Team:TU-Delft/brainstorming

From 2012.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)
Line 23: Line 23:
  <p>For these choices also helped the crash course we had in collaboration with the <a href=” http://2012.igem.org/Team:Amsterdam“ target=”_blank”>Amsterdam  2012 iGEM team</a> Those topics had to be enhanced with structured arguments, always keeping in mind whether they could stand as iGEM project. Additionally, they were criticised by all members trying to focus on some directions and excluding others. Those meetings helped us a lot in understanding what iGEM stands for, what we want to succeed and how we could satisfy our wills as a team with students with different knowledge background. We not only learned how to argue about our choices, but also how to collaborate with each other and become an enduringly more tight team. By the 15th Week we came up with final 9 topics; those were: </p>
  <p>For these choices also helped the crash course we had in collaboration with the <a href=” http://2012.igem.org/Team:Amsterdam“ target=”_blank”>Amsterdam  2012 iGEM team</a> Those topics had to be enhanced with structured arguments, always keeping in mind whether they could stand as iGEM project. Additionally, they were criticised by all members trying to focus on some directions and excluding others. Those meetings helped us a lot in understanding what iGEM stands for, what we want to succeed and how we could satisfy our wills as a team with students with different knowledge background. We not only learned how to argue about our choices, but also how to collaborate with each other and become an enduringly more tight team. By the 15th Week we came up with final 9 topics; those were: </p>
    <dl>
    <dl>
-
<dd>9. Frasme shifting</dd>
+
<dd>9. Frame shifting</dd>
         <dd>  8. Smelling bacteria </dd>
         <dd>  8. Smelling bacteria </dd>
         <dd> 7. Bioprinting </dd>
         <dd> 7. Bioprinting </dd>

Revision as of 11:35, 26 September 2012

Menu

Your title

The first weeks of our project (Week 12 - Week 19) we spent a lot of time in brainstorming sessions. Before ending to our final project theme, we came up with many meetings where all the team and the instructors were present. Each meeting had each special purpose; each of us had to study previous iGEM projects, articles and any other available source of information in order to come up with ideas about potential iGEM topics.


For these choices also helped the crash course we had in collaboration with the Amsterdam 2012 iGEM team Those topics had to be enhanced with structured arguments, always keeping in mind whether they could stand as iGEM project. Additionally, they were criticised by all members trying to focus on some directions and excluding others. Those meetings helped us a lot in understanding what iGEM stands for, what we want to succeed and how we could satisfy our wills as a team with students with different knowledge background. We not only learned how to argue about our choices, but also how to collaborate with each other and become an enduringly more tight team. By the 15th Week we came up with final 9 topics; those were:

9. Frame shifting
8. Smelling bacteria
7. Bioprinting
6. Bee colony
5. Bactocamera
4. Biosphere
3. Bio-solar panel
2. Min E. coli
1. Immune E.coli

And later, the 17th Week there was a presentation debate of the final 2 topics: Smelling Yeast and Antibeast. Their advice to this gave: Han de Winde, Juan Keymer, Bertus Beaumont, Chirlmin Joo, Daniel Solis Escalante, Niels Kuijpers, Fabai Wu, Yaron Caspi and others.