From 2014.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
|
|
| Line 27: |
Line 27: |
| | our project. | | our project. |
| | | | |
| | + | <tr> |
| | + | <th scope="col"> |
| | + | <left><img src="https://2014.igem.org/File:8158PPYAWiki.JPG"></left> |
| | + | </tr> |
| | + | </th> |
| | <br><br> | | <br><br> |
| | | | |
Revision as of 17:09, 8 October 2014
Policy and Practices
| Our iGEM team helped out at the sixth International Workshop on Bio-Design
Automation (IWBDA). As volunteers, we signed in the workshop speakers and
attendants, helped with the posters, and set up the event venue. We were also able
to attend the talks and poster presentations. This workshop was an important
influencing factor on our project design. It gave us an opportunity to learn about the
current research and concerns in the field, which shaped the direction and goals of
our project.
|
|
One of the keynote speakers, Orit Shaer from Wellesley College, spoke about
Human-Computer Interaction. She focused on tools that use reality-based interfaces
and the considerations necessary for developing these tools. After listening to her
talk, we had the opportunity to talk with her. As a wetlab team interested in bio-design
automation and experimental-computational integration, we thought it
would be valuable to continue collaboration with Dr. Shaer’s lab at Wellesley. Her
lab develops software tools for education and use in the wetlab.
Throughout the summer we met up with students from Wellesley to learn about their projects and
to teach them about biological concepts and lab protocols. We tested out the Google
Glass for several weeks and gave them feedback on the features they have been
developing. For example, they were able to upload our protocols on the Google
Glass, which allowed us to see the protocol step by step without carrying around
our notebooks. We were also able to provide a “client prospective” for their projects.
Since they are developing software for use in the lab, we helped them decide which
features would be most useful and improvements that could make their products
more appealing.
In addition to the talks and poster sessions, the IWBDA workshop included
discussion sessions amongst all of the attendees. Topics focused on how to
overcome the miscommunications between biologists and computer scientists as
well as how to promote bio-design automation in our education systems. These
discussions allowed us to talk more informally with the presenters and exchange
our opinions and suggestions. We were also able to hear about current problems
that exist between experimental and computational efforts, which gave us ideas
about what needs to be improved.
From this conference, we learned the value of bringing together researchers
from different labs to discuss, learn, and educate each other. Because of this, we
decided to host the Third Annual NEGEM. Several other Northeast iGEM teams (MIT,
Harvard, Tufts, WPI, Rutgers) and Wellesley came to Boston University twice over
the summer to present their projects, discuss, and receive feedback. Each team had
fifteen minutes to present their overall project idea, progress, timeline, and future
goals to the other teams. After each presentation, there would be a Q&A session
where other students could offer troubleshooting advice, ask for clarification, or
offer critiques. During our lunch breaks, we held question led discussions about
technological difficulties each team faced and how bio-design automation (BDA)
could solve these obstacles. Our lunch was sponsored by BDAC. In October, we will
have a final NEGEM meeting. Each team will give a formal presentation,
representative of how they will present at the iGEM Giant Jamboree. This will be an
opportunity to give final advice about the project and how to present it. We will also
have time to show off our Wiki pages and make any last minute changes before the
wiki freeze.
"
