Proposal Goals and Resources
Request for Proposal
Proposal Preparation
Pink Sheets
Peer Evaluations
Cooperative learning using formal teams is an integral tool in MIC 519/419H. Teams will be formed based on your self-designated expertise. Class time will be provided throughout the semester to solve problems leading to the submission of the formal team report in the form of a vaccine proposal. The course instructor is available for clarification and advice, but the team decides how to meet the goals of the project. Two articles that will help you with the team process are:
Peterson, M. Skills to Enhance Problem-Based Learning. Med. Educ. Online [serial online] 1997; 2,3. Available from URLhttp://www.med-ed-online.org/f0000009.htm
Oakley, B. Coping with Hitchhikers and Couch Potatoes on Teams Tomorrow's Professor Mailing List, Stanford University. http://ctl.stanford.edu/Tomprof/postings/441.htmlThe Vaccine Proposal has been designed to
The goal of the proposal is for you to apply your knowledge of basic immunology to a real-world immunology problem. The best minds in immunology have not yet solved this problem, so it is difficult, with no "RIGHT" answer! Your ability to research what is known about your pathogen, your immunology knowledge, and your reasoning are what will be evaluated. This proposal must be submitted by a team; individual proposals may only receive a maximum grade of 70%. Write this proposal for your peers (other students in MIC 519/419H), since it will be peer-reviewed at a study section in mid November.
The JMD Foundation, a nonprofit foundation dedicated to the improvement of human and animal welfare and supported by (nonexistent) voluntary contributions from like-minded citizens, solicits a proposal for a vaccine Phase 2 trial (http://www.niaid.nih.gov/clintrials/clinictrial.htm or http://clinicaltrials.gov).
Your team will write a vaccine proposal for a pathogen or tumor to which there is not currently an effective vaccine. The project has been divided into several sections as noted in the calendar. Each team will submit one proposal based on the project assignment. The final report is expected to meet all requirements and to appear seamless, i.e., no obvious format or style differences between sections done by different team members. Each team member is responsible for the information in all sections; the course Final Exam will test your knowledge and understanding of vaccine design and testing.
Janeway et al. Immunobiology Chapter 14 has information about basic vaccine design. The Pechenik text A Short Guide to Writing About Biology is an excellent resource for formal scientific writing. The Toolbox Reading and Writing About Immunology also has some suggestions about sources, as well as a list of commonly misspelled or misused words. Two sample proposals, one from 419 2007 and one from 519 2004 are available; note that the requirements have changed somewhat since these were written.
FORMAT and CONTENT:
Cover sheet for final paper copy: Type double-spaced and align left [Please do NOT use a cover or folder]
Other sections of the report should be headed with the proposal title. Divide the proposal into the sections listed below. Pages should be numbered at the bottom. Proposals must be single-spaced and 12 point type. Note page limits for some sections.
Literature Review: Summarize what is known about your pathogen and protective immune responses to it. Include relevant information about pathogen structure, disease mechanism, epidemiology, population at risk, and previous or current treatments or vaccines. This section should explain why you chose this pathogen as the subject for your proposal and what subject population you are targeting. To find review articles and research papers, use the Medline/Pub Med links at the Arizona Health Sciences Library site http://www.ahsl.arizona.edu . Every paragraph must have at least one source; all sources must be primary research articles or scientific reviews. You must use information from a source in the body of the paper to include it in the list of sources. Do not cite sources for textbook information. PAGE MAXIMUM: five pages.
Vaccine Design and Protective Immunity: Include in your description the type of vaccine you will develop, the antigen(s) (particular epitopes, if applicable) to which you will induce immunity, any required adjuvants, and the type of immunity you plan to elicit to each antigen (note that ALL vaccines must activate both B and T memory cells). In addition, explain why you chose this type of vaccine and antigen. Discuss the problems you may encounter, and how you hope to avoid or minimize the disadvantages and maximize the effectiveness and safety of your vaccine. Having a difficult problem (for example, antigenic variation) will count in your favor at this point if you address the problem and make a reasonable attempt to solve it. PAGE MAXIMUM: five pages.
Vaccine Efficacy : Describe the route and timing of administration and your choice and timing of immunological tests to demonstrate vaccine efficacy. You must include at least one test to measure specific antibody. Consider whether the antibody isotype is important and whether the biological functions of the antibody (such as neutralization) are crucial to its ability to be protective, and make sure your tests reflect these issues. You must also include at least one test to measure T cell memory. You may measure specific effector functions such as cytotoxicity or cytokine synthesis; remember that you must demonstrate the antigen specificity of the response (an increase in total CD4+ T cells is unlikely to be measurable). Explain your rationale for the choices you have made here, describe how you will handle possible problems, and state what your criteria will be for a successful trial and how long the study will last. Initial vaccine regimens are always a "best guess" scenario, so use as your guide what you have learned about the kinetics of immune responses. PAGE MAXIMUM: five pages.
Information Sources: Cite all sources in the body of the paper where information is used as (Authors, year). Give full citations for all sources at the end of the proposal, listing the sources alphabetically by last name of first author, and using the format Authors, Title, Journal, Volume:pages, year. Proposal must have a minimum of 10 sources, including at least 5 primary research articles. Web sources may NOT be used except as sources of recent epidemiological data (CDC, WHO).
Submission for Peer Review: The completed proposal will be submitted electronically as a word document to Dr. Decker by 5PM Thursday November 15. (and also to turnitin.com.) Proposals will be posted on the course web site and assignments for peer review will also be posted. Each team will meet in discussion to evaluate the same proposal; peer reviews will be written individually (see Vaccine Critiques, below).
Response to Pink Sheet: Your proposal will be peer reviewed by another team, who will submit written critiques. In the final draft of your proposal you must address these critiques by bolding changes made in the body of the proposal in response to the review and/or by adding a statement disagreeing with the review and explaining your reasons.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Content:
Mechanics:
The calendar contains intermediate due dates to help you keep on track for finishing the proposal by the due date. On some of these dates, individual Admit Tickets are due in class as a paper copy and electronically to Turnitin.com. Organized discussion activities on some dates will introduce you to group functioning and to immunological tests you will need for your proposal. You will also be encouraged to reflect weekly on how well your team is functioning and to give feedback to your teammates about their contributions.
One you have written a vaccine proposal, you should know enough about the process to evaluate a proposal written by your peers. The team vaccine proposals written for this class will be made available on-line, and your team will be assigned to review and evaluate one. Your anonymous critique (see Pachenik for an explanation of how to write a critique) will be returned to the authoring team, and will be addressed by the authoring team in their final proposal. The evaluation will not affect the grade of the team writing the proposal but is worth 50 points to your final grade. On the due date you will submit two hard copies of your pink sheet, one with your name that will be graded and one without your name that will go to the authoring team; an electronic copy will also go to Turnitin.com. Be professional and use the above criteria to in evaluating the proposal; make constructive suggestions for improvements and note what is done well.
The evaluation (called a Pink Sheet because evaluations of proposals submitted to the NIH were formerly done on pink paper) should be about 1-2 single-spaced printed page(s). It should include one-two paragraphs summarizing the proposal you read (be sure to include the title and letter of the paper at the top of the first page) and a few paragraphs discussing how well you think the authors presented and explained their proposal. Give specific examples of what you thought was well done or not well done, and make specific suggestions for improvements (if any). Concentrate on the scientific merit of the proposal; your pink sheet will be evaluated based on the scientific (immunology) knowledge it demonstrates.
All team members will formally evaluate themselves and their teammates for participation in the vaccine proposal twice during the semester. These evaluation scores will be factored into the proposal score for each team member. Team members not completing the evaluation forms will receive a participation score of 0.
Syllabus Tutorials ToolBox MIC519Home
