CBT15-H113

P0 Process Analysis
What is THE single most important technological invention/innovation that
historically has made the biggest impact, and what is THE single largest
challenge to conquer in the future?

To what extend has the development of chemotherapy been the most efficient
solution in curing cancer?

By Gabor Koles, Julie Wanjiku, Natalia Chrapkova, Per Mathiesen and Thomas
Bjerregaard

CBT15-H113

Introduction
The members of H113 were put together by the university with the aim of introducing to Aalborg
University Problem Based Learning method. We started getting to know each other on the first day
through some team building exercises in the form of competitions that involved mathematics,
critical thinking, team work and compromises. These exercises were a good attempt to get everyone
settled in the group. We were able to interact with each out very fast, which helped the group
members become aware of each other strengths and weaknesses.
P0 was introduced to us from the first day; this showed everyone the seriousness and level of
commitment the university expected from us. As soon as the 3rd of September, we were able to
choose one of the ten topics to focus on; each person chose three topics they were interested in, and
through a process of voting and elimination, healing diseases and extending lives was the topic
settled on. We agreed to do a bit of research before choosing a final topic; all suggestions were
considered. Topics within this area were written down on the black board and another process of
voting and elimination led to chemotherapy and stem cells in relation to cancer stem cells being our
final subtopic. The discussion led to a mind map that can be seen in Appendix 1.

The Contract
We were able to formulate a contract as team. This contract was barely satisfactory as we later on
realised that it missed crucial elements. For example punishment was not included if the contract
was not respected, which resulted with one person not keeping up with the group deadlines. This
could have been avoided if consequences were written down. A formal way of contacting the group
if a person was running late was not discussed, and thus not written in the contract. The group relied
on contacting each other through social media, Facebook. A messaging system was set up on
Facebook to keep each other informed. The group highly relied on each individual to be responsible
and respectful towards one another and the project. The brief duration of P0 did not grant us the
opportunity to make a contract with our supervisor, Jens Muff. However, we do realise that this will
be a necessity in P1.

CBT15-H113

Time Management
A timeline (Appendix 2) and a Gantt chart were made as a way to manage and assess our time and
the amount of work that needs to be done to avoid a stressful experience during P0. The timeline
was not as extensive as it could have been, which resulted to some confusion in the group. Details
such as clearer deadlines, time for process analysis, exam preparations and homework for other
courses were missing. This is one of the things we ought to improve in future projects.

Figure.1: The Chart provides a table of the time we used for each of the reports sections. Each blue
horizontal line represents every two days of the project

The Group
We learned of the four types of groups while attending the Problem Based Learning classes (PBL);
a well-functioning group, cosy team, cold efficient team and a dysfunctional team. At the start of
the project, we considered ourselves as well-functioning team, yet during the course of the first
week, friction between two of the group members was noticed. The problems between the two
persons were addressed to avert complications that will impact the team negatively. We considered
ourselves to be an efficient group as we were focused throughout the time we spent together in the

CBT15-H113

group rooms and with the assignments; we were able to finish the distributed parts by the 14th of
September. We were also able to connect with each other not just professionally as students, but
personally as friends: Team spirit was present during the sports event on the 10th of September,
which was followed by a dinner party that continued on in town at Huset.

Figure 2: The group is dressed up as lions and one hunter for the sports day event.

Figure 3: The group having dinner on 18th of September to celebrate handing in of project

CBT15-H113

Learning Goals
Each member presented their individual learning goals, and that led to the establishment of the
groups learning goals; this went easier than we thought because we had a common interest. We
were all determined to work for a realistic grade of ten when all our strengths and weaknesses were
considered. Roles were chosen by the individuals, these roles included a timekeeper, secretary,
finisher and two monitors.
After settling on chemotherapy, we sought knowledge and understanding of:
How cancer stem cells affects the human body
Chemotherapy and its side-effects
The survival chances of a diagnosed cancer patient
The use of stem cells in chemotherapy
Nanotechnology as a solution to chemotherapy

Project Analysis
We started out as six individuals, after a couple of days we were five; as disappointing as it was to
lose a member, the remaining individuals worked hard to become a team. There were various
challenges and insecurities to overcome, and we did so gradually throughout the duration of the
project. Becoming a team was a challenge because two of the people in the group had been in a
high school program that emphasised on individuality; a team mind-set was not present at the start
of the project. Another one was not used to working in a group simply because previous education
did not include this part, and the last two who were used to working in groups did not have a
positive opinion about group work; previous experiences involved groups that were inefficient.
Doubts towards the group soon faded away as we realised that we are all passionate about the
project. This realisation came when we discussed our individual goals. Two of the group members
vision themselves working with renewable energy or medicine in the future. The other three
members are still considering different options. Not everyone was confident that this course is the
right one, three people considered leaving. External factors such as calculus classes made this

CBT15-H113

course seem difficult. Language is another external element that caused some members to be less
confident about the decision of coming here. When one of the group members left to go to the
Danish version of chemical engineering and biotechnology course, another group member thought
of doing the same. The group managed to solve this issue in collaboration with each other.

When we met on the 7th of September, a group contract was developed. We came to learn that it
lacked a lot of things with the help of Anne Cole, and the problems that emerged during the project
phase. The lack of penalties was mainly due to the fact that none of us are comfortable with
punishing another person. For the projects to come each of us needs to be stricter whenever
someone breaks the rules; the contract was breached twice without consequences. We came to an
understanding that all issues should be discussed. However, petty issues were not always discussed,
which led to tension between two of the group members. The other sought to measures that hoped
to help the two resolve their differences. These measures included social activities such as the sports
day and a dinner: It was not a matter of cultural differences, but personalities that clashed. Despite
all of this, the work progress was not affected negatively.
Due to exhaustion and stress, tensions were high during the last days for everyone. We were
determined to completely finish the project by the 16th, this was not possible as a lot of editing had
to be done; thus the quite stressful days on the 16th and the 17th. After handing in our project, we
found that this tension was unavoidable as time was always against our ambition to deliver quality
work. In the future, time management should be one of the top priorities, if a group is to avoid any
last-minute rush that leads to stressful days.

The project phase

Settling on one of the ten topics was preceded with a poll, which led to chemotherapy and stem
cells being the favoured subtopics within healing diseases and extending lives. There was a slight
split within the group as some wanted to do chemotherapy and the rest wanted to do stem cells. We
agreed to do some initial research to see which other topics would spark more interest in the group,
but we later came to learn that the two topics are connected. We discovered that stem cells are used
in chemotherapy; the problem was solved and our projects direction was set. The brainstorming
session was a bit difficult since not everyone did the first research. However, this did not block our

CBT15-H113

progress because everyone had some background knowledge in chemotherapy and stem cells; some
people have personal experience with cancer and its treatments. This was all done before a contract
had been developed, therefore no punishment were given to the ones who did not do research.

The brainstorming session led to the making of the rough structure of our project, where we
dedicated most of our time in discussing the main body. Subtopics such as history, engineering, side
effects, stem cells and the nanotechnology solution were agreed upon. Distribution of work
followed and this was done by letting each person choose the subtopic that interested them the
most. It was a measure of securing everyones dedication and enthusiasm. A week-long of extensive
research and writing followed, accompanied by short meetings where we informed each other of
our progress. Since this is a very delicate area we chose not to discuss the ethics that surrounds the
research behind chemotherapy and stem cells. Furthermore, time and page limits prevented us to
venture into broad details. Another limitation was the depth and diction which was often too
advanced. Finding credible material was not an easy process for all members of the group. For
instance, acquiring scientific journals or sites with credible authors proved to be a challenge. Even
though two of the group members sought help from the school librarian, the information gathered
was credible, but not always relevant to the groups project. Therefore, we mostly used the internet,
where excessive amount of material can be found. Reliability was considered, therefore
questionable sources were discarded.

Plagiarism and referencing was a concept that was new for one of the group members, further
explanation was needed. The Problem Based Learning class helped a lot, not only for that member,
but for the whole group to get a common understanding of university standards. The universal
referencing method in the university is the Vancouver style. The finisher of the project was familiar
with this style and offered to do the referencing. We found it easier for one person to do the
referencing so as to establish coherence; however, a lot of hours were spent doing the referencing
just by one person, which made the work distribution uneven. We have learned that it is vital for
everyone to familiarise themselves with the required referencing style, so as to make the finishers
workload less demanding.

CBT15-H113

Through the two meetings we had with Jens Muff, we found out that the groups approach to the
main question was different from other groups. However, we were assured that our particular point
of view headed towards the right direction. During the first meeting on the 9th of September with
our supervisor, we explained our plans and what we hoped to achieve. The advice received from
him helped connect our research question to the main question. Meetings with Jens Muff were
essential as he was able to answer the various questions we had, which calmed our insecurities and
led to a smooth progression. A second meeting was planned on the 14th of September. Before this
meeting we agreed that everyone should finish their parts on the project, just in case there were any
problems. All but one completed their task, but no punishment was given to this individual: This
was a flaw in the group contract.
Time
An estimation of 85 hours from each member has been dedicated to the whole of this project. Thirty
hours were spent in school; it includes meetings where we worked or informed each other on our
progress. Some people found it easier working in the group rooms, while some preferred working at
home. This meant that some of the meetings were short and each member was allowed to work
wherever they felt comfortable. We estimated that 30 hours were spent at home writing and doing
research. This was after classes and during weekends. Twenty five hours are dedicated to the
process analysis and preparation for the presentation on the 24th of September. P0 has a total of 5
ECTS; this translates to a 135 hours by each student. It is clear that our estimation is far from this
goal. One hundred and thirty five hours was impossible to accomplish for P0: our time was also
devoted to preparing for classes and attending them. One of the things that consumed most of our
time was the editing. The separating of the different parts of the project led to a lot of repetition
throughout the report. For most people in the group English is not their first language; phrasing and
spelling was compulsory for a comprehendible report. To some extent, the editing and proofreading
consumed more time than we had anticipated; this was one the things that led to the tension within
the group during the last days before handing-in the report. Our method of editing involved sending
the document from one person to the next for proof-reading, we later on sat down together and did
it as a group. Such a process proved to be slow and tiring; therefore not as efficient as assigning one
person to be the main editor.

CBT15-H113

Discussion & Conclusion

Lack of confidence in the group could have started when one of the group members left. There is a
possibility that that person leaving might have indirectly seeded some doubts. Furthermore, it could
have increased the fears of working in a group for some of the members. Improvements could have
been made in order to eliminate the negative expectations that the members had in relation to group
work. The problem was that we only revealed these concerns at the very end of the project. The best
thing would have been if we had revealed our concerns and expectations to the group before the
start of the project work. Language issues might have also encouraged some of the Danish members
to switch to the Danish equivalent of this course. Nonetheless, the group functioned and
communicated well throughout the entire process. We managed to help each other to better
understand the course work, exercises and theory, which provided a better social environment for
the group. Uncertainties when it comes to plagiarism and referencing style were acknowledged, and
with the help of PBL and group collaboration, all questions were cleared up.

This is one example of how important it is to talk about different issues and try to find a suitable
solution. It also shows the importance of proper communication between individual group members
and a group as whole. Our group contract was a useful tool as it directly mentioned this particular
topic. We were aware of the guidelines that we set in regards to the group communication and we
tried to comply with the rules: Proper communication and honesty were important aspects for the
entire group right from the beginning. The flaws of the contract led to the deadline rule being
broken and the roles assigned not being strictly followed; this showed the lack of respect towards
the contract. However, complications were handled in a proper manner and major conflicts were
avoided. Lessons such as the addition of a punishment for breaking the rules, printing and placing
the contract on the wall in the group room to encourage us to fulfil our roles and abide with the
rules will be adopted in future projects.
Although tension between the two members did not seem like a serious issue, it could have
influenced the other challenges and the groups work efficiency. It certainly did not contribute
anything positive to the other members fears surround group work. This might also have a
connection to the thoughts of leaving. On the other hand, this tension had a positive effect overall

CBT15-H113

on the group as a whole. The other members of the group tried to fix the relation between the two
members. Consequently, the entire group realised that good relations among members is essential
for the group to work in a productive manner. We were aware of how important the social aspect is
in order to create a good working environment: When it comes to working environment, we could
have made our group room more cosy and enjoyable.

We realised the necessity of a detailed timeline for a smooth progression. It is fair to say that we
tried to use the time with our supervisor reasonably because we wanted to make sure we were on
the right track; however, we were not always prepared for the meetings. The unevenness of the
work distribution made the average estimated 85 hours from each student not a reality; moreover,
the 135 hours we are supposed to spend on P0 was not achieved due to the duration of the project
and the various classes we were to attend. An even distribution of work, better preparation for the
meetings with supervisor and more detailed timeline could help us overcome these obstacles.
In conclusion, P0 is a good method of familiarising new students with Aalborg Problem Based
Learning method. We quickly went from being individuals to a functional team, which is able to
work and produce a report that we can all be proud. The deep interest each of us has towards this
topic made this period an exciting experience: P0 gives each of us a steady stepping soon for P1.

10

CBT15-H113

Appendix
Appendix. 1 (Brainstorm /mind map of sub-topic decisions).

11

CBT15-H113

Appendix 2. (Timeline)
Wednesday 9/9 (08:00 14:00).
-

Meeting with supervisor at 9:15.

Have a detailed plan of your writings, to present to the group to this meeting.

Prepare an agenda

Thursday 10/9 (12.30 16.15).

-

We meet to see how far everyone has come, at we make sure each of has a focus and we
know where we are going with it. Every man for himself is a no go.

A good flow throughout the report, keep a red-thread and make sure a chronological
order is maintained.

Sunday 13/9 (No meeting).

-

Send your writings/findings to each of the other group mates, so we are all able to read
the whole thing through, before the meeting on Monday. Writing done!

Monday 14/9 (12.30 16:15).

-

We will at this meeting, put the whole report together, and discuss it. Adjust accordingly.

Meeting with Jens 14:00, prepare an agenda!

Tuesday 15/9 (no meeting)

-

Natalia will put the individual parts together, be available for questioning of your part.

Wednesday 16/9 (9.30 12:00).

-

Writing the conclusion as a group together with the abstract and the introduction.

Proof reading.

Thursday 17/9 (12:30 16:15).

-

Last check and improvements. Making sure there is a red thread throughout the project.

Friday 18/9 (7:30 12:00).

12

Meeting if necessary.

Hand in at 12:00!