Case Studies in Translational Research (CSTR)
Format of student presentations:
Students will work in teams with four people. Each student in the class will be on two different teams, on different dates, with different preceptors. Each class is a 90 minute session to be organized as follows:
Start on time
Strict adherence to the timing of presentations. One goal of this course is for students to learn time management in group presentations.
45 min: Students #1-3 give formal presentations. Eachpresenttion is 10 minutes plus 5 minutes discussion with strict adherence to these times.
30 min: Class discussion directed by student #4
10 min: Preceptor time. Faculty preceptor discusses the work and/or answers questions.
General guidelines for student presentations:
Student 1: Review the background problem. Identify the important research questions/goals.
Students 2 and 3: Review the general background of translational research/procedural issues and discuss how they pertain specifically to the problem under discussion (one issue per student).
These issues may include the following:
IRB human subjects protocols
IACUC animal protocols
Intellectual property/technology transfer/other legal issues
Technical issues related to drug discovery, screening, etc.
Student 4: Lead a 35 minute discussion on implications of the findings and future directions.
The dicussion leader my prepare a few slides to serve as an outline to organize this discussion and stimulate ideas. The preceptor should be encourged to join in and share his/her personal experiences and expertise in the field. The students should make sure that preceptor input is incorporated into the discussion.
Suggestions for organization are flexible according to the specific topics and at the discretion of the preceptor and students. If there are any questions about format, please discuss with one of the course directors.
Role of the preceptor:
In general, the preceptor will discuss his/her own work. The preceptor will provide two documents as background reading for the session. One document will cover the problem to be addressed, for example, a brief review of the disease under study. The second document will cover a translational research issue pertaining to the study. This document can be a published paper or unpublished manuscript describing a research study. We encourage preceptors to use less conventional documents such as IRB proposals or patent proposals to expose students to things that they might not otherwise have a chance to review. The students should view the research documents online prior to preparing their presentation and verify with the preceptor that these will be used.
The class discussion should be primarily student run. The role of the preceptor is to help the students organize this discussion prior to the day of the presentation. In addition, the preceptor should provide expertise and personal insights to supplement the student run presentation.
The preceptor is expected to meet at least once and preferably twice with all four students together prior to the day of presentation. The students should arrange these meetings at least two weeks in advance of the presentations.
Written and verbal evaluations and constructive criticisms will be provided to each student immediately after their presentations. Student presentations will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
1. Style of presentation
2. Staying within allotted times (see above)
3. Slide content
4. Knowledge of topics and ability to answer questions from classmates and faculty
5. Ability to facilitate discussion and bring everyone in the class into the discussion.
6. Ability to work well within teams and to interrelate talks with those of other team members
7. Ability to incorporate preceptor experiences and input into the discussion.
All students will be evaluated on their contribution to class discussion throughout the course. Team success will be judged in part by the quality of the discussion and the breadth of the participation.
Students are expected to attend every session. Potential schedule conflicts should be discussed in advance with one of the course directors.
For planning this course in future years, preceptors will be evaluated by students for:
2. Quality of guidance
3. Choice of topic
4. Selection of reading materials
• Last updated: 11/08/2012