Cooperative Learning through Team-Based Projects in the Biotechnology Industry.

We have developed a cooperative-learning, case studies project model that has teams of students working with biotechnology professionals on company-specific problems. These semester-long, team-based projects can be used effectively to provide students with valuable skills in an industry environment and experience addressing real issues faced by biotechnology companies. Using peer-evaluations, we have seen improvement in students' professional skills such as time-management, quality of work, and level of contribution over multiple semesters. This model of team-based, industry-sponsored projects could be implemented in other college and university courses/programs to promote professional skills and expose students to an industry setting.

INTRODUCTION

North Carolina State University’s first mission statement in 1889 was “to open the doors of higher education to all of North Carolina and to transform the state by developing and dispersing an understanding of agricultural and mechanical sciences” (http://www.ncsu.edu/about-nc-state/). The mission today has broadened but the same basic principle applies: educate citizens so that they can make valuable contributions to society. In order to do this, colleges and universities primarily use a series of classroom activities consisting of lectures and laboratories that build on the knowledge previously gained in lower-level courses. Lectures are traditionally passive learning experiences where the instructor talks and the students listen, and laboratories are more hands-on. While the passive lecture method can be effective for imparting large amounts of material, it does not actively engage the students and may not be the best method for preparing them for jobs where they are expected to take active roles in discussions, help troubleshoot problems, and come up with innovative solutions to issues faced by a company (1). The skills needed for success in industry may be more effectively learned through active learning experiences, which aim to foster critical thinking skills surrounding real-life problems or activities (5). Active learning, a term used to describe instructional methods where students guide their own learning, can be effective in fostering not only the technical skills but the soft skills such as teamwork and ambiguity management (the ability to handle a situation or project that is not clearly defined and subject to change) that students will need in order to succeed in the workplace. In many industries, including the biotechnology industry, employees work in teams where they have to troubleshoot problems together and utilize each other’s strengths to make the team and project effective. Learning these skills prior to entering the workplace is ideal, yet passive learning environments are not the ideal environments to teach these skills. Specific types of active learning, including cooperative learning, problem-based learning, case studies, and action learning, foster learning environments where students take a more active role in their learning, they gain a deeper understanding and greater retention of the material, their satisfaction with the course and subject matter increases, and their critical thinking skills improve (1, 5). Action learning is unique in that it involves groups of students working with industry on industry-relevant issues or problems.

Cooperative learning refers to those activities where students work together in groups to complete shared learning goals such as solving problems, completing projects or tasks, or creating presentations. The goals of cooperative learning are many; completing the project is an important goal, but just as important are the goals of learning how to work with others, how to organize and define project goals and stick with them, how to effectively handle ambiguity within the project, and to realize that learning is not just about the end product but also about what is learned about industry and oneself along the path to the end (4). Studies have shown that cooperative learning promotes meta-cognitive thought, willingness to take on difficult tasks, persistence in the face of difficulties, goal accomplishment, transfer of learning from one situation to another, greater time spent on task, higher individual achievement, greater social support (4), greater communication, and teamwork skills (2). The more individuals work together, the greater their social competence, self-esteem, and general psychological health, which in turn makes them want to work harder (4). Long-term and/or repetitive exposure to the cooperative learning environment is important so that students become confident and effective group members. Cooperative interaction between students and between student and instructor are major influences on student effectiveness and satisfaction in college, and the skills that make students effective in cooperative projects are also the skills that industry is looking for in employees.

The Masters of Microbial Biotechnology (MMB) program is a Professional Science Master’s degree in Biotechnology at North Carolina State University. The MMB program is a two-year, non-traditional master’s degree that combines training in science and business (3). Within the program, all students take our Industry Case Studies course every semester. This course combines action learning projects with cooperative learning. Students are put into teams of four to six students to work with a company for a semester-long project where the team works together to solve a problem or answer a question facing the host company. Each semester the companies, projects and teams are different. In this way, after four semesters, students in the MMB program will have grown tremendously in their ability to work with a team; plus they have the unmistakable advantage of working with many different biotechnology professionals on current industry issues.

Intended audience

This activity is appropriate for graduate students and upper-level undergraduates who are life-science majors. The team-based, case study projects are the central activity in the Industry Case Studies course taught as part of the MMB program, but could easily be adapted to undergraduate courses that aim to promote professional skills such as teamwork and flexibility and expose students to an industry setting. Student maturity and professionalism are important for success in the case study projects. Upper-level undergraduates who have completed an industry internship or possess other indicators of maturity would be appropriate participants in this activity.

Learning time

The case study projects are designed to run approximately 12 weeks of a 15-week semester. Over half of the project activities are performed outside of class—at the host company, at project team meetings, or individually. A timeline for the semester is shown in Table 1. The class meets once a week for three hours for the 15-week semester. During the first four or five weeks of the semester, students come to the designated classroom each week for guest lectures from industry professionals and lectures or other activities led by the instructors. After the first five weeks, students spend the class time plus an additional three to six hours each week working on their case study projects. They meet at the company, in the classroom, or at another agreed upon location to work on their projects. The instructors request that the teams meet at the company site as often as possible, but this varies with each project depending on company location, availability of space, and scheduling. Over the semester, student teams give presentations to the class covering the company background, scope and goals of the project, and project updates. Students also present updates to their host company periodically throughout the semester. At the end of the semester, each team delivers a final written report to the host company and course instructors and gives an oral presentation summarizing the results of their research to the class, faculty and industry guests.

TABLE 1.

Timeline for case study project.

Week	Activity	Description
1	Project Kick-Off at Host Company	Project team meets with host company liaison(s) and the project is outlined.
2–3	Project Work – Scope and Goals	Through discussions with the host company, define the scope and goal of the project. Research company background and history.
4	Team Presentation – Host Company and Scope and Goals of Project	Oral presentation to the class describing the history and background of the host company, presenting the problem to be addressed for the company, and listing the scope and goals of the project.
5	Project Work	Work on project tasks either individually, with team, or with company.
6	Project Update	Teams give a project update to the class.
7	Project Work	Work on project tasks either individually, with team, or with company.
8	Project Update at Host Company	Teams give a project update to the company and course instructors.
9–11	Project Work	Work on project tasks either individually, with team, or with company.
12	Final Presentation and Written Deliverable Submitted	Teams submit their written deliverable to the host company and course instructors. Teams give a non-confidential, oral presentation on the project to the class, faculty, and industry guests.

Prerequisite student knowledge

This activity has been developed and implemented with students in a Master’s degree program who already have an undergraduate degree in the life sciences, or at least a minor in a life science with coursework in microbiology and biochemistry. However, the structure of this team-based, active learning activity could be used with a variety of student groups. From our experience, student maturity, professionalism, and the desire to work cooperatively in a team environment have as much of an impact on student success as specific content knowledge.

The projects performed in the MMB program often involve technology, business or market analysis so the ability to search science, patent, and business databases is a useful skill for students. Most students already have an understanding of how to search for scientific, peer-reviewed journal articles but we give a lesson on searching online collections during one of the first class meetings. In addition, we use guest speakers and in-class activities to educate the students on the basics of intellectual property and how to search online patent databases (e.g., USPTO.gov).

Learning objectives

Upon completion of these case study projects, students will be able to:

Demonstrate their teamwork skills through completion of a project as part of a team with three to five other students, including

○ Individually evaluating their team role and style of team participation, acknowledging both strengths and weaknesses.

○ Demonstrating ability to work in a team through their level of contribution, quality of work, attitude, preparedness, ability to focus on tasks, ability to work with others, and time management.

Demonstrate increased understanding of the biotechnology industry through observation and analysis of their host company by

○ Describing the host company (history, markets, products, and technology) and their case study project.

○ Formulating an opinion on how they would fit into the environment/culture of their host company.

○ In addition, the student team will be able to:

Demonstrate written communication skills through the completion of a final written deliverable comprised of an executive summary of the project, background on the host company, background on the project topic, statement of the problem, presentation and summary of the team’s findings, and recommendations for the host company.

Demonstrate oral communication skills through a non-confidential, public presentation on their team’s project comprised of background on the host company and the project topic, statement of the problem, summary of the team’s findings, and recommendations for the host company.

PROCEDURE

Course timeline

The projects start with a kick-off meeting between the student team, the company representative(s) for the project, and a course instructor (see Table 1 for a timeline.). The meeting typically takes place at the host company. The kick-off meeting includes introductions, exchange of contact information, background on the company and a general description of the project. The students’ first objective is to become familiar with the background on the project and the problem. Through this process and in discussion with the company liaison, the students develop a set of goals for the project and discussions continue until the company and the students agree on a set of goals and prioritize them. Around week 4 of the project, the student teams give an oral presentation to the class describing the company, project, and project goals.

Throughout the semester, the student teams work on the project. Some class periods over the semester are devoted to case study project work. In addition, the teams meet outside of class and students work individually on their portion of the project. Teams maintain contact with the host company through e-mail, phone calls, and face-to-face meetings. The amount of contact differs with each project, as some projects are more open-ended than others and require more communication with the company. The teams give periodic updates to the class and, about halfway through the semester/project, they give a mid-project status report to the company in a meeting that includes the project team, company liaison, and the instructors.

At the end of the semester, the teams deliver a final written report to the host company. The report is graded by both the company and the instructors (Appendices 3 and 5). The teams also give a non-confidential, 30-minute, oral presentation on the project to the class, department faculty, and industry guests. This presentation is graded by the instructors (Appendix 1). Project teams often give an additional oral presentation to the host company, which allows more people from the host company to hear and comment on the student’s project. This company presentation is not graded but is a valuable experience for the students.

After the projects are complete, we have the students complete a one- to two-page self-reflection writing assignment using the prompt “What did you learn from the case study project and what did you learn about yourself?” Many students take an honest look at their strengths and weaknesses, see how they can improve, and feel more prepared to take on the next project whether it is in this course or in the next phase of their career.

Student instructions

The students do not receive any formal, written instructions for the case study project beyond the company’s project description and the project timeline. In class, we talk about expectations, professional behavior, teamwork, and various aspects of the biotechnology industry.

Faculty instructions

The instructor’s role in the case study project is as facilitator. One of the valuable learning experiences for the students is dealing with the ambiguity of the project and working as a team to overcome challenges. We monitor the activity of the team and provide some guidance when the teams run into personality conflicts or other problems but are hesitant to step in unless there is a serious issue.

The biotechnology industry is broad and we try to expose the students to as many aspects of the industry as possible. Each semester, we focus on one of four categories of company: large medical, large agricultural/industrial, small biotech, and medical devices. We rotate through all categories before repeating one so that the students are exposed to the wide variety of types and sizes of biotechnology companies. A running list is kept of potential case study companies and companies that we have previously worked with in each category. We always look for new companies to work with but also go back to companies that we have worked with before, often at their request due to the high quality work the students provide. When we do work with a company again, the projects are always new. At least six to eight weeks prior to the start of the semester, we begin approaching prospective host companies for the case study projects. Whom we approach in the organization depends on the size of the company. At small companies (<100 employees), the initial discussion may be with the CEO, President or other senior managers. At large companies (>100 employees), the initial discussions may be with Department Directors, Project Leaders, Section Heads, or other middle managers/scientific staff. In these discussions, we point out the benefits to the company of hosting a project and discuss the general framework and timeline for the project. If the company is interested in hosting a project, we then discuss potential project ideas and lay out general expectations. The discussions also include the following: examples of other case study projects, the background of the students, how much time students spend working on the projects (3–9 h/week), how much time the company would have to spend helping the students (1–4 h/week), the framework and timeline, and the deliverables. First-time companies are often intrigued by the nature of the program and the Case Studies course and want to hear more about the cooperative learning aspects of the course. They often comment on the benefits of this type of education and feel the program is doing a great service. Not every company is able to host a project; sometimes the timing is not right due to deadlines within the company, lack of personnel to supervise the project, or other reasons. We usually have to approach twice the number of companies we need for projects for a given semester. Prospective companies will occasionally ask to speak with a company that has hosted a case study project previously to get another opinion on the pros and cons of hosting a project. When a company does agree to host a project, we ask the host company to write a half-page project description and send it to us before the start of the semester. We try to get between four and six projects each semester, all within the biotechnology sector focus for the semester, but not necessarily all with the same company.

In the week prior to the start of the semester, we e-mail the project descriptions to the students and ask them to rank the projects based on their interest. We then configure the teams taking into account whether the student is a first-year or second-year student in the program, the student’s gender, project interest and which students have worked together previously. We strive for an even mix of first- and second-year students and male and female students on the team, while trying to mix up the teams so students work with different students from those they worked with on previous case study projects. We also try, usually with success, to give students one of their top choices. Over the four semesters students are in the MMB program, we like them to work at least once with each of the other students in the program. For each team, we designate a “team leader.” The roles of the team leader are as primary point of contact for the company and the instructors, and responsibility for initiating the organization of the team. The teams are primarily self-managed and it is up to the team to decide members’ roles and responsibilities. In most teams, this happens naturally and the team dynamic is good, but in some cases, the teams do not function very well and we step in and try to help the group figure out what is going on and what they can do to address their issues.

Suggestions for determining student learning and sample data

The case study projects are worth 160 points, which represents 80% of the final grade in the class. The 160 points are distributed as follows:

Team presentation on project background and goals (10 points; Appendix 1)

Team presentation of the mid-project status update (10 points; Appendix 2)

Final written deliverable (60 points)

○ Company evaluation (30 points; Appendix 3)

○ Instructor evaluation (30 points; Appendix 5)

Final team presentation (40 points; Appendix 1)

Peer evaluation (40 points; Appendix 4)

Rubrics for the various evaluations are in the supplemental files.

Safety issues

Students are expected to provide their own transportation to and from the host company. In addition, students are expected to follow all the rules and regulations at the host company during visits. We have not experienced any issues with student safety during these case study projects.

DISCUSSION

Field testing

Over the last three and a half years, we have completed 29 case study projects with 21 different host companies. A representative list of case study projects is given in Table 2. Each project is unique but they typically involve market or technology analysis, process evaluation and optimization, or preparation of a Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) grant.

TABLE 2.

Recent case study projects.

Case Study Company	Case Study Topic/Title	Semester
Advanced Liquid Logic	Bill of Materials for Sample Preparation Kits	Spring 2013
BRI	Bio-Derived Ingredients for Cosmetics	Spring 2013
Galaxy Diagnostics	Non-Medical Applications of Bartonella Alphaproteobacter Growth Medium	Spring 2013
Metabolon	Identifying High Impact Targets for Expanding Metabolomics Commercialization	Spring 2013
Novozymes	Evaluation of Attached Growth Bioreactors for Potential Use in Industrial Enzyme Production	Fall 2012
Novozymes	Regulatory and Market Assessment of Biological Soil Crust Reclamation	Fall 2012
RTI International	Market Analysis of Oleaginous Yeast and Fungi Technologies	Fall 2012
RTI International	The Medicinal Plant Industry: Market Opportunities	Fall 2012
RTI International	Analysis of Applications of Human Microbiome Diagnostic Technologies	Fall 2012
Arbovax	Opportunities in the Veterinary Vaccine Market	Spring 2012
Gentris	SBIR Grant Opportunities	Spring 2012
Biogen Idec	Technology Transfer Process for External Biologics Products	Fall 2011
BioMerieux	Process Flow Map for Pilot Bottle Production	Fall 2011
BioMerieux	Personal Protective Equipment Process Optimization	Fall 2011
Becton Dickinson	Industry Survey: Fine Needle Aspiration Biopsy	Fall 2011
Becton Dickinson	Innovation Best Practices	Fall 2011
The Hamner Institute	Estrogen Assays and Cost Analysis	Fall 2011
Agile Sciences	Qualification of the Medical Device Market Opportunity for the Company’s Biofilm Dispersing Technology	Spring 2011
Advanced Liquid Logic	Market Analysis Around Digital Microfluidics for Cellular Analysis	Spring 2011
Humacyte	Characterization and Analysis of Serum-Free and Animal-Free Culture Medium Supplements and Their Function in Cell Culture	Spring 2011

For example, in the spring semester of 2012, Arbovax hosted a case study project. Arbovax is a small biotechnology company located in Raleigh, NC, developing human vaccines for insect-borne diseases such as dengue fever. In the fall of 2011, the CEO of Arbovax was a guest lecturer in the Industry Case Studies course. After his lecture, we approached him about hosting a case study project. He was receptive and over the next few weeks we had a couple of conversations outlining a project where a team of students would evaluate the market opportunities for Arbovax in the veterinary vaccine market. The project description that Arbovax submitted is included as Appendix 6. A team of six students was assigned to the project. In week 4, after discussions between the team and Arbovax, and some initial research by the team on the project, the following goals were agreed on by the team and Arbovax:

Provide a list of arboviruses that are relevant in veterinary medicine, including background information about the diseases they cause.

Provide an overview of the state of the veterinary vaccine market. Identify potential revenues that could be generated from the production of vaccines for the viruses from Goal 1.

Rank the veterinary arboviruses according to the potential for Arbovax to have success in that respective market.

Identify the major companies involved in veterinary vaccines and provide an overview of their role in the market.

Over the next seven weeks, the team members worked on the project individually, with their teammates and/or with the company. The team maintained contact with Arbovax throughout the project by e-mail, phone conversations, and face-to-face meetings at Arbovax. In week 8, the student team gave a mid-project update to Arbovax at their facility with the course instructors present. This update meeting is an opportunity to make sure that the company, the students, and the instructors are aware of the status of the project, understand what is left to be done, and can address any problems or issues that have arisen. The Arbovax mid-project status report is included in Appendix 7. In week 12, the student team submitted their final report to Arbovax and the course instructors. The report was 30 pages long. The final project summary is in Appendix 8. The grading rubric completed by Arbovax is provided in Appendix 9. In addition, the student team gave a 30-minute non-confidential presentation to the class, faculty, and industry guests. The presentation slides are included in Appendix 10. Arbovax was pleased with the outcome of the project and invited the students to present their findings to the Arbovax Board of Directors.

Evidence of student learning

One of the student learning outcomes for the case study projects is for students to demonstrate their teamwork skills. The primary measure of the student’s teamwork skills is through a peer evaluation. Each student completes a confidential peer evaluation of each other member of his or her team. The students score each other using a peer evaluation rubric (Appendix 4) in the following seven areas: contribution, quality of work, attitude, preparedness, focus on task, working with others, and time-management. Figure 1 shows the cumulative data over three semesters for a cohort of 14 students in the MMB program. For each attribute, the individual scores for each student as determined by their teammates were averaged. The cohort average of each attribute was then plotted for each of three successive semesters. In the areas of contributions, quality of work, preparedness, working with others, and time-management, the cohort saw an increase in their average scores between the first semester in the program and their third semester. As the students gained experience working in a team, they were better able to contribute to the project and the quality of those contributions improved. In addition, the students improved in their ability to manage their time, to be prepared for meetings, and to work with others. It is also important to note that the students’ attitude about the projects remained consistently high over the three semesters.

FIGURE 1.

Cumulative peer evaluation averages for a cohort of 14 students over 3 semesters.

To demonstrate that the students have increased their knowledge of the biotechnology industry, a variety of mechanisms are used. In week 4, each team presents on the background and history of their host company (Table 1). A description of the history, background, markets, products, and technology of the host company is included in the final written deliverable from each project team. We also end the semester with each student writing a self-reflection on their experience; often including the prompt: “Would you want to work for this company, why or why not?” Excerpts from a few of the self-reflections can be found in Appendix 11.

The written and oral communication objectives in the case study projects are assessed with the final written deliverable, which is graded by both the company (Appendix 3) and the instructors (Appendix 5) and the final oral presentation, which is graded by the instructors (Appendix 1). The assessment is for the project team and each member of the team gets the same score. This, along with shuffling the composition of the teams every semester, makes it difficult to assess individual progress over successive semesters as was shown with the peer evaluations. However, it does motivate the students to work as a team and mirrors the way projects are run in industry. Data from six semesters are shown in Figure 2. In general, the final deliverables are high quality with an average score of 90% and a range of 82.5 to 97.5% for the final oral presentations. A representative breakdown of the final oral presentations by rubric category is given for each team over three semesters in Table 3. In general, the student teams score the lowest in the categories assessing the actual delivery of the oral presentation—elocution, pace, eye contact, and enthusiasm. The final written deliverables had an average score of 92% and a range of 81.5 to 98% over six semesters (Fig. 2). As the students are assembling their final team deliverables, they receive input and suggestions from both the course instructors and the company liaisons to refine the final products. This input, in conjunction with in-class activities (periodic oral project updates and short writing assignments) and peer mentoring in the teams, helps to maintain a consistent level of performance in the final deliverables over time. Occasionally, however, there are projects that do not go as anticipated. This can be seen when looking at the scores for the “Project Goals.” The project goals are agreed on by the project team and the company and are scored by the company only (see Appendix 3, section 1). Most of the time, the teams have delivered on the project goals with an average score of 91% over six semesters, but, as can be seen in Figure 2, there are times when the companies score the project goals significantly below this average. For example, project F11-3 was scored at 50% for the goals. We felt that the company had unrealistic expectations for the project and the project liaison was grading the project too harshly. Other faculty and industry representatives who saw the oral presentation were impressed with the results of the project and complimentary of the team’s work. We therefore adjusted the final score. Project F12-2 had two company liaisons who had differing opinions on the goals for the project and a student team that did not communicate well which resulted in poor performance. Project F12-5 had interpersonal problems within the team, which had a negative impact on performance. While we try to minimize the occurrence of poor performance on a project through coaching and communication with companies and student teams, there is always the possibility of dysfunction in the student team or the company or both.

FIGURE 2.

Final project grades for oral and written deliverables and scores for the “Goals and Scope of the Project” section of written deliverable rubric (Appendix 3) from each project team over six semesters. Oral deliverables are scored by the instructors; grades for the written deliverables are the combined scores from the company and the instructors; scores for the goals and scopes are determined by the company. Note: F10-1 refers to fall semester 2010 group 1; F10-2 refers to fall semester 2010 group 2; S11-1 refers to spring semester 2011 group 1; etc.

TABLE 3.

Breakdown of oral presentation rubric scores over three semesters.

Rubrica/Project	S11-1	S11-2	S11-3	F11-1	F11-2	F11-3	F11-4	F11-5	F11-6	S12-1	S12-2	Average
Organization	3.5	4	3.5	4	3.5	3.75	3.25	3.5	3.5	3.5	4	3.64
Subject Knowledge	4	3.5	3.75	3.5	3.75	3.75	3.75	3.75	3.75	4	4	3.77
Graphics/Slides	3.5	4	4	4	3.5	3.75	3.5	3.75	4	4	4	3.82
Poise/Enthusiasm/Eye Contact	3.5	3.5	3.5	3.5	3.5	3.5	3.75	3.25	3.5	4	4	3.59
Elocution/Pace	3	3.5	3.25	3.5	3.25	3.5	3.5	3.25	3.75	4	3.5	3.45
Total Points (20)	17.5	18.5	18	18.5	17.5	18.25	17.75	17.5	18.5	19.5	19.5	18.27
Grade (%)	88%	93%	90%	93%	88%	91%	89%	88%	93%	98%	98%	91%

Oral presentation rubric is found in Appendix 1.

S11-1 – Spring semester 2011 group 1; S11-2 – Spring semester 2011 group 2; F11-1 – Fall semester 2011 group 1; etc.

The students also found this type of action learning situation valuable for their education and useful for their future careers. On an anonymous course evaluation, the students had the following responses to the following question “Briefly explain whether and how this course may help you in your career”:

Working in the case study groups with both a team and a direct company contact definitely will benefit each of us as we enter the industry. The skills gleaned from working together and communicating between the team and the company will be the most useful.

It teaches students how to interact in business situations and what businesses expect out of specific projects. Also allows a student to interact with a variety of fields within the industry and companies of different sizes.

I really enjoy the case study projects. It allows me to learn how to conduct myself in the industry, and allows me to experience different types of companies.

I’m positive this course will help me in my career. The learning experiences gained in these case studies are quite different from company to company. And right now, I have no idea what size/type of company I want to go into, but I will feel a lot more comfortable wherever I end up, simply because I’ve had some experience doing case studies with extremely different types of companies.

CONCLUSION

The case study projects are the heart of the Masters of Microbial Biotechnology program. They provide the students not only with the opportunity to work with several biotechnology companies on company-specific problems but also in a team with other MMB students in a cooperative, action learning environment. These two active learning methods combined offer the students a unique preparatory path towards working in industry. The knowledge and skills gained through the projects include an in-depth knowledge of the biotechnology industry and the ability to analyze a problem or an issue in the industry, the ability to work with others on a team towards a common goal, ambiguity management, plus professional and personal growth through the questioning and reflection process that occurs during and after the projects. All of these skills, plus many more learned through the case study projects, prepare MMB students for the challenges and rewards they will encounter in industry.

Appendix 1: Oral presentation rubric

Appendix 2: Mid-project status report guide

Appendix 3: Industry case study project rubric

Appendix 4: Peer evaluation rubric

Appendix 5: Writing assessment rubric

Appendix 6: Example case study project description

Appendix 7: Example mid-project status report

Appendix 8: Example project summary

Appendix 9: Example host company project evaluation

Appendix 10: Example final oral presentation – slides

Appendix 11: Excerpts from student self-reflections