Princess Imoukhuede's presentation, 2017 MATLAB workshop

1. BIOE 201: Conservation Principles in Bioengineering
Instructor: Prof. Imoukhuede
Fundamentals
• Conservation of Mass
• Conservation of Energy
• Conservation of Momentum
Applications
• Systems Biology & Disease
• Cellular Engineering &
Renewable Energy
• Biomaterials & Biomechanics

2. 2Rosch & Imoukhuede (2016) ABME
pii@Illinois.edu

3. Imoukhuede et al (2014) Cancer Med. Weddell et al (2014) PLoS ONE.
QIAGEN - GeneGlobe Pathways - VEGF Pathway. (n.d.). Retrieved Dec. 10, 2014.
Bioengineering Questions Are Complex & Multi -disciplinary
CASE STUDY: ANGIOGENESIS – BLOOD VESSEL GROWTH
• Understanding angiogenesis requires:
– Physics/Electrical Eng: Fluorescence imaging of
developing vasculature
– Mathematics: Statistical modeling of angiogenic
receptors
– Biology: Examination of signaling processes
– Chemical Engineering: Mass-action kinetics
integration of signaling processes
– Computer Science: computational modeling +
simulation of signaling
• We need leaders to solve complex BIOE ?’s

4. QUICK POLL
HOW MANY TEACH A COURSE WITH TEAM-BASED PROJECT(S)?

5. Leadership Via Team Projects
GOOD + BAD
WE DO IT…
• Leadership skills are often
addressed by placing students in
teams to complete classroom
projects (Reeve, 2010)
• Higher Education Research
Institute (HERI, 2014) reported
that 86% of 1st yr U.S. students
participated in at least 1 course-
based team project in their 1st
semester.
• Team project gains: Interpersonal
skills (Halstead, Huang)
HOWEVER…
• Evidence of a national
multidisciplinary study
suggests students do not
“collaborate” (Colbeck, 2000)
• Many students simply divide
tasks into independent chunks
and work around/ignore weak
team members

6. Research Shows…
PLACING STUDENTS IN TEAMS IS NOT ENOUGH
• Multi-campus college study (Colbeck, 2000, JHE):
– Without organizing structure, leadership dev is probabilistic
– Need: interaction with instructors + technique practice
• Engineering quasi-longitudinal study (Rosch, 2015, JLE):
– Little leadership dev from frosh-sr yr, despite team-based course exposure
– Students’ motivation to practice leadership decreases over time
– Decreases in leadership motivation most pronounced in helping group via
selfless service
• National study (Stephens, 2015, IJEE): US Eng students possess fewer
leadership experiences via undergrad education
• HOW DO WE REVERSE TREND?
• HOW DO WE DEVELOP ENGINEERING/BIOENGINEERING LEADERS?

7. Rosch Theory: Develop Leadership Capacity Via
MOTIVATION TO LEAD + LEADERSHIP IDENTITY
• Motivation to lead (Chan & Drasgow,
2001): desire to behave as a leader
1) Affective identity – “I lead because I
see myself as a leader”
2) Non-calculative – “I lead because it’s
for the good of the group”
3) Social-normative – “I lead because
others expect it of me”
• Leader identity (Hiller, 2005) –
Personal image of oneself as
someone who influences peers
David Rosch, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor,
Agricultural Education
Program, College of
Agriculture, Consumer and
Environmental Sciences

8. QUESTION
Can We Develop Student LEADERSHIP CAPACITY
In Bioengineering Via TEAMING & TRAINING ?

9. BIOE201: Conservation Principles for Bioengineering
SOPHOMORE CORE COURSE FOLLOWING MODULE STRUCTURE

10. Research Design:
2 SECTIONS = 1 CONTROL + 1 INTERVENTION
BIOE 201
Control
N=32
11 Teams
10 teams: 3
students
1 team: 2
students
1 team
assignment:
Final project
Intervention
N=31
10 Teams
9 teams: 3
students
1 team: 4
students
6 formal team
assignments
+
Feedback via
team assessments
+
Leadership
trainingUniversity of Illinois at Urbana Champaign IRB #14864
Enhancing learning in the Bioengineering Curriculum

11. Research Design:
TEAM FORMATION + TEAM WORK +
LEADERSHIP TRAINING + ASSESSMENTS

12. http://info.catme.org/
Comprehensive Assessment of Team Member Effectiveness (CATME):
CREATES TEAMS + EVALUATES STUDENTS
50+ publications since 2006
1. CATME Team-Maker:
• Students provide info
• Instructor chooses criteria &
weighting
• System assigns students to
teams
2. CATME Rater Calibration:
Students learn accurate rating
by rating fictitious team
members
3. CATME Peer Evaluation:
• Students perform self &
peer evaluation
• System analyses the data,
flags unusual ratings

13. CATME Team Maker Parameters:
WEEK 2: INSTRUCTOR ASSIGNS CATME TEAMS
Layton et al. (2010) Adv Eng Educ

14. CATME Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scale (BARS): Questions
WEEKS 4 & 9: STUDENTS COMPLETE CATME BARS
Question category Rating Response Set
Contributing to the team’s work
Self & Each
teammate
Scale:
1= does not
contribute
5 = strongly
contributes
Interacting with teammates
Expecting quality
Having related knowledge skills & abilities
Team conflict
Team
Likert Scale:
1 = strongly disagree
5 = strongly agree
Team interdependence
Team perspectives
Team satisfaction*
Additional comments Open Free Response
Ohland et al. (2012) Acad Manag Learn Edu

15. Teaming Practice:
CLASS ASSIGNMENTS + EXAM REVIEWS + PROJECTS

16. Teaming Practice: Projects
WEEKS 10-11: MID-SEMESTER PROJECT
• Challenge: Model disease + protein in disease
• Charge:
– Describe protein signaling (conservation of mass)
– Treat disease by targeting protein signaling
• Deliverables: 5 page report + PPT
presentation:
1. Choose: Disease
2. Identify: Protein role in disease
3. Delineate: Protein signaling network activation
4. Find: Published computational models of
signaling
5. Describe: Plan to complete this project.

17. Teaming Practice: Projects
WEEKS 10-11: MID-SEMESTER PROJECT RESOURCES
• Review Article
• 2-Day MATLAB SimBiology
Workshop:
– Mathworks provided trial licenses
– Mathworks performed tutorial on
Simbiology
• Extended office hours (TA + Prof)

18. Matlab SimBiology enables modeling, simulation, & analysis

19. Teaming Practice: Projects
WEEKS 10-11: MID-SEMESTER PROJECT PRESENTATIONS

20. Teaming Practice: Projects
WEEKS 14-15: FINAL PROJECT

21. Teaming Practice: Projects
WEEKS 14-15: PROJECT PEER ASSESSMENT

22. SUMMARY OF TEAMING PRACTICE
• In-Class Assignments
• Exam Reviews
• Projects
– Conservation of Energy
– Mid-Semester Project
– Final Project

23. CONNECTING TEAMING WITH LEADERSHIP
Teaming Leadership

24. Leadership Development:
PRACTICE, TRAINING, & ASSESSMENTS

25. Leadership Development: Practice
WEEKS 2, 5, 9, 13: TEAM ROLE ROTATATION
Team spokesperson:
• Leads team
• Sets team meetings
• Spokesperson (presents
answers to problems)
Team scribe:
• Keeps notes & sends
summaries from team
meetings
• Writes up & turns in
team answers
• Emails TA names of new
team leader + secretary

26. Leadership Development: Training
WEEK 7: STRENGTHSQUEST ASSESSMENT
• Internationally recognized personality
assessment to build self-knowledge
• 30 min online assessment, coordinated by
Gallup
• Customized report:
– Top talent themes
– How talents can be used for success
• Governing principles for leadership in
teams:
1. Devote efforts to improving areas of
strength
2. Delegate to others where weak
3. Apply strengths to overcome obstacles
4. Create opportunities to benefit from
strengths

27. Leadership Development: Training
WEEK 7: ILLINOIS LEADERSHIP CENTER STRENGTHSQUEST WORKSHOP
• Trained facilitator
• Facilitated sharing of strengths
within teams
• Moderated activities:
– Setting strength-driven goals
– Identifying strategies for
developing talents

28. Rosch Theory: Develop Leadership Capacity Via
MOTIVATION TO LEAD + LEADERSHIP IDENTITY
• Motivation to lead (Chan & Drasgow,
2001): desire to behave as a leader
1) Affective identity – “I lead because I
see myself as a leader”
2) Non-calculative – “I lead because it’s
for the good of the group”
3) Social-normative – “I lead because
others expect it of me”
• Leader identity (Hiller, 2005) –
Personal image of oneself as
someone who influences peers
David Rosch, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor,
Agricultural Education
Program, College of
Agriculture, Consumer and
Environmental Sciences

29. QUESTION:
Can We Develop Student LEADERSHIP CAPACITY In
Bioengineering Via TEAMING & TRAINING ?
ANSWER: YES!
• Leadership Identity:
• Intervention section saw 15 % ↑ leadership identity
•  = primary way of developing leadership behaviors in
professional work teams (Hiller, 2005)
• Motivation to lead:
• Intervention section saw ~5% ↑
•  = desire to behave in leadership-oriented ways when
among others (Chan, 2001)

30. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Collaborators
• David Rosch, PhD: Assistant Professor, Agricultural Education Program
• Jennifer Amos, PhD: Teaching Associate Professor, Bioengineering
• Nicole Nelson: Graduate Student, ACES
BIOE201 Instructional Teams
• Dipanjan Pan, PhD: Assistant Professor, Bioengineering
• Jared Weddell: Graduate TA, Bioengineering
• Ali Ansari: Graduate TA, Bioengineering
• Spencer Mamer: Graduate TA, Bioengineering
Illinois Leadership Center
• Jeff Yacup, Assistant Director
• Furqan Hadi, StrengthsQuest Workshop Facilitator