Editing Thesis Design (section)

=== Assessment ===
Your final grade is calculated as per below. There is no final exam. Dates below are indicative. There may be changes depending on the speed with which we proceed. 

Note the predominance of peer review in this course. Assessment rubrics can be found [[Grading rubrics#Thesis Design|here]].
{| class="wikitable"
|+
!Assignment
!%
!Date assigned
!Date due
|-
|Participation
|10
|N/A
|N/A
|-
|Peer review 1: RQ + Hypothesis
|10
|Week 2
|Week 3
|-
|Peer review 2: RQ + Hypothesis + method
|15
|Week 4
|Week 6
|-
|Peer review 3: Research proposal 
|35
|Week 6
|Week 8
|-
|Article presentation
|15
|Week 1
|var
|-
|Interactive poster pitch
|15
|Week 5
|Week 8
|-
|TOTAL
|100
| colspan="2" |
|}

==== Assignment descriptions ====

* '''Participation''': Active participation is crucial in this course. This includes engaging in class discussions, contributing to group activities, and consistent attendance. Students are expected to demonstrate engagement with course materials and contribute thoughtfully to peer interactions. Participation will be assessed on the quality of contributions rather than quantity. Note that during class you may be requested to upload some evidence of class participation to a dedicated folder. This will be assessed P/F.  
* '''Peer review 1''': Research question and hypothesis . This assignment requires peer review, where each student will provide constructive feedback on a classmate's submitted RQ and hypothesis, focusing on clarity, relevance, and feasibility. Your score on this assignment is based on the text you submit and the review you produce. See [https://help.feedbackfruits.com/en/articles/2942398-peer-review-student-perspective this FBF resource] for all peer review assignments.
* '''Peer review 2''': Building upon the first peer review assignment, students will refine their RQ and hypothesis and add a provisional methodology. This assignment involves a second round of peer review, where students critique each other's proposed methods for research, assessing the appropriateness, clarity, and potential effectiveness. As before, your score on this assignment is based on the text you submit and the review you produce.
* '''Peer review 3''': In this comprehensive assignment, students will complete a detailed research proposal, including the refined RQ, hypothesis, methodology, and a brief literature review. The proposal will undergo a rigorous peer review process, where students are expected to provide in-depth, constructive feedback. The focus will be on the overall coherence, scientific rigor, and originality of the proposals. As before, your score on this assignment is based on the text you submit and the review you produce. This deliverable also includes a link to a hypothesis [[Pre-registration on OSF.io|Pre-registering a project with OSF]]. 
* '''Article resources''': [[Collaborative article resource assignment]]

* '''Interactive poster pitch''': I'll organize an event with external colleagues in which you will present your proposal, either individually or in small groups. Details to be determined based on class progress.
** Make a slide in accordance with #BetterPoster
** Add your slides to [https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1bzVJ7ky1esEhs7iO5hozrgpeDOzC5eq_u1iUUZ7R5aA/edit?usp=sharing this deck] under the appropriate heading and also submit it to BrightSpace.
** Due date:  Wednesday midnight
** On Thursday I'll send to the visitors and invite them to prepare questions/comments.

Information on scoring the participation activities can be found in the [[Grading rubrics#Introduction to voice technology|overview of rubrics]].