THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE

2016 SUMMER INTERNSHIP COURSE

GRADING CRITERIA and EVALUATIONS

Grading/Evaluation of Research Projects:

The Mentors will provide continuous assessment to evaluate the different core components of

the Internship throughout the 7 weeks. Many of these evaluations will be done electronically.

The mentor will be evaluating his/her Bench Research or Scientific Writing group only. For

Presentations skills, the mentor will be evaluating ALL interns (except in a few cases).

Main criteria that will be assessed by the Mentors during the Internship Course:

BENCH RESEARCH SCIENTIFIC WRITING

PRESENTATION SKILLS

Three evaluation opportunities (Internship Weeks 5, 6, 7)

Three evaluation opportunities (Internship Weeks 5, 6, 7)

Three evaluation opportunities (Internship Weeks 5, 6, 7)

1. Skills and accuracy2. Project knowledge3. Teamwork4. Data entry5. Interpretation of

data

1. Keywords search2. Literature search3. Review of key

articles4. Refinement of

initial outline5. Writing progress6. Regular written

updates to mentor7. Creation and use

offigures/tables/flowdiagrams

8. Quality of article9. Completion of 1st

draft10. Complete

references & endnote library

11. Plagiarismreport

12. Innovativewriting skills

1. Delivery style2. Organization3. Clarity &

knowledge4. Responses to

questions5. Slide quality6. Time management

The Interns’ scores in the main components of the Internship course will be recorded in a

Grading Certificate which will be presented to the Intern at the end of the Internship. An

example of the Grading Certificate is shown on the last page.

Interns who complete the Internship with full attendance and have obtained an overall score of

>70% (Grades B- and above) will be awarded an Internship Certificate.

METHOD TO EVALUATE BENCH RESEARCH:

EVALUATION RATING Excellent 5

Good 4 Average 3

Fair 2 Poor 1

CRITERIA: RATING Fulfilled the learning objectives of the Bench Research Exercise* : 1. Competency verified for Bench Research Training Skills 5 2. Demonstrates awareness about each lab technique and the theory behind it 5 3. Able to read, understand and follow a protocol for a particular technique 5 4. Have the necessary skills to perform several lab techniques (as per training provided

during bench research)5

5. Able to accurately record raw data into the worksheet 5 6. Demonstrated proficiency to perform calculations and determine its validity 5 7. Exhibited the knowledge to interpret the general trend/meaning of the results

obtained5

8. Demonstrated the skills to be able to do basic troubleshooting as the experimentprogresses

5

9. Exhibited proficiency to do internal QC for the experiment 5 10. Exhibited the aptitude to organize and portray results into a presentation 5 11. Display ability to coordinate each lab technique with others as a team 5 12. Display ability to plan for the experimental work flow as a team 5 Interaction and relationship with Mentor: 13. Discussed each step of the experiment for verification and troubleshooting with their

Mentor5

14. Provided daily updates on progress of each research day to the Mentor 5 Interns Abilities: 15. Exhibits discipline, ability and commitment to see their project all the way to the last

Research Day5

TOTAL 75 • All 5s → maximum (75)• More 5s than 4s → minimum for Mentor’s Choice Award (68)• Minimum to clear this evaluation (50)• Consideration for Mentor’s choice (score of 68-75); cleared this evaluation (score of at least 50)

* Assessed at the beginning of Week

METHOD TO EVALUATE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH:

EVALUATION RATING Excellent 5

Good 4 Average 3

Fair 2 Poor 1

CRITERIA RATING Fulfilled the learning objectives of the Scientific Writing Research Exercise* : 1. Attended the Scientific Writing Research Workshop (Amy Moore’s) 5 2. Demonstrates awareness about plagiarism and its consequences 5 3. Demonstrates ability to independently conduct a thorough and exhaustive literature

search5

4. Demonstrates ability to independently come up with keywords for a research topic 5 5. Exhibits the ability to screen articles and filter those that are most relevant to the

topic at hand5

6. Exhibits the ability to read, understand and extract information from relevant articles 5 7. Demonstrates ability to organize vast information in a logical and comprehensive

manner5

8. Displayed skills to come up with an expanded outline for the research topic at hand 5 9. Demonstrates skills to work in a systematic manner to add information to the outline 5 10. Demonstrates proficiency to document key information from articles into a tabular or

diagrammatic form5

11. Exhibits the competency to record and to reference material taken from other articles 5 12. Demonstrates ability to use reference managers to manage references 5 Interaction and relationship with Mentor: 13. Met consistently (minimum of 2 to 3 times weekly) with their Mentor to seek

guidance and feedback on writing tasks5

14. Provided weekly to bi-weekly written updates on progress of writing to the Mentorand CRM Director

5

Interns Abilities: 15. Demonstrates discipline, ability and commitment of carrying the project beyond the

Internship till publication5

TOTAL 75 • All 5s → maximum (75)• More 5s than 4s → minimum for Mentor’s Choice Award (68)• Minimum to clear this evaluation (50)• Consideration for Mentor’s choice (score of 68-75); cleared this evaluation (score of at least 50)

*Assessed at the beginning of Week 7

GRADING OF INTERNS:

EVALUATION RATING Excellent 5

Good 4 Average 3

Fair 2 Poor 1

CRITERIA: RATING 1. Fulfilled the learning objectives of the Internship* :

• Participation in daily lectures 5 • Participated in research seminars 5 • Participated in research writing workshop 5 • Participation in research meetings 5 • Participation in group discussions 5 • Participation in bench research 5 • Participation in a writing project 5 • Presented research results (bench projects) in research meetings 5 • Presented research findings (writing projects) in research meetings 5 • Presented PowerPoint talks (as an individual) on their writing project 5 • Presented PowerPoint talks (as a group) on their bench project 5 • Interacted positively with the Faculty, Mentors, Speakers and Interns 5

2. Produced a quantifiable amount of work during the Internship:• Completed a lab project along with other Interns in their group 5 • Completed the first full draft of a paper 5

3. Demonstrate having acquired / improved on new / existing soft skills from the Internship 5 TOTAL 75

• All 5s → maximum to pass with distinction (75)• More 5s than 4s → minimum to pass with distinction (68)• All 4s → minimum to pass with honors (60)• Pass without honors (50)• Pass with distinction (score of 68-75); pass with honors (score of 60-67); pass without honors

(score of 50-60)

* Assessed at the beginning of Week 7

5. CRITERIA FOR AWARD OF GRADUATION CERTIFICATE:

• Secured a pass with distinction (Score of 68 – 75)

• Pass with honors (Score of 60 – 67)

• Pass without honors (Score of 50 – 60)

 

SW 1st evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)  

1st ASSESSMENT OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (MENTOR’S CHOICE)

(20% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 3- 07/01/2016 Total Score /100marks

Criteria Mentor’s Score

1

Keywords * the Intern should be familiar on how to conduct a thorough keyword search using common electronic databases and have come up with their own keywords (besides the suggested keywords that have been given to them)

The Intern is making excellent progress in conducting their keyword search/has finalized all their keywords

20 marks

The Intern is making very good progress in conducting their keyword search 16 marks

The Intern is making good progress in conducting their keyword search 12 marks

The Intern is making fair progress in conducting their keyword search 8 marks

The Intern is making poor progress in conducting their keyword search 4 marks

2 Literature search * the Intern should be adept in conducting a thorough, relevant literature search using common electronic databases (besides the recommended articles that have been given to them)

The Intern is making excellent progress in conducting their literature search / has completed their literature search

20 marks

The Intern is making very good progress in conducting their literature search 16 marks

The Intern is making good progress in conducting their literature search 12 marks

The Intern is making fair progress in conducting their literature search 8 marks

The Intern is making poor progress in conducting their literature search 4 marks

3 Outline * fundamental outlines have been given to the Interns, and Interns are encouraged to expand and add original ideas to the outline

The Intern has added a great amount of original input to the fundamental outline 20 marks

The Intern has added a substantial amount of original input to the fundamental outline 16 marks

The Intern has added moderate amount of original input to the fundamental outline 12 marks

The Intern has added minimal original input to the fundamental outline 8 marks

The Intern has added no original input to the fundamental outline 4 marks

4 Writing progress * the Intern should have begun the writing of their actual material, Mentors may also consider the quality of their work (content, language, grammar)

The Intern is making very good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 20 marks

The Intern is making good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 16 marks

The Intern is making fair progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 12 marks

The Intern is making slow progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 8 marks

The Intern has not started in the writing of the actual manuscript 4 marks

5 Regular written updates to Mentor

 

SW 1st evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)  

* a written update constitutes an email that includes the word file with the Intern’s manuscript writing progress (since the last email), and that specifies what has been completed, what the remaining steps are, and states any difficulties faced, asks relevant questions

Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (2-3x/week) 20 marks

Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (1x/week) 16 marks

Meets regularly with Mentor but does not provide written updates to Mentor 12 marks

Does not meet regularly with Mentor but provides written updates to Mentor 8 marks

Does not meet and does not provide regular written updates to Mentor 4 marks

TOTAL COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

SW 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)  

2nd ASSESSMENT OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (30% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..……

Deadline: WEEK 5- 07/15/16 Total Score……..……/100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s

Score

1 Review of key articles * the Mentors should take into account how many articles have been identified vs. how many key articles have been read

The Intern is making excellent progress in the review of key articles 20 marks

The Intern is making very good progress in the review of key articles 16 marks

The Intern is making good progress in the review of key articles 12 marks

The Intern is making fair progress in the review of key articles 8 marks

The Intern is making poor progress in the review of key articles 4 marks

2

Writing progress * actual writing of the manuscript should have begun and the written material should be submitted to the Mentor for assessment of progress, Mentors must also consider the quality of their work (content, language, grammar)

The Intern is making excellent progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 20 marks

The Intern is making very good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 16 marks

The Intern is making good progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 12 marks

The Intern is making fair progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 8 marks

The Intern is making poor progress in the writing of the actual manuscript 4 marks

3 Figures and diagrams * figures and diagrams should ideally be novel and not a rehash of a past figure/diagram and/or table

The Intern has started constructing the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 20 marks

The Intern has started sketching the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 16 marks

The Intern has given the exact plan for the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 12 marks

The Intern has narrowed down ideas for the Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables 8 marks

The Intern has identified broad areas of information that could be represented as Figures/Diagrams and/or Tables

4 marks

4 EndNote library citations * all references are done using EndNote, all references are cited in text using the appropriate format, Mentors should assess the upkeep of the library

EndNote library is 100% up to date 20 marks

EndNote library is 80% up to date 16 marks

EndNote library is 60% up to date 12 marks

EndNote library is 40% up to date 8 marks

EndNote library is 20% up to date 4 marks

5 Regular written updates to Mentor

 

SW 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)  

* Mentors should assess the quality of each update: a written update constitutes an email that includes the word file with the Intern’s manuscript writing progress (since the last email), and that specifies what has been completed, what the remaining steps are, and states any difficulties faced, asks relevant questions

Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (2-3x/week) 20 marks

Meets regularly with Mentor and provides written updates to Mentor (1x/week) 16 marks

Meets regularly with Mentor but does not provide written updates to Mentor 12 marks

Does not meet regularly with Mentor but provides written updates to Mentor 8 marks

Does not meet and does not provide regular written updates to Mentor 4 marks

TOTAL COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

SW 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)  

3rd ASSESSMENT OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (50% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 6- 07/22/16 Total Score /100marks

Criteria Mentor’s

Score

1

Completion of 1st Draft / Plagiarism Report

* the plagiarism report (Turnitin) must have been run on the manuscript and submitted to the Mentor before the assessment date

First draft of the manuscript is 100% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 20 marks

First draft of the manuscript is 90% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 16 marks

First draft of the manuscript is 80% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 12 marks

First draft of the manuscript is 70% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 8 marks

First draft of the manuscript is 60% complete and the plagiarism report is <20% 4 marks

2

Figures/Tables/Flow Diagram

* figures and diagrams should ideally be novel and not a rehash of a past figure/diagram and/or table

The Intern has submitted the finalized Figures/Diagrams to ARTs 20 marks

The Intern has finalized (received approval) the Figures/Diagrams with the Mentors 16 marks

The Intern has sketched the Figures/Diagrams for the Mentors 12 marks

The Intern has started constructing the Figures/Diagrams 8 marks

The Intern repeated the use of an existing Figures/Diagrams or has none of their own 4 marks

3

Complete References & EndNote

* all references are done using EndNote, all references are cited in text using the appropriate format, Mentors should assess the upkeep of the library

EndNote library is 100% up to date 20 marks

EndNote library is 80-90% up to date 16 marks

EndNote library is 60-70% up to date 12 marks

EndNote library is <50% up to date 8 marks

EndNote library is not submitted 4 marks

4 Innovative Writing Skills

* Mentors should assess if the Intern had demonstrated an innovative writing style

The Intern has displayed a unique style of writing 20 marks

The Intern has displayed a great style of writing 16 marks

The Intern has displayed a good style of writing 12 marks

The Intern has displayed a commendable style of writing 8 marks

The Intern has displayed a basic style of writing 4 marks

5 Quality of Article

 

SW 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)  

* Mentors should assess the quality of the article from the perspective of content (information, flow and readability), language (appropriate use of scientific writing without too much jargon), grammar & spelling (adheres to the basic rules of the English language)

Article is well-written and of high quality 20 marks

Article is well-written and of moderate quality 16 marks

Article is poorly-written and of moderate quality 12 marks

Article is poorly-written and of mediocre quality 8 marks

Article is poorly-written and of poor quality 4 marks

TOTAL COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

SW Top 3 Selection WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 26, 2016)  

FINAL SCIENTIFIC WRITING RANKING

Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline: WEEK 7- 07/26/16….Total Score……..……/100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s Score

1 Significance and rationale of the scientific writing project is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the topic and displays clear understanding of the significance of the topic

Excellent 20 marks

Good 16 marks

Fair 12 marks

Poor 8 marks

Very Poor 4 marks

2 Literature review is presented for understanding of scientific topic

* displays clear understanding of the current literature and background of the topic

Excellent 20 marks

Good  16 marks

Fair   12 marks

Poor  8 marks

Very Poor  4 marks

3 Design of structure and outline of scientific project is valid for the topic

* demonstrates competency in explaining the topic design in a clear and concise manner

Excellent 20 marks

Good 16 marks

Fair 12 marks

Poor 8 marks

Very Poor 4 marks

4 Results are clearly stated and Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information

 

SW Top 3 Selection WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 26, 2016)  

* displays analytical skills in reporting findings of the existing literature

Excellent 20 marks

Good 16 marks

Fair 12 marks

Poor 8 marks

Very Poor 4 marks

5 Interpret findings, draw conclusions, and make recommendations for future research

* shows ability to interpret the existing literature, draw accurate conclusions, and make recommendations for further research

Excellent 20 marks

Good  16 marks

Fair   12 marks

Poor  8 marks

Very Poor  4 marks

TOTAL

COMMENTS: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

BR 1st Evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)  

1st ASSESSMENT OF BENCH RESEARCH (20% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 3- 07/01/ 16 Total Score /100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s

Score

1

Number of techniques trained in and completed & Number of repeats performed per technique

* the Intern must have completed the required number of techniques and number of repeats for pipetting and basic techniques (counting of beads, sperm count, motility, viability)

The Intern’s completed 100% of the required training 20 marks

The Intern’s completed 90% of the required training 16 marks

The Intern’s completed 80% of the required training 12 marks

The Intern’s completed 70% of the required training 8 marks

The Intern’s completed 60% of the required training 4 mark

2

Accuracy of results obtained

* the Intern must have completed the required number of techniques and number of repeats for pipetting and basic techniques (counting of beads, sperm count, motility, viability)

The Intern’s results fall within the reference range 20 marks

The Intern’s results fall within 5% of the reference range 16 marks

The Intern’s results fall within 10% of the reference range 12 marks

The Intern’s results fall within 15% of the reference range 8 marks

The Intern’s results fall within 20% of the reference range 4 mark

3 Reporting of results

* the Intern populated the Excel sheet and entered his results in the Excel file provided

The Intern’s completed 100% of the reporting 20 marks

The Intern’s completed 90% of the reporting 16 marks

The Intern’s completed 80% of the reporting 12 marks

The Intern’s completed 70% of the reporting 8 marks

The Intern’s completed 60% of the reporting 4 mark

4 Initiative and dedication

* the Intern showed initiative, commitment, dedication and an eagerness to participate

The Intern showed very strong characteristics of initiative and dedication 20 marks

The Intern showed good characteristics of initiative and dedication 16 marks

The Intern showed fair characteristics of initiative and dedication 12 marks

The Intern showed poor characteristics of initiative and dedication 8 marks

The Intern showed no characteristics of initiative and dedication 4 mark

BR 1st Evaluation WEEK 3 Friday (July 1, 2016)  

5 Understanding of the project and general impression

* the Intern showed initiative, commitment, dedication and an eagerness to participate

The Intern showed very good progress in their understanding of their bench training 20 marks

The Intern showed good progress in their understanding of their bench training 16 marks

The Intern showed fair progress in their understanding of their bench training 12 marks

The Intern showed slow progress in their understanding of their bench training 8 marks

The Intern showed no progress in their understanding of their bench training 4 mark

TOTAL

COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

BR 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)  

2nd ASSESSMENT OF BENCH RESEARCH (30% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 5- 07/15/16 Total Score /100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s

Score

1 Skills and Accuracy * skills and accuracy in basic techniques (pipetting, sperm count, motility, viability), any other specific task that the Intern was assigned to

The Intern shows excellent skills and high accuracy (mostly within the reference range) 20 marks

The Intern shows very good skills and very good accuracy (mostly within 5-10% of the reference range)

16 marks

The Intern shows good skills and good accuracy (mostly within 10-15% of the reference range) 12 marks

The Intern shows fair skills and fair accuracy (mostly within 15-20% of the reference range) 8 marks

The Intern shows poor skills and poor accuracy (mostly >20% of the reference range) 4 mark

2

Project Knowledge

* knowledge of the Interns own bench project based on the Mentors discretion and interaction with the Intern - understanding the rationale of the project, the reason for performing specific tests

The Intern displays solid knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 20 marks

The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project  16 marks

The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project  12 marks

The Intern displays poor knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 8 marks

The Intern displays very little knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 4 mark

3 Teamwork

* communication with Mentor and Team Members, professionalism

The Intern displays team spirit/acts as a team player 20 marks 

The Intern shares info about the project with team members, offers help to Mentor/team members when appropriate

16 marks 

The Intern is considerate about others’ own tasks 12 marks 

The Intern is conscientious about research responsibilities/tasks assigned 8 marks 

The Intern is respectful of others’ time, work and space 4 mark

4 Data Entry

* data entry into the specific project worksheet and into the Excel worksheet

Data entry is 100% up to date 20 marks

Data entry is 90% up to date 16 marks

Data entry is 80% up to date 12 marks

 

BR 2nd evaluation WEEK 5 Friday (July 15, 2016)  

Data entry is 70% up to date 8 marks

Data entry is 60% up to date 4 mark

5

Interpretation of Data

* understand the significance of the results obtained, and is able to troubleshoot during bench work

The Intern displays solid knowledge about the interpretation of data 20 marks

The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 16 marks

The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 12 marks

The Intern displays poor knowledge about the interpretation of data 8 marks

The Intern displays very little knowledge about the interpretation of data 4 mark

TOTAL

COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

BR 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)  

3rd ASSESSMENT OF BENCH RESEARCH (50% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 6- 07/22/16    Total Score /100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s Score

1 Skills and Accuracy * skills and accuracy in basic techniques (pipetting, sperm count, motility, viability), any other specific task that the Intern was assigned to

The Intern shows excellent skills and high accuracy (mostly within the reference range) 20 marks

The Intern shows very good skills and very good accuracy (mostly within 5-10% of the reference range) 16 marks

The Intern shows good skills and good accuracy (mostly within 10-15% of the reference range) 12 marks

The Intern shows fair skills and fair accuracy (mostly within 15-20% of the reference range) 8 marks

The Intern shows poor skills and poor accuracy (mostly >20% of the reference range) 4 mark

2

Project Knowledge

* knowledge of the Interns own bench project based on the Mentors discretion and interaction with the Intern - understanding the rationale of the project, the reason for performing specific tests

The Intern displays solid knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 20 marks

The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 16 marks

The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 12 marks

The Intern displays poor knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 8 marks

The Intern displays very little knowledge about the theoretical basis of their bench project 4 mark

3 Teamwork

* communication with Mentor and Team Members, professionalism

The Intern displays team spirit/acts as a team player 20 marks

The Intern shares info about the project with team members, offers help to Mentor/team members when appropriate 16 marks

The Intern is considerate about others’ own tasks 12 marks

The Intern is conscientious about research responsibilities/tasks assigned 8 marks

The Intern is respectful of others’ time, work and space 4 mark

 

BR 3rd evaluation WEEK 6 Friday (July 22, 2016)  

4 Data Entry

* data entry into the specific project worksheet and into the Excel worksheet

Data entry is 100% up to date 20 marks

Data entry is 90% up to date 16 marks

Data entry is 80% up to date 12 marks

Data entry is 70% up to date 8 marks

Data entry is 60% up to date 4 mark

5 Interpretation of Data

* understand the significance of the results obtained, and is able to troubleshoot during bench work

The Intern displays solid knowledge about the interpretation of data 20 marks

The Intern displays a good amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 16 marks

The Intern displays a fair amount of knowledge about the interpretation of data 12 marks

The Intern displays poor knowledge about the interpretation of data 8 marks

The Intern displays very little knowledge about the interpretation of data 4 mark

TOTAL

COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  

BRPG1stevaluationWEEK5Monday(July11,2016)

1st EVALUATION OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (10% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline: Week 5 07/11/16….. Total Score……..……/100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s Score

1 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study

Excellent 20 marks

Good 16 marks

Fair 12 marks

Poor 8 marks

Very Poor 4 marks

2 Experimental design is valid for question addressed * demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

3 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

4 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills

Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 20 marks

Good (time ± 1 min) 16 marks

Fair (time ± 2 min) 12 marks

BRPG1stevaluationWEEK5Monday(July11,2016)

Poor (time ± 3 min) 8 marks

Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min) 4 marks

5 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions

Excellent 20 marks

Good 16 marks

Fair 12 marks

Poor 8 marks

Very Poor 4 marks

TOTAL

COMMENTS:

 

BRPG 2nd evaluation WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 25, 2016)  

Week 7 (2nd evaluation) OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (20% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline: Week 7- 07/25/16….. Total Score……..……/100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s Score

1 Hypothesis is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the study

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

2 Sufficient background is presented for understanding of the research question * displays clear understanding of the current literature and background for the study and research question

Excellent 10 marks

Good  8 marks

Fair   6 marks

Poor  4 marks

Very Poor  2 marks

3 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

4 Experimental design is valid for question addressed * demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

5 Results are clearly stated * demonstrates an understanding and ability to analyze the results

Excellent 10 marks

 

BRPG 2nd evaluation WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 25, 2016)  

Good  8 marks

Fair   6 marks

Poor  4 marks

Very Poor  2 marks

6 Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information * demonstrates skills to present the data with figures and tables

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

7 Conclusions are clearly described * shows ability to draw accurate conclusions based on the study findings

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

8 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

9 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills

Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 10 marks

Good (time ± 1 min) 8 marks

Fair (time ± 2 min) 6 marks

Poor (time ± 3 min) 4 marks

Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min) 2 marks

10 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

 

BRPG 2nd evaluation WEEK 7 Tuesday (July 25, 2016)  

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

TOTAL

COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

BRPG 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Friday (July 29, 2016)  

FINAL ASSESSMENT (3rd evaluation) OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (70% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern…………………………………………………… Mentor…………….………..…………..… Deadline: Week 7- 07.29.16……. Total Score……..……/100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s Score

1 Hypothesis is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the study

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

2 Sufficient background is presented for understanding of the research question * displays clear understanding of the current literature and background for the study and research question

Excellent 10 marks

Good  8 marks

Fair   6 marks

Poor  4 marks

Very Poor  2 marks

3 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

4 Experimental design is valid for question addressed * demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner

 

BRPG 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Friday (July 29, 2016)  

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

5 Results are clearly stated * demonstrates an understanding and ability to analyze the results

Excellent 10 marks

Good  8 marks

Fair   6 marks

Poor  4 marks

Very Poor  2 marks

6 Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information * demonstrates skills to present the data with figures and tables

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

7 Conclusions are clearly described * shows ability to draw accurate conclusions based on the study findings

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

8 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

 

BRPG 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Friday (July 29, 2016)  

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

9 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills

Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 10 marks

Good (time ± 1 min) 8 marks

Fair (time ± 2 min) 6 marks

Poor (time ± 3 min) 4 marks

Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min) 2 marks

10 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

TOTAL

COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluationstobedonebymentor3timesoverthecourseoftheinternshipbythefollowingdeadlines:1) WEEK3–Friday,July1,20162) WEEK4–Friday,July8,20163) WEEK6–Friday,July22,2016

EVALUATION OF BENCH RESEARCH PRESENTATION (NOT GRADED)

Intern Mentor Date:_________________________________________________

Criteria Mentor’s Comment

1 Significance of the problem under investigation is clearly indicated * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Very Poor

2 Experimental design is valid for question addressed

* demonstrates competency in explaining the experimental design in a clear and concise manner

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Very Poor

3 Overall style of the presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)

Excellent Good

Fair

Poor

Very Poor

4 Presenter uses time effectively * demonstrates time management skills

Excellent (time ± 30 seconds)

Evaluationstobedonebymentor3timesoverthecourseoftheinternshipbythefollowingdeadlines:1) WEEK3–Friday,July1,20162) WEEK4–Friday,July8,20163) WEEK6–Friday,July22,2016

Good (time ± 1 min)

Fair (time ± 2 min)

Poor (time ± 3 min)

Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min)

5 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate

manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions

Excellent Good

Fair

Poor

Very Poor

COMMENTS:

SWP1stevaluationWEEK3(Monday,June27,2016)

1st ASSESSMENT OF PRESENTATION SKILLS (SCIENTIFIC WRITING) (20% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: Week 3- 06/27/16 Total Score /100 marks

Criteria

Mentor’s

Score

1

Organization/Structure/Clarity

* Was the presentation properly structured and did it have a logical flow?

/20

2

Knowledge of Topic

* Did the Intern master/understand the topic and showed insight?

/20

3

Delivery Style

* Speak clearly, voice projection, eye contact, engaging the audience

/20

4

Timing

* Adequate distribution per section, proper utilization of allotted time

/20

5

Questions

* Answered questions logically, showed insight

/20

TOTAL /100

COMMENTS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SWP2ndevaluationWEEK6(Monday,July18,2016)

2nd ASSESSMENT OF PRESENTATION SKILLS (SCIENTIFIC WRITING) (30% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern Mentor Deadline: WEEK 6- 07/18/2016 Total Score _____/100 marks

Criteria

Mentor’s

Score

1

Organization/Structure/Clarity

* Was the presentation properly structured and did it have a logical flow?

/15

2

Knowledge of Topic

* Did the Intern master/understand the topic and showed insight?

/20

3

Delivery Style

* Speak clearly, voice projection, eye contact, engaging the audience

/20

4

Slide Quality

* Appearance, appropriate use of visuals, general appeal, quality, neatness

/15

5

Timing

* Adequate distribution per section, proper utilization of allotted time

/10

6

Questions

* Answered questions logically, showed insight

/20

TOTAL /100

COMMENTS: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

SWP 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Thursday (July 28, 2016)  

FINAL ASSESSMENT (3rd evaluation) OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING PRESENTATION (50% goes towards the Final Score)

Intern…………………………………………………….… Mentor…………….………..…………..…… Deadline Week 7- 07/28/16 Total Score……..……/100 marks

Criteria Mentor’s

Score

1 Rationale of scientific writing project is clearly defined * provides a clear hypothesis of the topic

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

2 Literature review is presented for understanding of the scientific writing project * displays clear understanding of the current literature and background of the topic

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

3 Significance of the topic under investigation is clearly defined * demonstrates complete knowledge of the significance of the study

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

4 Design of structure and outline for scientific writing project is valid for the topic * demonstrates competency in explaining the topic in a clear and concise manner

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

5 Displays analytical skills in reporting findings of existing literature * demonstrates an understanding and ability to analyze the literature findings

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor

2 marks

6 Figures/Tables clearly convey intended information * demonstrates skills to present the data with mechanistic figures and tabulation of existing results

Excellent 10 marks

 

SWP 3rd evaluation WEEK 7 Thursday (July 28, 2016)  

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

7

Interpret findings, draw conclusions, and make recommendations for future research * shows ability to interpret the existing literature, draw accurate conclusions, and make recommendations for further research

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

8 Overall style of presentation is effective (delivery/eye contact) * presents in an effective manner (overall delivery style)

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

9 Presenter uses time effectively

* demonstrates time management skills and presentation is spaced appropriately

Excellent (time ± 30 seconds) 10 marks

Good (time ± 1 min)

8 marks

Fair (time ± 2 min)

6 marks

Poor (time ± 3 min)

4 marks

Very Poor (time ± 4 or more min)

2 marks

10 Presenter answers questions in an organized, concise, and accurate manner * displays ability to respond to audience questions effectively

Excellent 10 marks

Good 8 marks

Fair 6 marks

Poor 4 marks

Very Poor 2 marks

TOTAL

This document reflects the performance of the intern during the 9th Annual Summer Internship From: Jun 13 – Jul 29, 2016

This is to certify that the intern,

Devin Ta Northeast Ohio Medical University, Canton, Ohio

SCIENTIFIC WRITING Completion of 1st

Draft/ Plagiarism

Report

Figures/Tables/ Flow Diagram

Complete References &

EndNote Library

Innovative Writing

Skills

Quality of Article

Overall Grade

100 100 100 95 95 98 A+ A+ A+ A A A+

BENCH RESEARCH Skills and Accuracy

Project Knowledge

Teamwork Data Entry Interpretation of Data

Overall Grade

90 90 90 90 90 90 A- A- A- A- A- A-

PRESENTATION SKILLS Organization/

Structure/ Clarity

Knowledge of Topic/

Questions

Delivery Style Slide Quality Timing Overall Grade

89.52 89.82 91.07 82.86 100 89.64 A- A- A B+ A+ A-

Grading Scale: A+ (>96%), A (91-95%), A- (86-90%), B+ (81-85%), B (76-80%), B- (71-71%), C (70% is a fail)

Dr. Rakesh Sharma Dr. Rakesh Sharma Mentor, Scientific Research Mentor, Bench Research

July 29, 2016 Dr. Ashok Agarwal Date Program Director

The Cleveland Clinic

American Center for Reproductive Medicine