Improving Molecular Biosciences Undergraduate BSc Project
Selection and Allocation
Charmian Dawson and Suzanne Ruddy, Structural and Molecular Biology
Previous Allocation System
• All project titles and descriptions made available.
• Titles not grouped by subject of investigation or approach.
• Students select and submit 5 project titles in preferential
order.
• Student required to meet with supervisors prior to
submission of selection.
• Staff and student ratings as well as student exam mark
taken into account
Videos
Updated Allocation System
• A representative selection of titles are disclosed.
• Projects categorised into 6 different subject areas.
• Techniques appropriate to investigations within
each of the 6 categories are listed.
Chaoqun Yao (BSc Biochemistry) using
kinase binding assay
• Videos created to familiarise students with project
categories.
• Students submit 3 preferred categories.
Uneven Distribution of Project
Selections
• No requirement for interviews
Difference Between
Availability and Demand
70
60
50
40
Projects
30
Students
20
10
0
Biomolecular
structure and
function
Molecular cell
biology
Microbial
biochemistry
Cell regulation
and gene
expression
Computational
analysis of
biomolecules
Biotechnology
Figure 2. Student interests do not perfectly match the
research focus of the department
Alex Yon (BSc Molecular Biology) optimising
protein expression
20
Benefits
• Decrease in administrative burden of project
allocation.
15
• Students find project selection process easier and
make more sensible choices.
10
5
Annie Miles (BSc Biochemistry) purifying a
protein
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
• More even distribution of student selections across
research areas.
Number of student selections
Figure 1. Unpopular projects were difficult to allocate, while high
demand for more popular supervisors led to student dissatisfaction
Difficulties
• Students cannot effectively discriminate between
the
context of descriptive terms, e.g. metabolism.
• Students cannot effectively discriminate between different
stages of the same investigation utilising very different
techniques, e.g. a project might examine the structural
properties of an aberrant protein implicated in a disease,
meaning that the investigation is largely a structural study.
However, the student is primarily influenced by the disease
aspect.
• Students are unfamiliar with research techniques and
demands of laboratory bench work as previous laboratory
experience is based on class practicals.
• Uneven distribution of selection: popular research areas
(e.g. stem cells, disease etc) and popular staff are oversubscribed.
• Videos give students more realistic expectations of
the demands of bench work.
• I mproved student satisfaction with project
allocations.
Prudence Lui (MSci Genetics)
crystallizes a protein
Student Choices Encompass
Multiple Projects
Number of potential
projects
Number of Supervisors
25
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Students
Figure 3. Updated system increased average suitable
projects per student from ~3 to ~57
Student Comments
“I absolutely enjoyed my 9 weeks with the group I was allocated to. The title of the project did not
sound that attractive, which indicates the high chances I might not have selected it if I were to pick
by the titles given. The project was interesting and I wish I had more time”.
Dhawal Chelani (BSc Biochemistry) using
mass spectrometry to study protein structure
T h e v i d e o s s h o w
undergraduate research and
typical lab techniques within
each research category.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/
prospective-students/
undergraduate/degrees/
ubsbocsing05
“The project couldn't have been better suited to what I was hoping for! I felt that both my
personality and my personal scientific interests were considered as I was allocated to work with a
supervisor that I got on very well with on a project that was fascinating to me”.
“Really enjoyed the project especially with a topic I was less familiar with”.
“This project and module was by far the best and most enjoyable that I have carried out in my 3
years at UCL.”