Built site for gh-pages

.nojekyll

@@ -1 +1 @@
-0968ca2b
+2345f4fe

mod_team-sci.html

@@ -333,7 +333,13 @@ <h2 id="toc-title">On this page</h2>
   <li><a href="#learning-objectives" id="toc-learning-objectives" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#learning-objectives">Learning Objectives</a></li>
   <li><a href="#preparation" id="toc-preparation" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#preparation">Preparation</a></li>
   <li><a href="#panel-discussion" id="toc-panel-discussion" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#panel-discussion">Panel Discussion</a></li>
-  <li><a href="#module-content" id="toc-module-content" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#module-content">Module Content</a></li>
+  <li><a href="#module-content" id="toc-module-content" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#module-content">Module Content</a>
+  <ul class="collapse">
+  <li><a href="#science-of-team-science" id="toc-science-of-team-science" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#science-of-team-science">Science of Team Science</a></li>
+  <li><a href="#teams-have-a-predictable-trajectory" id="toc-teams-have-a-predictable-trajectory" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#teams-have-a-predictable-trajectory">Teams have a predictable trajectory</a></li>
+  <li><a href="#benefits-of-diverse-teams" id="toc-benefits-of-diverse-teams" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#benefits-of-diverse-teams">Benefits of Diverse Teams</a></li>
+  <li><a href="#a-more-nuanced-view-emerges" id="toc-a-more-nuanced-view-emerges" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#a-more-nuanced-view-emerges">A more nuanced view emerges</a></li>
+  </ul></li>
   <li><a href="#additional-resources" id="toc-additional-resources" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#additional-resources">Additional Resources</a>
   <ul class="collapse">
   <li><a href="#papers-documents" id="toc-papers-documents" class="nav-link" data-scroll-target="#papers-documents">Papers &amp; Documents</a></li>
@@ -386,7 +392,7 @@ <h2 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="learning-objectives">Learning Objectives</h
 <h2 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="preparation">Preparation</h2>
 <p>Each project group should:</p>
 <ul>
-<li>Plan on providing a project summary and update on recent progress and any questions/issues that are arising</li>
+<li>Plan on providing a 3-5 minute project summary and update on recent progress and any questions/issues that are arising</li>
 <li>Finish their internal ground rules (if not already complete)</li>
 </ul>
 </section>
@@ -409,20 +415,58 @@ <h2 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="panel-discussion">Panel Discussion</h2>
 </section>
 <section id="module-content" class="level2">
 <h2 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="module-content">Module Content</h2>
-<p>Under Construction, stay tuned!</p>
+<section id="science-of-team-science" class="level3">
+<h3 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="science-of-team-science">Science of Team Science</h3>
+<p>Research in management, organizational behavior, and psychology has long focused on the performance of teams–often in military, healthcare and industrial contexts. While many aspects of this work are also relevant to scientific teams, there are some key differences having to do with differences in context, leadership, and incentives. In the early 2000’s–as collaboration in science increased–the need for empirical research into the workings of science teams became apparent. The field of “science of team science” or SiTS was launched in 2006 with a conference at the National Institutes of Health (Stokols et al.&nbsp;2008).</p>
+<p>A National Academies study on the Science of Team Science (NRC 2015) assembled the existing evidence base and launched a flurry of research into how team composition, coordination, support, and organizational context could improve outcomes for science teams. A new National Academies study on the Research and Application in Team Science is currently in progress. Our goal here is not to review the whole field, but to provide a framework for thinking about the team functioning and process and to identify some key team science practices that are supported by both research and practical experience.</p>
+</section>
+<section id="teams-have-a-predictable-trajectory" class="level3">
+<h3 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="teams-have-a-predictable-trajectory">Teams have a predictable trajectory</h3>
+<p>Creating a team is not just a matter of putting a bunch of people in a room together. Social scientists have identified consistent pattern in the evolution of teams (Tuckman 1965, Tuckman and Jenson 1977). Knowing that this is a process nearly every team experiences may make it (at least somewhat) more comfortable.</p>
+<figure class="figure">
+<img src="images/phases_of_team_development.jpg" alt="graphic, laying out the 5 phases: forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning, with accompanying fluctuations in team performance" width="90%" align="center" class="figure-img">
+<figcaption background-color="white">
+</figcaption>
+</figure>
+<p>Teams that are assembled from across organizations must agree to adopt a common set of norms and processes in order to progress from storming to performing. This can feel like a detour from the science, but a modest early investment in developing shared practices pays off in the long run.</p>
+</section>
+<section id="benefits-of-diverse-teams" class="level3">
+<h3 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="benefits-of-diverse-teams">Benefits of Diverse Teams</h3>
+<div class="quarto-figure quarto-figure-center" style="width: 50%; float: right; padding: 15px">
+<figure class="figure">
+<p><img src="images/Lee_et_al_2014.jpg" class="img-fluid figure-img"></p>
+<figcaption>Novelty peaks at a team size of about 6 authors (examinining only authors from a single private uinversity. From: Lee et al.&nbsp;2014</figcaption>
+</figure>
+</div>
+<p>There is pretty good evidence that collaborative teams produce research that is more novel and has higher impact than work produced by individuals or smaller more homogeneous groups (Lee at al.&nbsp;2015, Hong and Page 2024). Wooley et al (2010) found evidence for a “collective intelligence” in teams, which is not strongly correlated with the average or maximum individual intelligence of group members but is correlated with the average social sensitivity of group members, the equality in distribution of conversational turn-taking, and the proportion of females in the group.</p>
+<p>Similarly, in a study of 6.6 million medical research papers, Yang et al.&nbsp;found that mixed gender teams consistently produced more novel and more impactful products. In another bibliographic analysis Abbasi and Jaafari (2013) found that inter-institute and inter-university collaborations resulted in higher-impact publications. Interestingly, the result was much weaker for international collaborations.</p>
+<p><img src="images/yang-et-al-pnas.png" class="img-fluid" style="width: 50%; float: right; padding: 15px" alt="Mixed-gender teams are more likely to produce novel papers than same-gender teams at all team sizes. Mixed-gender teams are also more likely to publish an upper-tail paper than same-gender teams by as much as 14.6%, depending on team sizes. Yang et al.&nbsp;2022, PNAS DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2200841119"> It seems reasonable to expect that the effects of cultural and economic diversity would be similar, but those factors remain harder to parse at this scale. The true <em>impact</em> of science is also elusive, as the excitement of tackling a bigger, more challenging problem or the social utility of generalizable findings goes well beyond citation counts and impact factors.</p>
+</section>
+<section id="a-more-nuanced-view-emerges" class="level3">
+<h3 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="a-more-nuanced-view-emerges">A more nuanced view emerges</h3>
+<p>Collaborative science may be more exciting, novel, and impactful than solo or small-team science, but it is rarely faster. The paradox of synthesis is that the factors that slow progress may be <em>exactly</em> the factors that generate new insight.</p>
+<p><img src="images/go-far.png" class="img-fluid" style="width: 50%; float: right; padding: 20"></p>
+<p><span style="color: red">Additional content coming soon…</span></p>
+</section>
 </section>
 <section id="additional-resources" class="level2">
 <h2 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="additional-resources">Additional Resources</h2>
 <section id="papers-documents" class="level3">
 <h3 class="anchored" data-anchor-id="papers-documents">Papers &amp; Documents</h3>
 <ul>
+<li>Abbasi, A., and A. Jaafari. 2013. Research impact and scholars’ geographical diversity. Journal of Informetrics 7:683–692.</li>
 <li>Bates, A.E. <em>et al.</em>, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320724001289?via%3Dihub">Overcome Imposter Syndrome: Contribute to Working Groups and Build Strong Networks</a>. <strong>2024</strong>. <em>Biological Conservation</em></li>
+<li>Graffius, Scott M. (2023, January 14). Leverage the Phases of Team Development — Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, and Adjourning — to Help Your Teams be Happier and More Productive: 2023 Update. Available at: https://www.exceptional-pmo.com.</li>
+<li>Hong, L., &amp; Page, S. E. (2024). Individual selection criteria for optimal team composition. THEORY AND DECISION, 96(4), 607–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-023-09960-w</li>
 <li>Peterson, D.M., <em>et al.</em>, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.10343">Team Science: A Syllabus for Success on Big Projects</a>. <strong>2023</strong>. <em>Ecology and Evolution</em></li>
 <li>Gaynor, K.M., <em>et al.</em>, <a href="https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010567">Ten Simple Rules to Cultivate Belonging in Collaborative Data Science Research Teams</a>. <strong>2022</strong>. <em>PLoS Computational Biology</em></li>
 <li>Deutsch, L., <em>et al.</em>, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S146290112100054X?via%3Dihub">Leading Inter- and Transdisciplinary Research: Lessons from Applying Theories of Change to a Strategic Research Program</a>. <strong>2021</strong>. <em>Environmental Science &amp; Policy</em></li>
 <li>Farrell, K.J. <em>et al.</em>, <a href="https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fee.2287">Training Macrosystems Scientists Requires Both Interpersonal and Technical Skills</a>. <strong>2021</strong>. <em>Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment</em></li>
 <li>Hampton, S.E. &amp; Parker, J.N. <a href="https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/61/11/900/223655">Collaboration and Productivity in Scientific Synthesis</a>. <strong>2011</strong>. <em>BioScience</em></li>
+<li>Lee, You-Na, John P. Walsh, Jian Wang. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.007">Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact</a>. <strong>2015</strong> Research Policy Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages 684-697. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.007</li>
 <li>Lowman, H. et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2401812121">Collaborative consortia can boost postdoctoral workforce development</a>. <strong>2024</strong> <em>PNAS</em></li>
+<li>Tuckman, B. W. Developmental Sequence in Small Groups. Psychological Bulletin, <strong>1965.</strong> 63: 384-399.</li>
+<li>Tuckman, B. W., &amp; Jensen, M. A. C. Stages of Small-Group Development Revisited. Group and Organizational Studies <strong>1977</strong> 2 (4): 419-427.</li>
 </ul>
 </section>
 <section id="workshops-courses" class="level3">