IGEM:Stanford/2010/Notebook/31 March 2010

Meeting Agenda

 * Watch the following presentations prior to the meeting:

1. Cambridge 2009

2. ArtScienceBangalore 2009

3. MIT 2006

4. Caltech 2008


 * Consider the following questions during the meeting (with regard to the above presentations):

1. What do you think makes a good igem Project?

2. Personal Likes and Dislike and why

3. Using these presentations, how should we go about developing a project?


 * Consider other projects not listed above

Meeting Notes
'09 Cambridge:
 * Good Modeling and use of design tools
 * Great applicability and utility
 * Too many graphs resulted in distraction?
 * Good characterization
 * User-friendly color scheme
 * Good use of abstraction
 * Possible: unequal allocation of work
 * Noticeable systems out of parts

'09 ArtScience Bangalore:
 * Original idea from homeland
 * Sense of purpose?
 * Presentation seemed out of order
 * Succinct and clear presentation
 * Lack of data in comparison to other teams
 * Community Outreach (gold medal-related work)

'06 MIT:
 * Very interactive presentation
 * Good level of abstraction
 * Good decomposition
 * Technically advanced the field
 * Good diagrams
 * Physically proved their success (via samples)
 * Scent/fragrance applications are inexpensive
 * Synthetic biology can be fun
 * Needed a more contextual basis
 * Question posed by Prof. Smolke: Did they meet their goal? Easily-defined milestones

'08 Caltech:
 * Equal allocation of work
 * Breadth and depth of project
 * Spent the right amount of time on hard data/graphs
 * 2 types from 1 common precursor
 * Good idea of random differentiaton
 * Presenter exchange
 * Perhaps a better citation system for literary sources?
 * Was this project too risky or ambitious? What is ambitious or simple?
 * Did the division of labor work well?

Take home messages:
 * Good characterization/analysis and modeling
 * High quality parts
 * Decomposition of project into milestones - easy to define successes or goals
 * Have some context or application area (before/after?)
 * Have an engaging presentation that involves audience involvement
 * Have an engaging or provocative project idea that engages the five senses?
 * Consider best work allocation and team knowledge
 * Project should advance field and provide foundational advances of some sort
 * Project should be communicated on various levels of abstraction (via diagrams)
 * Project should allow team members to have fun

Agenda Items for the Next Meeting

 * Brainstorm at least three project ideas (just bare bones) in each of the five different iGEM categories