GIVE NOW about ocw help & faqs contact us
7.342 | Fall 2022 | Undergraduate

# Synapse Remodeling in Health and Disease

### Weekly Readings

In preparation for each class session, students are expected to thoroughly read the two assigned papers and think about their responses to discussion questions provided by the instructors (questions for each week’s readings are linked in the Readings section). During week 13 (lab demonstration) students are expected to read one assigned reading and think about the techniques to ensure they understand the experimental setup behind the imaging demonstration in the laboratory of Professor Elly Nedivi. Students will not have assigned reading during weeks when they are preparing for their written and oral assignments and the field trip.

### Written Assignment

Students are expected to write one 2-page paper (i.e. 2 pages single-spaced or 4 pages double-spaced, 12-point font, 1-inch margins) in the form of a mock grant proposal. The mock grant proposal will describe one or more experiments that would address a specific question related to the field of synapse remodeling. Students may choose a question/hypothesis corresponding to any aspect of synapse remodeling (e.g. molecular changes, structural remodeling on a single-cell level, circuit-level changes involving multiple cell types, mouse behavior in the context of synapse remodeling, etc). The grant proposal should include the following sections:

- Background/Rationale (1–2 paragraphs): Explain why this is an important question worthy of funding. Make it clear how your proposed project fits in the context of previous literature, i.e. state what is known in the field, and what is unknown that you will attempt to answer with your proposed project.
- Hypothesis (1 sentence): State a testable hypothesis.
- Experimental Design (most of the paper): Describe proposed experiment(s), including control groups and/or control experiments. You may divide this section into two aims, or you may include everything in a single aim.
  - Within your experimental design section, you should describe your expected results and interpretation (a few sentences). Discuss the results you expect if your hypothesis is true. Discuss how you would interpret the results if they are not what you expect, e.g. if your hypothesis is not true or if something totally unexpected occurs. You could add an alternative experimental strategy if the proposed experiment failed.
- [OPTIONAL] Broader Impacts (1 short paragraph): describe the broader significance/importance of your proposed project to the field of neuroscience.
- [OPTIONAL] Figures: You may include one or two figures to explain your methods and/or how you will interpret your results, but it is not necessary to include figures in this assignment if you are able to adequately explain your project without figures.
- Reference List (this list can be appended after the two pages of text): list the references cited in your proposal. You should cite at least two primary research papers, which can be papers we covered in class or any other scientific papers relevant to your proposal. Review articles can be cited in addition to the two or more primary research papers, if appropriate. You may use any accepted reference format (e.g. APA, MLA, Chicago), and you may use either numbered or author-date style in-text citations. For example, when using APA format, follow the author-date method of in-text citation, i.e. with the author’s last name and the year of publication for the source in the text (e.g. Doe, 2022). One complete reference for each source should appear in the reference list at the end of the paper.
- Instructors will discuss the instructions for the written assignment in class the week prior to draft submission. Students will be provided with a sample of a successfully funded grant as a guide to craft their own (see file below).
  - Sample: NSF Research Proposal 2014 Example (PDF)
- Students will submit rough drafts of their grant proposals via email to the instructors by week 8. To simulate the grant peer review process and provide additional help to improve their draft, we will spend one class session reviewing each other’s drafts and then discussing each proposal as a group to provide feedback about each other’s experimental proposal. Students will then submit their final versions at the beginning of the next class session.

### Final Oral Presentation

Each student will prepare an oral presentation describing and critiquing a paper from the primary literature in the field of synaptic remodeling. The presentation should last 15–20 minutes, and we will include 5–10 additional minutes at the end for questions from the class. Students must get prior approval from the instructors at least two weeks before the oral presentation to ensure that the paper is appropriate. The oral presentation should be formatted on a PowerPoint file with the following sections:

1. Background (1–2 slides): Provide context for the study. Why is this study important? What was known before, and what gap in our knowledge was this study designed to address?
2. Questions/Hypotheses (1 slide): Identify the authors’ central question(s) and/or hypothesis.
3. Results (1–4 slides): Present the key data (e.g. specific figures highlighting the key data) that are most important for supporting the authors’ central claims. You may show a screenshot of a specific portion of a figure rather than the whole figure, and you should omit figures that are not central to the authors’ central claims. There is no need to review all the data in the paper. Rather, you should focus on the data that you consider to be most important for supporting the authors’ central claims.
4. Control Experiment(s) (1–2 slides, may be combined with the Results section above): Identify and discuss the control experiments or control groups key to the interpretation of the results data you presented.
5. Conclusions (1 slide): Briefly summarize the authors’ major conclusion(s) from the data you presented.
6. Critique (1–2 slides): Critique the author’s interpretations. What are the caveats? Critique the study, including any problems with the experimental design or ambiguity in the interpretation of results. What control experiments are missing? What would you have done differently?
7. Future Directions (1 slide): Discuss at least one follow-up question that would be interesting to pursue and propose one additional experiment the authors could do to extend their conclusions further.

Students will submit their PowerPoint slides by 1 pm on the last day of class (week 14). The grade they receive will be based on both their slides and the oral presentation they gave in class.

## Course Info

##### Instructors

- Dr. Dalila Ordonez
- Dr. Josiah Boivin

##### Departments

- Biology

##### As Taught In

Fall 2022

##### Level

Undergraduate

##### Topics

- Health and Medicine
  - Sensory-Neural Systems
- Science
  - Biology
    - Molecular Biology
    - Neurobiology
    - Neuroscience
  - Cognitive Science

##### Learning Resource Types

assignment Presentation Assignments
assignment Activity Assignments
assignment_turned_in Written Assignments with Examples
Readings

Browse Resources

# You are leaving MIT OpenCourseWare

Please be advised that external sites may have terms and conditions, including license rights, that differ from ours. MIT OCW is not responsible for any content on third party sites, nor does a link suggest an endorsement of those sites and/or their content.