Capacity building scientist. To mentor, encourage and guide young scientists in their areas of research. Develop my skills in genomics and bioinformatics

Uganda Christian University, Uganda

Focus During ASSET



Favourite Strength




2015 ASSET CohortProfiles PagesSandra

Sandra developed genomic tools for two different cultivars Shum and Gilo of African eggplant (Solanum aethiopicum) breeding programs. Sandra's work helps move this important indigenous plant into the global genomics arena.

[email protected] Contact Sandra







Activities

30

I feel like I am now empowered and I am fully awareof situations and approaches to use to be able to

move forward positively.

– Pauline Asami, BecA-ILRI hub

ASSET 2015, Kigali, Rwanda



ASSET (Agricultural Scientist Support Exchange Team) is a new programme that seeks to promote agricultural development through graduate student capacity building. Additionally, ASSET aims to increase e�ectiveness of agricultural scientists in the United Kingdom as well as Sub-Saharan Africa by forming lasting collaborative links between the two areas. The programme pairs students from the UK and Sub-Saharan Africa by assessing areas of study and identifying students with similar interests. Both students are then encouraged and supported in professional development of scienti�c writing through a peer-based network centred on peer-review exchange.

31

On the 23rd of November, newly selected participants were invited to attend a leadership and management workshop conducted by HFP Consulting in Kigali, Rwanda. Dr Jodi Lilley, the program lead coordinator, introduced coaching methods and their practical application in peer review. This year’s programme included 16 agricultural scientists of 12 di�erent nationalities across the group. Prior to the workshop all participants identifed a personal goal for the week to aim towards. At the end of the course, personal re�ection and review forms were handed out to gain insight into which areas of the course students particularly found helpful. The following points were noted;• Participants particularly enjoyed training in active listening as they felt it was a fundamental part of all the other communication skills. Similarly, many members of the group mentioned particularly enjoying the personality assessment and con�ict management seminars.• Every participant stated that they felt they had achieved, and often surpassed, the personal goal they had set for the week.• Many of the participants reported that they made unexpected personal discoveries about themselves during the course and that these left them able to better understand or communicate with others.• Very view of the participants listed any negative comments about the course. Where these were mentioned, they focused on the negotiation session.

Since returning from the training and management course, the �rst stages of peer review are being co-ordinated to begin in early 2016. Members of ASSET have already started arranging group sessions to work on the documents they are preparing for peer review.

32

The areas I wanted to learn most about were coveredso well, even beyond my expectations.

– Anne Muia, Kenyatta University

Review Stage 1

Author1st Draft + Cover sheet

Author

Review Stage 3Review Stage 2

PrimaryReviewer

Reviewer’sCover Sheet

x2

2nd Draft

+

Response to Review

SecondaryReviewer 1

Author2nd Draft + Cover sheet

Author

PrimaryReviewer


x2

3rd Draft

+

Response to Review

SecondaryReviewer 2

Author3rd Draft + Cover sheet

Author

PrimaryReviewer


x2

4th Draft

+

Response to Review

SecondaryReviewer 3

Advisor

Outside ASSET Programme

!

ASSET Peer Review Stages

33

ASSET Pair

ASSET Pair

ASSET Pair

ASSET Pair

ASSET Pair

ASSET Pair

ASSET Pair

Anne Ndanu MuiaKenya

[email protected]

Dawit KidanemariamEthiopia

[email protected]

Javier Galdon-ArmeroSpain

[email protected]

Samwel KariukiKenya

[email protected]

Kenneth EgbadzorGhana

[email protected]

Nuno LeitãoPortugal

[email protected]

Biniam GhebreslassieEritrea

[email protected]

Guru RadhakrishnanIndia

[email protected]

Shorinola OluwaseyiNigeria

[email protected]

Mercy AnetorNigeria

[email protected]

Sandra KamenyaUganda

[email protected]

Donna CousinsUK

[email protected]

Leonie LuginbuehlSwitzerland

[email protected]

Ihuoma OkwuonaNigeria

[email protected]

Nadia RadzmanMalaysia

[email protected]

Godfrey NgureKenya

[email protected]

ASSET Pair

ASSET Participants

34

Peer-Review Process Feedback exchange for document development was conducted over the course of 6 months. Coversheets incorporating the GROW coaching model accompanied each phase of the review (pgs. 39-44). Feedback on the process was collected after the first and second rounds.

The ‘GROW’ coaching model (John Whitmore) was embedded into the ASSET peer-review rounds in conjunction with Vanda Morgan to achieve several objectives. Firstly to transform a process that can be a negative exercise in pulling each other’s work apart into a truly beneficial constructive criticism exchange. Secondly to provide supportive and meaningful feedback designed to help team members reach their goals as efficiently as possible. Finally, the method helped make sure the effort spent on document development was strategically aligned with the participant’s career goals.

‘GROW’ is a Mnemonic Goal - What do you want your document to do for you? Reality - What is the current state of the document? Options - What could be done to strengthen the document? Will - What will you do to move the document closer to your goal?

GoalThis statement helps the reviewer know the final target for the document. The statement should include:

• What is the desired destination for the document?• What journal will you be submitting to?• What funding agency will you apply to?• Who will be approving your thesis chapter?• Why is this goal important for your future success?• How much personal control do you have over your document’s goal?• What are some short term steps on the way to your goal?• When do you want to achieve it by?• Do you feel positive? / How challenging / attainable is your goal?

RealityThis helps either the author or the reviewer gain a better understanding of the current situation. The aim is to assess how close document is to the final goal:

• What is the major argument or aim of the paper or proposal?• Are these arguments or aims well supported?• What impact will the results or proposed work have on the field?• What are the major challenges this document has in reaching the goal?• What is the document’s major strength?• What is working really well in the document?• Is the goal realistic?

35

OptionsThis is where the reviewer will suggest changes to the document. If the goal is unrealistic, alternative goals should be suggested:

• Can what’s working well be used more in the document?• How can the document be changed to bring it closer to the goal?• Are there missing experiments?• Do interpretations need to be changed?• Are there unsupported claims?• Does the author need to take greater care with spelling and grammar?• Is the proposed work feasible?• Should the document’s organization be adjusted?

Will or Way forwardThis stage is an action plan devised by the author to bring the document closer to the goal. After synthesizing the realities provided by reviewers and considering all your options, what will you do?

• How will you address each major concern brought up during review?• Do you need to adjust your goal?• Do you have the resources you need for the suggested options?• What challenges do you face in your plan?• What can you do to overcome these challenges?• What support do you need?• How will you get that support?

Peer-Review Schedule

36

37

The Following Pages Contain the Coversheets for Peer-Review

38

Author’s Cover Sheet

Document type (Manuscript/thesis chapter/grant proposal)

Author’s Goal Provide an up to date statement to help your reviewers know the final target for the document.

Include info such as:

What is the desired destination for the document? What journal will you be submitting to? What funding agency will you apply to? Who will be approving your thesis chapter?

Why is this goal important for your future success? How much personal control do you have over your document’s goal? What are some short term steps on the way to your goal? When do you want to achieve it by?

Do you feel positive? / How challenging / attainable is your goal?

Asset Member:

39

(Author’s Goal Continued)

Author’s Reality Help your reviewer understand the current situation.

What is the major argument or aim of the paper or proposal? What impact will the results or proposed work have on the field? What is the document’s major strength? What is working well in this document? What are the major challenges this document has in reaching the goal?

40

Reviewer’s Cover Sheet


Reviewer’s Reality Help the author see their document from another perspective.

What is the major argument or aim of the paper or proposal? Are these arguments or aims well supported? What impact will the results or proposed work have on the field? What is working well in the document? What are the major and minor challenges this document has in reaching the goal? Is the goal realistic?

Asset Member:

41

Options Suggest changes the document. If the goal is unrealistic, alternative goals should be suggested:

Can what works well be used more in the document to make is stronger? How can the document be changed to bring it closer to the goal? Are there missing experiments? Do interpretations need to be changed? Are there unsupported claims? Does the author need to take greater care with spelling and grammar? Is the proposed work feasible? Should the document’s organization be adjusted?

42

Author’s Response to Reviewers


New Reality Describe a new reality based on the perspectives provided by your reviewers:

Is the goal realistic? Does your goal need to change? What is the document’s major strength? What is working well in the document? What are the major challenges this document has in reaching the goal? What are the minor challenges?

Asset Member:

43

Will or Way Forward Describe your action plan to bring the document closer to the goal.

How will you address each major concern brought up during review? Do you have the resources you need for the suggested options? What challenges do you face in your plan? What can you do to overcome these challenges? What support do you need? How will you get that support?

44

A g r i c u l t u r a l S c i e n t i s t S u p p o r t E x c h a n g e T e a m

Dear Sandra,

Thank you for bringing so much to the team during the Kigali workshop.

Keep up the great work putting all your new leadership and management skills into practice!

A g r i c u l t u r a l S c i e n t i s t S u p p o r t E x c h a n g e T e a m

a s s e tYou are an

Follow-up Materials

45

This is to Certify that

Guru Radhakrishnan

Completed the

2015 - 2016 ASSET ProgrammeAnd is an Asset to the Scientific Community

The programme included HFP::Consulting Leadership and Management training in Kigali, Rwanda (November 23-27, 2015) as well as a 6-month peer-review exchange.

By completing the programme, each participant dedicated many hours to the success of others. This commitment to agricultural development and international relationship building is a true achievement.

Jodi LilleyASSET Founder & Facilitator



46

47









Feedback & Evaluation

48

Outcome & Impact Evaluation The anonymous feedback provided by the participants and their advisors suggests the programme has achieved the desired outcomes. All but 1 of the 9 advisors who responded would encourage others in their group to participate in the future and found the programme well organized, well executed and a good use of time. There have also been many great suggestions on ways to improve the programme. More early engagement with the advisors would help clarify expectations in the future. Each targeted outcome will be discussed in turn. It is worth noting ASSET was featured as the symbol of the JIC’s winning bid for the BBSRC Excellence with Impact competition. The institutions application was represented at the award’s ceremony by the number 16 – the number of ASSET members. Participant testimonials can be found at the end of this section and a proposal for a future ASSET programme can be found in the Appendix.

Targeted Outcome 1 Leadership and Management Skills Improved

All 14 participants providing feedback stated their skills in this area had improved. This was supported by the advisors who agreed with the exception of one (8/9). Many participants gave specific examples of these skills in their written comments. It is clear the Kigali workshop was well received and made a big impact. All participants indicated it was the right length of time, relevant and well supported, organized and executed. There were some participants who wished the workshop was longer and delved deeper into certain topics. The workshops at the JIC with Vanda brought the training to the next level for the JIC participants. In the future, it would be valuable to find a way to incorporate the African participants in this continued learning. It would be optimal to have another workshop for all participants at the JIC at the end of the programme to reinforce skills and introduce new topics. In the future, the leadership and management training can make more use of the JIC’s in-house expertise via Vanda. A greater emphasis on coaching should be incorporated to increase leadership and management skills in addition to strengthening relationships and feedback skills.

Targeted Outcome 2 Written Productivity Increased

This was perhaps the strongest outcome for the programme. This is not surprising given the team’s commitment to peer-review over six months. All responding participants and advisors indicated an improvement in scientific writing skills and stated the documents developed faster and with higher quality due to the programme. All responding participants agreed their reviewing skills had improved and the process had been well organized. All participants found the GROW model useful during feedback exchange and many (10/14) found the format more useful than they expected. Most thought the duration of the peer-review adequate, with 1 participant finding it too long and 1 too short. Overall, approximately 80% of participants were able to meet the deadlines for each round. The duration of each review stage (draft, review, response) was agreed upon by the group during the Kigali workshop and most (12/14) found these timings optimal. Some wanted longer time for review. It may be good in the future to limit the progamme to 2 review rounds, giving more time for each of the stages. Many participants did not submit a draft in the third round because they felt their draft had not changed substantially from the previous round. There was a lot of variability in how long people took to review documents. On the shorter end, some spent only a couple of hours for both documents in each round. On the longer end, some participants spent upwards of 20 hours for

49

both documents in a single round. Generally, reading and understanding the document took the most time. The facilitator maintained flexibility as long as there was communication between the partners. It was obvious people were doing their best to meet the deadlines. Having primary partnerships between people with closely aligned scientific areas will help make the review more efficient.

Targeted Outcome 3 Feedback Skills Improved

All participants reported they had increased confidence when giving feedback and a greater ability to accept and integrate feedback from others. Likewise, all but 1 responding advisor agreed their team member had improved in the areas of giving and receiving feedback. Feedback skills were emphasized both by HFP Consulting and by Vanda. These skills were then practiced multiple times in each review round. An unexpected pattern emerged where some participants had a difficult time giving tough developmental feedback in the review rounds. This area should be explored as critical feedback is key for effective improvement.

Targeted Outcome 4: Productive international peer relationships established

This critically important outcome is very difficult to assess. It was stated in the BecA-JIC Alliance meeting the success of ASSET will be judged by its ability to form lasting relationships. This can only be determined in the long-run and so we can presently only speculate on this outcome. It is clear however that productive relationships were formed for the duration of the programme as the partners successfully worked together to produce their documents. All the participants that responded indicated the programme had developed meaningful and productive relationships and all but 1 advisor agreed connections to international partners had been made. All participants felt they had increased understanding of other cultures due to their experiences and would reach out to ASSET members in the future for assistance. Most (11/12), felt more comfortable reaching out for assistance in general. For many, the cultural translation session of the Kigali workshop was the highlight of the programme.

Targeted Outcome 5 African Agricultural Development Potential Increased

All responding participants and advisors found the programme increased awareness of agricultural challenges in Africa. All participants and most advisors (8/9) agreed awareness of scientific challenges outside of the participant’s field were also increased. Having rotating secondary reviewers likely contributes to the increased exposure to new fields. Finally, all participants believe they are now more likely to engage in or diversify their work in African agricultural development. Approximately 70% strongly agreed with this outcome.

50

Participant Testimonials‘ASSET is a brilliant programme. From the diversity in the participants (both in culture and

research fields), the efforts of the programme controllers and the dedication employed in the review process, all bundled up to a complete success for everyone. I personally gained so

much from participating, I am honored to have been involved in the process. I hope this will be the first of many.’

‘I’ve grown, others around me have grown, and will definitely continue to grow because of this programme. Thank you so much.’

‘…this kind of gathering is vital in tackling today’s agricultural challenges.’

‘I have to say that the peer-review process, at this really early stage of my career, has had a real impact in my confidence and motivation. The fact that my thoughts are heard and considered, and that they have an effect on other people’s work has really been a booster and I feel more

confident when speaking up and making decisions. So, I have to thank that to ASSET, and I am sure that similar feelings are common in other ASSET members. Thanks!!’

‘Oh my God, it has been amazing for me. My leadership abilities have been greatly impacted. I am more confident in leading my team and precisely my communication is more effective by

using what works to get people to do more. I am more efficient in delegation and also demands I am being empowered when duties are delegated to me. The peer-review process has been so helpful. I see my document is taking very good shape through the wonderful contributions of my review partners. I must say I am greatly delighted to have my primary review partner I

am indeed learning from his style of writing while reviewing his paper. I actually look forward to participating in this process.’

‘I have many improvements in my performance from attending the Kigali workshop. 1. I have tried to work on my SWOT analysis which showed me my weakness of shyness or fear of my superiors is becoming a hindrance to my opportunities for growth and promotion. 2. I bought the book Seven Habits of Highly Effective People to help understand and improve my time

management and prioritizing skills. 3. I am using the publications at the end of the workshop book to better my presentations and gain confidence as a woman in leadership. 3. I also

borrowed the use of one of ice breakers from the workshop of, giving a ball to the next speaker to lead a group in my church. From the peer-review, due to the commitment to ASSET I have been forced to embark on writing my document which I had procrastinated about for some time. I have had to push myself to write and add more sections to the previous draft so that

my reviewer will have more sections to read through. I am glad that I am finally going to have a publication out. Also because of lack of expertise in the field of my study at my institute, it has benefited me to get reviews from people who understand my work other than my supervisor which has helped me enrich my document. Specifically, I had overlooked a lot of stuff like the source of the scripts and software used in my study which were highlighted … so others can

duplicate my work in the future.’

‘LOVE YOU ALL’

51

Participant Feedback

Responses in italics

By Particpiating in the Programme, your Leadership and Management Skills have Improved.

The Speed of your Document’s Development has Improved

The Quality of your Document’s Development has Improved

Your Reviewing Skills have Improved

Your Confidence when Providing Feedback

71.4% Strongly Agree28.6% Agree0% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree





Your Ability to Accept and Integrate Feedback from Others has Improved

The Review Process was Well Organised



52

The GROW Coaching Model Enhanced the Constructive Critism Exchange

The GROW Coversheets Provided a Useful Structure to the Exchange Process



If the timings were not optimal for some or all of the review phases, please suggest changes

Draft – 4 weeks, review – 2 weeks, response – 1 weeksThe timing allocated for each components of the reviewing were OK, but I think six month for the whole process is too much. May be by reducing the rounds of reviewing in to two cycles we might reduce the whole period by at least a month or even two. I remember for the last round almost everyone was saturated. I felt the review time was a bit short. An extra week or two would have provided more ample time to read, understand and give even more productive contribution.

Draft – 4 weeks, review – 3 weeks, response – 2 weeks. With this schedule, we can have two round of review rather than 3

How did the Format Conform to your Expectations?

How did you Feel About the Peer-review Exchange

Duration? (Jan - June)

71.4% It was More Useful0% It was Less Useful28.6% It was What I Expected

Each of the Review Round Components were Given an Optimal Amount of Time

28.6% Strongly Agree57.1% Agree14.3% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree

7.1% Too Short7.1% Too Long85.7% The Right Duration

53

The Programme Fostered the Development of Meaningful and Productive Relationships

You have Increased Understanding of Different Cultures due to your Participation

You will Reach out to ASSET Members in the Future when you Need Assistance

You Generally Feel More Comfortable Reaching out to Potential Collaborators at your Own or Other Institute





You Have an Increased Understanding of Scientific

Challenges and Projects Outside of your Field

You Have a Greater Understanding of Agricultural Improvement Efforts in Africa



You are More Likely to Engage in or Diversify your Current Engagement in African Agricultural Development Work


The Kigali Workshop was Well Organised

78.6% Strongly Agree7.1% Agree0% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree 14.3% I was Unable to Attend

54

The Right Length of Time

Conducted Well by HFP::Consulting

Supported Well by the ASSET Team

50% Strongly Agree35.7% Agree0% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree 14.3% I was Unable to Attend

50% Strongly Agree35.7% Agree0% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree 14.3% I was Unable to Attend


The Kigali Workshop was Well Organised


55

Positive Feedback

Please Indicate Something from any Part of the Programme that Worked for you

The Kigali workshop was a real eye opening experience to how many day-to-day interactions with colleagues/friends/family can and should be managed, and how important decisions should be made.

One thing that is working well for me after the conference is dealing with different workers in my team. I still have challenges with some, but I am better because of ASSET.

The peer review process has greatly empowered me to produce quality scientific publication as well as provide efficient feedback to other people’s publications.

Serial reviews. The review format of having my document reviewed by one primary reviewer and three secondary reviewers worked very well for me. The diversity in peer review input worked very well in improving my document. Also, the one-on-one Skype sessions with the primary reviewer were very helpful.

In general the organization of the workshop was very successful. I can say it was well planned and executed properly on time. The cultural diversity included in the workshop and the session conducted was so nice. I like the GROW model very much and all the topics covered by HFP consulting was very nice. Also I really like the communication and engagement done by Jodi and the rest of the team after the workshop, which is very unique of this workshop. A big congratulation.

I learnt a lot from the Kigali workshop. I had several favorites: SMARTIES, Personalities and strengths/ weaknesses, leadership styles and learning about different cultures and how things I may consider trivial are significant for others. From the review process I learnt the importance of giving feedback in the right manner. A statement or even a word can encourage or discourage; motivate or demotivate. I’ve also learnt to receive feedback objectively.

I particular like the leadership training workshop we had at the beginning of the programme. I learnt a lot from the training which I now use on a day-to-day basis

I am very pleased with the whole programme and I am so glad I could join in. I think the assignment of a specific primary reviewer was a great idea as it keep you attached to a document and a specific personal situation, which helps develop reviewing skills.

I really appreciate the opportunity to meet and work together with amazing researchers from Africa. I have learned a lot especially regarding the agriculture needs in Africa and how I could contribute to the field.

I appreciate the travel arrangements by ASSET which were organized well to allow me travel from Nairobi to Kigali then Entebbe conveniently. The leadership training was very useful to me and I have applied some of the knowledge acquired not only in the agricultural academic career but also used it to serve my community. I really appreciate this training because such training is normally availed to our superiors and not junior staff like me. Exposure to young scientists from Europe gave me an insight on how they are disciplined and hard-working, this challenged me to work harder.

56

Two things: 1-The peer review process which was an eye opener and helped me be a better peer. 2-The training in Kigali that made me meet people and learn a lot about myself and others.

The training in general and the peer review process in particular has lifted up my career skills in communication and providing as well as receiving feed backs. Having the chance to interact with people of different cultural and educational backgrounds had made me think out of the box.

It was great to meet all the participants during the workshop and to spend a whole week together in this beautiful hotel. It really helped to build the trust between the ASSET members that was required to talk about more personal problems.

The peer review part of this program was amazing. The reviews from others helped me to improve my manuscript and see it the way others see it. The feedback part was also great as it helped me communicate to my reviewers. At the onset of the program, Skype calls with my primary reviewer helped to clarify the process and establish relationship.

Developmental Feedback

Please Indicate Something from any Part of the Programme that

Organize group writing sessions. The one we did at JIC was really useful and good fun.

If possible, one week should be added to the workshop for the first review to be done. In that case, the participants spend another week actually reviewing documents. The challenge here would be the cost component. I also suggest that the additional week could be spent in a cheaper hotel.

The duration for the review could be extended to 3 weeks.

Maybe the kick-start workshop could be announced a little bit earlier so people with current engagements can have ample time to plan for it and make reschedules where needed.

Things which I would recommend to include in the future for such types of workshop are: 1-To have someone with live experience to share with young scientists, preferably someone from research/science background and who is/was working in leadership and management position. 2-To give a bit of emphasis for the GROW model, it was a bit short. 3-I would also encourage to keep the momentum of this workshop the way it is.

This programme was excellent. If it could happen often many more scientists would be impacted. And perhaps allocate a longer time duration.

The programme was well organized and managed and due credit must be given to the organizer for this. However, for the future it will be important to have a website/portal dedicated to the ASSET. This way participants (current and alumni) can have a common portal for interaction. This can also be used in place of dropbox to submit documents and reviews.

The follow-up sessions with Vanda were really important to keep the community spirit up, so finding a way of integrating the African participants in these events would be great.

Could be Improved in the Future

57

It would be really beneficial if there was a day dedicated to discuss about the scientific projects of the ASSET participants. This is to promote the knowledge exchange between UK and Africa and provide a good platform for potential collaborations too.

Nothing it was all great!!

There were aspects about the training in Rwanda that need to be allocated more time, example, I feel the coaching bit needs more time given its importance.Everything worked well for me.

I thought at times that providing feedback to two people per round was maybe a bit too much - it meant that I could spend less time for each of the individual manuscripts. Maybe for the future it would be good to only give feedback to one person, but change that person every time. Although I see why it would be good to have one permanent reviewer, it is difficult to give useful feedback on the same document three times in a row, especially when the document doesn’t change that much over time. Also, although I liked to structure of the feedback forms, the sections and the suggestions on the forms made it easy to give a more superficial review.

Pairing reviewers in same or close area of specialization will produce greater benefit for reviews.

58

Review Round 1 Participant Feedback Responses in italics

How long did you spend reviewing your PRIMARY partner’s document?

including the reading, text edits and cover sheet fill in?

• A week, not full-time, but with a bit of time spent every day• It took me a week to review with 2 hrs solid every day working on it.• 1 hour• A total of about 6 hours• Around 3 hours• 8hrs• 5 days• 3 hours• 4 to 5 hrs• 2 hours• 5 days• 3 days

How long did you spend reviewing your SECONDARY partner’s document including the reading, text edits and cover sheet fill in?

• In this case, it was shorter, so it took me an afternoon, but I imagine it could be longer

• More or less the time but the secondary was a bit difficult and time consuming because of

specialization difference. This is apart from the fact that i have been able to learn new science

and technology.

• 1.5 hours

• A total of about 3 hours

• Around 3 hours

• 4hrs

• 4 days

• 2 hours

• 2 - 3 hrs

• 4 hours

• 4 days

• 1 day

Were you Able to Make the Review Deadline (29th Jan) on Time?

78.6% Strongly Agree83.3% Yes16.7% No

59

What Part of the Process Took you the Most Time?

• Gathering my ideas to write the cover sheets and making them as useful as possible• Reading, making sense out of it and editing• Correcting written English with track changes• Phrasing my comments so that they are most constructive• Editing the text• Materials and Methods• Reading• Reading/correcting in text• Reading, one document was too concentrated on the scientific part only so I spent more hours

on it• Reading the manuscripts and thinking about possible changes to improve it• Reading the work• Reading the manuscript

Do you have any suggested changes for the next round of review?

• I understand that timing was ok for me this time, but if for any reason people are especially busy one week they might struggle to have the reviews on time. I guess a bit of flexibility might be desirable, but it obviously can have a bad impact in the whole process, so I don’t see room for much change.

• I am concerned that those who struggle to write English may need help, rather than left alone to do it.

• Tract changes should be encouraged. Makes the work easier

60

Review Round 2 Participant FeedbackResponses in italics

How many hours did you spend reviewing your PRIMARY partner’sdocument including the reading, text edits and cover sheet fill in?

- 4- 1- 8- 2

How many hours did you spend reviewing your SECONDARY partner’s document including the reading, text edits and cover sheet fill in?

- 2- 4- 6- 3- 10

What part of the process took you the most time or was most challenging?

- Reading and abstracting the main ideas of the paper- Discussion- Reading and text editing- Reading the document and trying to get the concept of the content- Getting to understand the topic to provide an adequate feedback.

Were you able to make the review deadline (18 March) on time?

80% Yes20% No

61

Advisor FeedbackResponses in italics

Your team member has shown improvement in the following areas as a consequence of their participation in the programme…

Leadership

Connections to International Partners

Awareness of Agricultural Challenges in Africa

Awareness of Scientific Challenges Outside of their

Field

Scientific Writing








Recieving Feedback

Giving Feedback

62

By engaging in the program’s peer-review process, the following aspects of your team member’s document were increased…

Please provide your perception of the logistics of the programme.




77.8% Strongly Agree22.2% Agree0% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree 44.4% Strongly Agree

44.4% Agree11.1% Disagree0% Strongly Disagree


Speed of Development

The Programme was Well Organised

Quality

The Time Commitment Required of my Student

was Appropriate given the Benefits of Participation

You Would Encourage Other Team Members to Participate in the Future

The Programme was Well Executed

63

Please provide any additional feedback you would like to share here:

I understood that this was a programme engaging my student and your reviewers in report writing. Your expectations of my part in this programme were not clear to me on the onset. As such I have not been much aware of what was going on in terms of the time frame and deliverables of the programme specific to my student for follow up. I occasionally received mail on the progress of the student’s paper. This is a nice initiative however and I would like to commend the assistance provided for the student to complete her paper.

The thesis chapter that went through the ASSET programme required considerably less editing effort on my part, keep up the good work!The programme is good in that it encourages interactions among early career scientists who forge linkages for future collaboration.

64

65









Appendix

66

ASSET 2nd GenerationGoalEmpower Agricultural Scientists to Improve the Livelihoods of

African Rural Farming Families

3 Strategic Pillars

1. Develop each participant’s peer-coaching to drive change in their community

2. Embed participants within a solutions-focused peer-coaching community working towards shared goals through document exchange

3. Build relationships between early career scientists working inside and outside Africa

Strategy at a GlanceASSET will support the resourcefulness of scientists working to improve African agriculture to overcome obstacles they face in their institutions, scientific work and personal circumstances. Participants will utilize coaching skills within a peer-coaching community to develop written projects crucial for their success. Examples of target projects could include grant proposals, manuscripts, community engagement events, or institutional change goals. The peer-coaching community will consist of early career scientists from both inside and outside Africa. Inclusion of scientists from outside Africa will raise the profile of African agricultural challenges at developed world scientific institutions and foster collaboration with scientists in Africa.

3 PhasesA cohort of participants will meet in Africa and attend an experiential learning workshop centered on coaching and mentoring. Special attention will be paid to skills required for relationship building, communication and networking. Presentations will be made for each participant’s goal.

Following the workshop, primary partners will develop their target projects by engaging in virtual coaching (virtual 1:1s and digital document exchanges) over the course of 6 months.

The cohort will meet again after the peer-review exchange at the JIC for workshops reinforcing skills and introducing new tools.

67

Outcome AssessmentThe program will be successful if it accomplishes gains in the areas described in the 3 strategic pillars surrounding peer-coaching community development and international collaboration. Success will be measured using the following criteria:

1. Each participant gained significant peer-coaching experience and is using it to benefit their community.

2. The written projects of each participant have reached their ‘goal-state’ with significant benefit from the peer-review process.

3. Participants have increased likelihood of international collaboration through a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities their counterparts experience in other countries.

Assessment Method and Milestones for Each Criterion:

Criterion 1: The First Milestone is Attending the Training Event at the Outset of the Program.

During the following six-months, each participant will submit 3 Coaching Reflection Questionnaires capturing the coaching progress and experiences they have had with their ASSET partner and in their institutions. The second milestone will be the completion of the coaching-centered peer review.

Criterion 2: At the Outset of the Program each Participant will have a Clear Idea of the Written Project they want to Feed through the Peer-review Process.

The selection process will particularly select for participants with well-defined ideas. During the event, participants will determine the ‘goal-state’ they would like their project to reach by the end of the 3 rounds of peer-review in the following 6 months. Each completed review round is therefore a milestone and the participants will score the state of the project at the end of each round, with the ‘goal-state’ scoring 10.

Criterion 3: Participants will be asked to fill out a brief survey concerning their awareness of circumstances experienced by scientists in other countries before the initial event and after the end of the program. Success will be gauged by the extent to which increased understanding has made them feel confident to reach out to international partners and propose collaboration.

68

69

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I have been privileged to be involved in this experience. Everyone who supported, encouraged or facilitated the project was absolutely necessary and deserves huge appreciation. Special

thanks is due to the advisors, JIC leadership and graduate student advocates who supported the team members, showed patience and kept an open mind.

Immense appreciation goes out to the Giles Oldroyd and Christian Rogers for pledging their resources and commitment. The programme would have been a shadow of itself without Matt Heaton and Vanda Morgan who extroverted their enthusiasm and creativity to the benefit of all.

The biggest debt of gratitude is owed to the team members who committed the hours to each other’s development and pushed themselves out of their comfort zone.

This Report was Written by Jodi Lilley

Matt Heaton Provided Graphic Design for all materials.

“Science and art belong to the whole world, and before them vanish the barriers of nationality.”― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

70

Date post:	19-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	jodi-lilley
View:	13 times
Download:	0 times

ASSET 2016 Report

Documents