Guidelines for Project Presentation - Rice University



Guidelines for Project Presentation

1. All group members must participate in the presentation

2. Each presentation should last about 5 minutes to make their presentation and 2 minutes to answer questions. Time limits will be strictly enforced to make sure all groups get the same amount of time. If you exceed 6 minutes, you will be asked to stop and be evaluated on what has been presented to that point. Practice your presentation. Remember that you can always read it faster to yourself than you can out loud and nervous. Also, have someone in your group track your time. If you are presenting alone, ask someone in another group to give you time cues.

3. Presentations need to be in PowerPoint format and recorded on a CD-ROM or a USB key. Be sure that the file opens on any computer by trying to open it on several different machines.

4. The audience for your presentation will be a scientific review panel from the World Health Organization. The panel will review the proposed designs and decide which efforts will receive funding to move into the development phase. Therefore, you must convince the panel of the severity of the problem as well as the efficacy of the proposed design. Your prototype does not need to actually function, but it should illustrate the scientific principles of the device as well as the ways in which it satisfies the design requirements. In constructing your prototype, we suggest that you use common household materials (plastic wrap, aluminum foil, cardboard, etc) to illustrate how the device would work. You are limited to a total materials cost of $10 and you will be asked to turn in receipts to verify that you satisfied this constraint. You should be prepared for questions from the review panel following your 10 minute presentation.

5. You will evaluate each presentation using the attached form. Please note that you may only recommend TWO DESIGNS for further development.

|Presentation Group No./Room |# |Group Members |Disease/Disorder |Treatment/Technology |

|Number/Evaluator | | | | |

| |1 |Ivy Kuperberg |Type 1 Diabetes |Information Technology |

|Jair | |Rory Bledsoe | | |

|Stephanie | | | | |

|Yvette | | | | |

|Keck Hall 100 | | | | |

| |2 |Erica Han |Obesity |Education and funding program |

| | |Shinhae Lee | | |

| | |Paul Maliakkal | | |

| |3 |Schuyler Woods |Obstetric Fistula |New diagnostic tool |

| | |Yordanos Gebretatios | | |

| |4 |Sarah Taylor |Sickle Cell Disease |Screening device |

| | |Kathleen Hanson | | |

| |5 |Alex Gordon |Osteoporosis |Medical device to limit bone |

| | |Ginny Stuckey | |density loss |

| | |Eric Vu | | |

| | |Peter Yang | | |

| |6 |Josh Hesterman |Japanese Encephalitis | |

| | |Kathleen Shergy | | |

| | |Jason Altobelli | | |

| |7 |Myra D’Souza |Lymphatic Filariasis | |

| | |Anushree Kumar | | |

| | |Neel Srikishen | | |

| |8 |Teresa Monkkonen |Chagas Disease | |

| | |Joe Mendez | | |

| | |Nancy O’Connor | | |

| |9 |Vincent Malouf |Lymphatic Filariasis | |

| |10 |Gary Johnson |Schistosomiasis | |

| | |Sara Slabisak | | |

| | |Zach Dreyfuss | | |

|Presentation Group No./Room |# |Group Members |Disease/Disorder |Treatment/Technology |

|Number/Evaluator | | | | |

|Ryan |11 |Julia Ridgeway |TB |Medication patch |

|Darren | |Mia Lopez | | |

|Dr. RRK | |Rachelle Sam | | |

|Keck Hall 102 | |Jeremy Tullis | | |

| |12 |Anjuli Shivshanker |TB |Color change indicator for dosing |

| | |Natalie Gwilliam | | |

| | |Emmma Johns | | |

| |13 |Shuvro De |Meningitis |IM drug injection |

| | |Natalie Vasco | | |

| | |Samantha Hong | | |

| |14 |Kassaundra Esculera |Leprosy |New optical detection method |

| | |Nydia Trevino | | |

| | |Jackie Kirby | | |

| |15 |Jesdeep Mangat |TB |Social policy change |

| | |Ponney Palanisamy | | |

| | |Lindsay Zwiener | | |

| |16 |Anne Hierholzer |TB |DOT enhancement |

| | |Marissa Eubanks | | |

| | |Renata Medina | | |

| |17 |Nikki Metzgar |HPV |Push for HPV Vaccine |

| | |Mara Courtney | | |

| | |Ingrid Norbergs | | |

| | |Bailey Rodriguez | | |

| |18 |Jose Sanchez |Dengue |Mosquito net improvements |

| | |Johanna Andrews-Chavez | | |

| | |Gislaine Williams | | |

| | |Meagan Barry | | |

| |19 |Rachel Lattimore |Dengue |Mosquito net improvements |

| | |Priti Dangayach | | |

| | |Christina Lagos | | |

| |20 |Andrew Bowen |Ebola |Sterilized Kit |

| | |Kirsub Choe | | |

| | |Sarah Conlon | | |

| | |Justin Hudson | | |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

Evaluation Form:

You are a member of a scientific review panel from the World Health Organization. Your job is to review the proposed designs and decide which efforts will receive funding to move into the development phase. Please evaluate each proposal using the criteria below. You may only recommend two designs to receive funding.

Name of Evaluator:

Group Number:

Disease:

Diagnosis/Treatment:

Severity of the problem:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Minor health problem Urgent unmet health need

Efficacy of the proposed design:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Solution does not address at least one major constraint Solution satisfies design constraints

Not economically feasible in proposed setting Likely to be safe, effective, and cost-effective

Quality of the presentation:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Difficult to follow Compelling presentation

Poor quality demo Demo illustrates technical principles

Overall Recommendation:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Do not consider further Worthy of future consideration Definitely fund

but not yet ready for funding

Comments:

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download