The course project is a self-directed group data analysis project using real ecological data and rigorous scientific methods. Groups are expected to hypothesize about their chosen data, examine their hypotheses with reproducible and quantitative analysis techniques, visualize their results, and create scientific products in the form of a report and a presentation.
You might end up with a publishable scientific product! This paper was written by a group of graduate students as part of the first version of this course, which was created by Dr. Christie Bahlai.
A list of recommended datasets can be found here. You are welcome to choose a dataset not listed, or data collected as part of a research project, but keep in mind that you may not submit anything twice: any work you do as part of this course may not be submitted for credit in another course (such as a fourth-year research project) and vice versa. If choosing a dataset not listed, make sure it is well-documented, legitimate, and complex enough to support your analysis efforts. Your work should be original; your project should not be a reproduction of published analyses.
The following components will be graded as part of the project:
While you may not submit your work for this course for credit in another course, you are welcome to publish or present your work in an academic setting. Groups are encouraged to publish their work on figshare, an open, citable repository of scientific content.
For the report, you are expected to:
The report and associated code is expected to:
You are also expected to work well as a team, and use GitHub to submit and store your final product (more details below).
As a guideline, aim for at least 2500 words and about 6-8 figures/tables. This is not a hard criteria. We are flexible in these guidelines, since we want you to learn to work as a team and create a scientific product. You’ll be surprised how quickly the words, figures, and tables start adding up.
Your code should follow the coding style found on our resources page.
All items (except the presentation) are due on December 5th at 11:59 pm.
The project report and code should be submitted on GitHub. The report should also be submitted on Quercus. Each group will have their own GitHub repository in the EEB313-2019 organization to which you can upload your report and code. You are welcome to use your GitHub repository for collaborative work during the project, but feel free to use other tools such as Google Drive, Dropbox, Overleaf, etc. if you prefer.
| Inadequate (0 marks) | Adequate (4 marks) | Excellent (8 marks) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Contribution to group work | Student contributed little to project; self-assessed contributions are low in quality and/or quantity; self-assessment is not consistent with actual contribution. | Student contributed adequately to project; made some significant contributions | Student substantially contributed to project to ensure success; self-assessed contributions are crucial to project; self-assessment is consistent with actual contribution. |
| Content | Missing crucial information; methods and results are inconsistent, not logical, or not adequately explained; conclusions are confusing or unsupported by results; unnecessary information included as clutter | Most essential information included; methods and results are adequately described; conclusions supported by results; most included material is relevant to report | All essential information included; methods and results are succinct, clear, logical, and scientifically valid; conclusions are creative and meaningful; project is concise throughout |
| Style and reproducibility | Code and writing are poorly organized, poorly formatted, missing units, difficult to read, poorly documented, difficult to reproduce analyses | Code and writing are well-organized, well-formatted, consistent use of units and significant figures | Code and writing are precise and clear throughout, free of errors, well-organized, well-documented, easily reproducible analyses, publication-ready |
| Presentation | Presentation is poorly organized; much too long or much too short; presentation is unclear; presentation is missing information; presentation is not scientific and professional; presentation uses too much jargon; not all team members participate; does not adequately address audience questions | Presentation is adequately organized; timing is appropriate; most information is presented logically; presentation is scientific and professional; most jargon is avoided; all team members participate but equally; audience questions are sometimes addressed well | Presentation is clearly and logically organized; presentation flows and is easy to follow; presentation includes appropriate information without jargon; presentation is well-rehearsed and high-quality; all team members participate equally; audience questions are clearly addressed |
As the final project is a team effort, all members within a group will receive the same mark in the final three categories and an individual mark for their contribution to group work. A final project that is considered to lie between two of the defined levels will be marked accordingly, e.g. between “Adequate” and “Excellent” would be 5, 6, or 7 marks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. See the licensing page for more details about copyright information.