202

1.1.1 Number of Short-Term Training Courses Held

1.1.1.1 Research Design & Methods Short Course for Junior Faculty Members & Graduate Students

- -

2.2.4 Number of People Participated in Activities Addressing Gender Equality or Female Empowerment in Science and Technology Research

 

 

Lokakarya Desain dan Metode Riset - SMARTCITY 2019

Workshop

To improve the quality of research proposals produced by junior faculty members and doctoral students from UI and partner Indonesia universities.

Traditional (Face to Face)

36

Jakarta Pusat

Ashley Hotel, Menteng, Jakarta

-

 

 

 

70000000

210000000

140000000

None

 

 

 

 

 

 

There were 10 mentors from partner US University and Universitas Indonesia consisted of 2 scholars from University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, 4 scholars from University of Florida, 1 scholar from Universitas Indonesia, 2 scholars from Alabama Agriculture & Mechanical University, and 1 scholar from Savannah State University. They were invited to deliver lessons and to mentor all participants in revising the proposals which are supposed to be submitted to any national research fundings or SMART CITY Consortium Research Fellowship. The experts were professors and lectures whose expertise indicated by its authorship's h-index, and have experience in getting funded/awarded for their research proposals.

Initially CCR SMART CITY targeted 92 participants from 5 universities, 1 college, and 1 polytechnic joining this activity: UI (20), UNPAD (10), UNDIP (10), UNUD (10), UNSRI (10), UTS (5), PGRI (19), and Poltekkes (3). However there were only 66 participants, consisted of UI (2), UNDIP (10), UNPAD (9), UNUD (12), UNSRI (10), UTS (10), PGRI (10), and Poltekkes (3). They are made up of 8 doctoral students, 29 junior faculty members, 4 associate professors, 7 assistant professors, 2 master students, and 6 undergraduate students. Their field of studies are varied from: medical and biomedical science, engineering, science and mathematics, computer science, geological engineering, environmental science, environmental engineering, biology, civil engineering, and nutrition science. They brought the draft of research proposal that they intended to submit to an international or national fundings or SMART CITY Consortium Research Fellowship. On the first day, 4 scholars - 2 from UIUC and 2 from AAMU, presented about following substances: 1) Research Design Development and Research Methodology, and 2) Research Protocol Development and Research Proposal Guide and Challenge in Developing I. On the second day, 2 mentors from UF presented a topic as a continuation of the first day's second topic which is Research Protocol Development and Research Proposal Guide and Challenge in Developing II. Then 1 mentor from UI presented a substance about selection factor in competitive research fundings and their successful experience in getting a research grant. Later on, they were divided into 10 groups and divided respectively according to the 10 mentors matching field of expertise. On the third day, participants were given time to revise their respective draft of proposal, and also consult back and forth with their mentors to complete their research proposal. On the fourth (last) day, the participants were asked to submit their revised research proposal through the Post-Test, and for those who were interested into submitting to SMART CITY Consortium Research Fellowship, were given time and place to present their proposal progress to SMART CITY management team. They were also given evaluations on the research proposal substances and requirements that they would need to fullfil by the time they'd submitted. "

1. Not all participants filled in the registration form via Google Drive so not all participant were recorded and the list is yet to be completed. It could complicate the evaluation process because the management team could not monitor the change of their proposal before and after the short course. 2. There were 1 mentor who suddenly had a challenge in coming to the event so a replacement mentor was needed, and the position was filled in by an UI mentor. 3. Not all participants submitted their pre-event proposals so the Program Assistant could not send the mentors their mentees proposals for scanning preview before the event. 4. Even up to the event, their proposal was not ready; some participants even admitted they were going to make the presentation on the venue. 5. Some universities had difficulties speaking in english so the mentors LOs were asked to help translate what they want to say. 6. Many of the participants didn't submit the registration/PBF/Pre-test so the program assistant had difficulties in matching the mentees with matching mentor topics. Many of participants didn't get mentors that matched with their topic, so they couldn't get substance feedback. 7. Some university didn't have many doctoral students or junior faculty member so they sent Undergraduate students, Freshgraduate undergraduate students, or Graduate Students who acts as representatives for the professors doing the research. 8. A community college, PGRI, had a non-distributive participants who misunderstood the requirement from SMART CITY UI - PGRI contract which said each 19 PGRI branch needs to send at least 1; but they understood this as each branch could only send 1. So a change in the invitation needed to be done in the next short course. 9. Lead university couldn't bring 20 participants because there were problem in distributing the event announcement so many didn't know there was a short course. 10. each LOs needed to be assigned with joblists on the short course day to avoid slacking off during event. 11. The mentors are currently filling in activity and travel report, which could've been given on the previous night before the last day to avoid any late submission back from the mentors"

1. Make a deadline for the mentee to submit their pre-event proposal so management team can review it and the mentors can have a brief preview and understanding to give them feedbacks. 2. Confirm to the mentors for their availability in joining in the short course. 3. Also make a deadline for Researcher Network Meeting for better distribution in matching mentees with mentor's field of research 4. Announce to partnering Inondesia HEI from a month before so they can prepare and search doctoral students or junior faculty member to come to the short course 5. Change the requirement in PGRI invitation from ""one for each PGRI branch"" to ""at least one from each branch"" 6. Lead university has a communication network for doctoral students so it should be announced there for the next short course 7. Activity and travel report should be given on the last night so the mentors could give them back on the last day"

1. PBF/Pre-Test datas from the participants, for those wanting to get participation certificates. 2. Activity and Travel Report from the mentors 3. Boarding passes for the mentor return journey 4. Boarding passes for the mentees return journey 5. Certificates"

 

 

 

111

77

Nadira Niken, Ukkas Yasir, Fadlan Dimas, Nabila Vina, Rahman Andre, Hendra Toni, Syahrul Zulvian, Joni Nizar, Dedi Yoga, Yogi Edi, Aditya Farrel, Jafar Erfan, Edi Dwi, Junaedi Taufik, Raihan Sulaiman, Yugi Junaidi, Endang Zainul, Pandu Herry, Dani Satya, Rafi Fikri, Harso Juna, Haris Kresna, Nanda Dirga, Sigit Zulkarnaen