STA305/1004 - Project
Due Dates: November 5, 2019, 23:59 (Proposal) ; Dec 5, 2019, 23:59 (Project)
For this project, each student - no groups allowed - will design, analyse, and communicate
the results of a homemade replicated 2k factorial experiment, where k ≥ 2. Each student
is required to submit four items:
0. Draft proposal of the experiment that you plan to conduct; (due: Nov. 5, 23:59 on
Quercus)
1. R Markdown document used to author your report, along with necessary data file(s);
(due: Dec. 5, 23:59 on Quercus)
2. pdf export of your report; (due: Dec. 5, 23:59 on Quercus) and
3. video presentation of the objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of your experi-
ment. (due: Dec. 5, 23:59 on Quercus)
Detailed description and requirements are provided below.
Description.
Each student is asked to plan and perform a homemade factorial experiment. The experiment
must be a replicated 2k factorial experiment, where k ≥ 2, and the number of replications is
at least two. That is, the experiment should include 8 measurements at the minimum.
Students should start thinking about decide what they want to study. The number of possible
topics is very large. We strongly recommend selecting a topic that you are interested in and
will enjoy working on.
Submission requirements.
You are responsible for submitting the following via Quercus by the due dates. The grading
rubric for the project is attached at the end of this document.
0. Draft Proposal of Experiment.
Due date: November 5, 23:59
• An R Markdown document (i.e., has .Rmd extension) and pdf export of the R Mark-
down document that states your experiment’s objectives, methods, statistical analysis
plan.
– The objectives should be concise statements about what you are hope to learn,
and the methods are your plan for collecting the data. In the example of the
baseball experiment in the introductory video [add link] the objective could be
stated as: “What are the effects of grip, and stance on ball speed.”
1
– The method could be stated as: “I will collect measurements of my ball speeds
while varying grip and stance at two different levels each. I will vary my grip
with placements of the index and middle fingers, open versus closed. The stance
factor will be based on the height of the left leg during the wind-up motion. I will
perform 5 repetitions in a randomised order since my arm may loosen up and/or
tire out effecting the ball speeds. The order will be radomised using an R script
prior to the measurement session. I will also randomly pick a baseball from a ball
cart each time I pitch. It is well known that a baseball with worn out seams result
in lower ball speeds. Finally, a friend will measure my ball speeds using a speed
radar gun while I pitch following the radomised order.”
– The statistical analysis plan is a brief description of how you plan to analyse
the data, including which summary statistics and data visualizations you plan to
include.
• The draft will not be graded. If a draft with the content outlined above is submitted
then you will receive full credit. TAs will give students feedback on their draft as soon
as possible. The draft is an opportunity for you to receive early feedback on your ideas
and plans so that you can incorporate the feedback into your final submission.
1. R Markdown document.
Due date: December 5, 23:59
You are required to write your report and perform your analysis in an R Markdown document
using R. Submit an error-free R Markdown document (.Rmd file) that contains the R codes
used to perform analysis. If your code requires extra files such as your observed data, you
must include them as well. Please keep your data files and .Rmd file in the same directory
to help accelerate the grading process. The grading TA must be able to run your notebook
without an error on their machine after downloading the files as they are. (The TA will
install extra packages if necessary.)
We recommend using https://rstudio.cloud/ if you don’t already have RStudio and/or
LATEX installed on your computer.
An introduction to R Markdown is available on the course web site.
2. PDF report.
Due date: December 5, 23:59
A maximum 4 page PDF report that contains the following sections. You are required to
use R Markdown to create your report. However, the final PDF report must not include any
R codes. (Include knitr::opts chunk$set(echo=FALSE) in your first code chunk to hide
code chunks throughout your output PDF document.)
1. Description (1 page maximum). Include how and why you conducted the exper-
iment. What do you hope to learn by doing this experiment?
2
2. Analysis of data (2 pages maximum). Include appropriate plots and calculations
used to answer experimental question(s). These may include main effects and interac-
tions, estimated variance of the effect; confidence intervals for the true values of effects;
Lenth plot; or half normal plot.
3. Conclusions (1 page maximum). State your conclusions based on the results of
your experiment in a paragraph or two.
3. Video presentation.
Due date: December 5, 23:59
A video presentation of your study. Your video must meet the following criteria:
• In the beginning of the video, you must clearly present your student ID along with
yourself. The grading TA must be able to identify you and your student ID number.
Failure to present your student ID will result in a 0 grade for the video
presentation. We recommend that you update your Quercus profile with a picture
where your face is clearly identifable.
• The presentation should not exceed 5 minutes. Any video beyond 5 minutes will not
be viewed by the grading TA, and will not be considered when marking.
• In the video you should describe the objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of
your experiment.
The video may be of any form, so be creative! For example, you may include clips of yourself
conducting the experiment while describing the experiment - beware that the clips will also
count towards your 5 minute limit.
Submission Instructions.
1. Submit your report and analysis including the PDF document, .Rmd file, and any
associated data files under Project: Report.
2. Submit your video presentation under Project: Video. You may use Quercus’s built-in
media recorder or upload your own video file. The uploading process may take a few
minutes.
Notes on video submission.
• If you are using a Mac, the Quercus media recorder submission page may not work on
your Safari browser. The recorder works fine with Chrome or Firefox on both Mac and
PCs.
• Beware that the Quercus media recorder doesn’t allow pauses but you are able to
retake your videos as many times as you want.
3
• Quercus accepts media file uploads of size up to 500MB if you are uploading a file.
The supported file types for playbacks are FLV, ASF, QT, MOV, MPG, MPEG, AVI,
M4V, WMV, MP4, and 3GP. If you upload any other file types, the TAs may not be
able to assign you a grade.
4
Grading Rubric
Excellent (5) Good (4) Adequate (3) Marginal (2) Inadequate (1)
PDF Report (20).
Description.
Strong evidence of origi-
nal thinking and a clear
explanation of how and
why they conducted a
replicated factorial ex-
periment.
Evidence of original
thinking and a mostly
clear explanation of
how and why they
conducted a replicated
factorial experiment.
An adequate explana-
tion of how and why
the experiment was con-
ducted, and a repli-
cated factorial experi-
ment conducted.
A factorial experiment
was not conducted, al-
though the experiment
that was conducted
is appropriate for
the stated objectives.
There is little evidence
of understanding a
factorial experiment.
Little evidence to no ev-
idence of experimental
design or the analysis of
experimental data.
Analysis.
Appropriate data analy-
sis was conducted to an-
swer objectives of exper-
iment including appro-
priate calculations and
plots.
Almost all of the data
analysis was conducted
to answer objectives of
experiment. Most of the
calculations and plots
are appropriate.
Most of the data anal-
ysis was conducted to
answer objectives of ex-
periment. Some calcu-
lations and plots may
be superflous or inap-
propriate.
Some of the data analy-
sis was conducted to an-
swer objectives of exper-
iment, although there is
no statistical evidence
to support all of the ob-
jectives. Some calcu-
lations and plots may
be superflous or inap-
propriate.
Most of the data anal-
ysis conducted does not
help answer objectives
of experiment. Several
calculations and plots
are superflous or inap-
propriate.
Conclusions.
All the conclusions
are clearly stated, and
supported by statistical
analysis in the context
of the experiment.
Almost all the conclu-
sions are clearly stated
even if a few are not
clear. The clearly
stated conclusions are
supported by statistical
analysis.
Some of the conclusions
are stated, some may
be missing or unclear.
The stated conclusions
are supported by statis-
tical analysis.
Some of the conclusions
are stated, some may be
missing, and none are
supported by statistical
analysis in the context
of the experiment.
None of the conclusions
are stated, and none are
supported by statistical
analysis in the context
of the experiment.
Organization.
Very well organized
with clear headings and
sections. Excellent flow
from one section to the
next with tables and
plots carefully tuned
and placed.
Well organized with
clear headings and
sections. Flow from
one section to the next
might be lacking.
Generally well orga-
nized but some sections
were muddled. Appro-
priate tables and plots
were used but might be
poorly presented.
Sections unclear and no
attempt to flow from
one topic to the next.
Some tables and plot
might have fundamental
flaws in their presenta-
tions.
Difficult to read the re-
port. For example, the
report does not contain
headings, figures are far
away from where they
are referenced in the
text. Missing required
parts.
Grading Rubric
Excellent (5) Good (4) Adequate (3) Marginal (2) Inadequate (1)
R Markdown notebook (5).
Appropriate
use of built-in
R functions.
Appropriate R functions
are used correctly to
perform the intended
tasks. Entire notebook
runs without an error
with necessary packages
installed. Reproduces
the same numerical re-
sults presented in the re-
port.
Appropriate R functions
are used but may con-
tain mistakes in their
usage. May contain er-
rors but they do not
interrupt the analysis
steps. Reproduces sim-
ilar results as presented
in the report but some
numeric results may be
different.
R functions are often
used inappropriately
and do not perform
the intended tasks.
Contains errors that
interrupt some parts of
the analysis steps. Pro-
duces conflicting results
for minor parts of the
conclusions presented.
Most R functions are
used inappropriately
and do not perform
the intended tasks.
Contains errors that
interrupt the analysis
steps but requires only
minor fixes. Produces
conflicting results for
most of the conclusions
presented.
Contains major errors
and does not reproduce
the result presented.
Video presentation (5).
Presentation.
Information is presented
in a logical and interest-
ing sequence. Experi-
ment objectives, meth-
ods, results, and con-
clusions clearly stated,
repeated appropriately,
and strongly supported
throughout the presen-
tation. Clearly audi-
ble voice throughout the
video.
Information is pre-
sented in a logical
sequence. Experiment
objectives, methods,
results, and conclusions
clearly stated and sup-
ported throughout the
presentation. Audible
voice throughout the
video.
Presentation jumps
around topics making
it difficult to follow.
Experiment objectives,
methods, results, and
conclusions are stated
but minimally sup-
ported through out the
presentation. Voice is
not audible in some
parts of the video.
Presentation has no se-
quence of information
and audience cannot un-
derstand the presenta-
tion. Experiment ob-
jectives, methods, re-
sults, and conclusions
are not explicitly stated
and need to be guessed.
Majority of the video is
not audible.
A video presentation
was submitted with the
student ID presented,
but the video is not
audible throughout the
presentation.