Define a research question and its measurable outcome · 定义研究问题及其可测量结果
“Better instructions” could mean several different things
- For the materials project, better might mean preferred, quicker to read or more likely to lead to correct sorting. Those are different outcomes. A question using only the word better leaves the team unable to decide what data to collect.
- This original GAC033-aligned lesson fixes one research question for a proposed study. The wider driving question remains how to improve return instructions. The narrower question will concern completely correct paper sorting, not every benefit a real classroom might value.
“更好的说明”可能有多种含义
- 对于材料项目，“更好”可能意味着更受青睐、阅读更快或更易导致正确分拣。这些是不同的结果。仅使用“更好”一词的问题会使团队无法确定收集何种数据。
- 本原创GAC033配套课程为拟议研究确定了一个具体问题。更广泛的驱动问题仍是如何改进回收说明。较窄的问题将关注完全正确的纸质分拣，而非真实教室可能珍视的所有益处。
Which meaning of better matches the proposed main outcome? · 更好的哪个含义匹配拟议的主要结果？
The question chooses sorting accuracy. Colour and preference are different possible outcomes. · 该问题选择了分类准确性。颜色和偏好是不同的可能结果。
Name the changed feature precisely
- The independent variable is the feature deliberately changed: label layout A or B. Both use the same words and tray names. B separates each label more clearly and aligns it with its corresponding tray; A uses the existing closer layout.
- Do not change colour, wording, item difficulty and layout together if the claim is specifically about spacing and alignment. If several changes are combined, describe the comparison as a whole design package and avoid crediting one feature alone.
精确命名变更的特征
- 自变量是有意改变的特征：标签布局A或B。两者使用相同的文字和托盘名称。B版将每个标签分隔得更清晰，并与对应托盘对齐；A版沿用现有的较紧凑布局。
- 若主张特指间距和对齐，不要同时更改颜色、措辞、物品难度和布局。若多项变更结合，应将对比描述为整体设计方案，避免单独归功于某一特征。
What is the independent variable in the stated comparison? · 所述比较中的自变量是什么？
The layout is deliberately assigned. Complete success is the outcome. · 布局是故意分配的。完全成功即为结果。
Define what counts as success
- The outcome is whether all four item placements on the paper sheet match a fixed key within two minutes. Each participant contributes one complete success or no complete success. A blank placement prevents a complete success; this rule is written before collection.
- The team may separately record error categories to explain difficulties, but those notes are not a substitute for the main measure. Four-item partial marks and whole-sheet successes have different denominators. Keep the primary count consistent.
| Sheet result | Complete-success outcome |
|---|---|
| All four placements correct | 1 |
| Three correct and one wrong | 0 |
| Three correct and one blank | 0 |
“Among 24 willing peers in our class, does layout B yield more completely correct four-item paper sorting sheets than layout A, under the same instructions and a two-minute limit?”
定义何为成功
- 结果是两项放置是否在两分钟内与固定标准答案完全匹配。每位参与者贡献一次完全成功或无完全成功。空白放置阻止完全成功；此规则在收集前已制定。
- 团队可单独记录误差类别以解释困难，但这些备注不能替代主要衡量标准。四项部分得分与整份成功的分母不同。保持主要计数的一致性。
| 表格结果 | 完全成功结果 |
|---|---|
| 四项放置全部正确 | 1 |
| 三项正确一项错误 | 0 |
| 三项正确一项空白 | 0 |
“在我们班级24名自愿同伴中，在相同说明和两分钟限制下，布局B是否能比布局A产生更多完全正确的四项纸质分拣表格？”
A sheet has all four placements correct within the time limit. What is its complete-success value? · 一张纸在时限内所有四个位置均正确。其完全成功的值是多少？
The predefined binary outcome assigns one success only to a completely correct sheet. · 预定义的二元结果仅将一次成功分配给完全正确的纸张。
Specify people, setting and comparison
- The planned groups are 12 volunteers per condition, assigned by shuffled A/B slips. Every volunteer sees only one layout. This reduces practice effects that could occur if everyone tried A first and B second, but it does not ensure perfectly matched groups.
- State the actual setting and sample. The question concerns this small class task, not every student's behaviour at the real trays. If fewer volunteers participate, record the actual group sizes and compare proportions as well as counts rather than pretending the original plan occurred.
A directional expectation such as “B may help” is not a result. Do not rewrite the outcome rule after seeing scores to make the preferred layout win.
指定人员、环境和对比
- 计划每组12名志愿者，通过随机抽取A/B纸条分配。每位志愿者只看到一种布局。这减少了若所有人先试A再试B可能产生的练习效应，但不能确保分组完美匹配。
- 说明实际环境和样本。该问题关乎本次小型班级任务，而非所有学生在真实托盘上的行为。若志愿者减少，记录实际组别规模，并比较比例及计数，而非假装原计划得以实施。
方向性预期如“B可能有帮助”并非结果。不要看到分数后重写结果规则以使首选布局获胜。
If everyone tries A first and B second, an improvement on B could include a practice effect. · 如果每个人都先尝试 A 再尝试 B，B 的改进可能包括练习效应。
Participants may learn the task during A. Fixed ordering is an alternative explanation for improved later performance. · 参与者在尝试 A 时可能会习得任务。固定顺序是后期表现改善的另一种解释。
Check feasibility and alternative explanations
- Can the materials and key be prepared, approval obtained and task completed within the project schedule? If not, reduce scope openly. A feasible question is one the team can answer with its resources and permissions, not simply one that sounds impressive.
- Name plausible influences: reading familiarity, assistance from a friend, inconsistent timing or task order. The protocol controls assistance and timing; it records the remaining sample limit. Listing a limitation does not remove it, but it prevents an exaggerated interpretation.
检查可行性及替代解释
- 材料和标准答案能否准备好、获得批准并在项目日程内完成任务？若不能，应公开缩减范围。可行的问题是团队能用其资源和权限解答的问题，而不仅仅是听起来令人印象深刻的题目。
- 列出合理影响因素：阅读熟悉度、朋友协助、时间不一致或任务顺序。协议控制了协助和时间；记录了剩余的样本限制。列出局限性并不能消除它，但可防止过度解读。
Which TWO features belong in a feasible research question? · 哪两项特征属于可行的研究问题？
The proposed evidence and permissions must be achievable. Preferred outcomes and universal guarantees are not feasibility conditions. · 拟议的证据和许可必须是可实现的。偏好的结果和普遍保证不是可行性条件。
Write the question and analysis together
- Before collecting, state how you will report success: complete successes out of participants in each group, with the same outcome definition. The proposed 12-person groups make the raw counts comparable; actual unequal groups require attention to their denominators.
- Write your own question with the changed feature, measured outcome, people, setting and conditions. Underline each component, then ask a partner what they would measure. If they name a different outcome, revise the wording until the task is clear.
A researchable question fixes the comparison, outcome rule, participants and conditions. The analysis must match that definition, even when the result is disappointing.
同步撰写问题与分析
- 在收集数据前，说明如何报告成功情况：每个组别中完成成功的参与者人数与总参与人数的比例，并使用相同的结果定义。提议的12人分组使原始计数具有可比性；实际不等的分组需要关注其分母。
- 用变更后的特征、测量结果、人群、环境和条件编写你自己的问题。划出每个组成部分，然后询问同伴他们会测量什么。如果他们提到不同的结果，请修改措辞直到任务清晰明了。
一个可研究的问题确定了比较方式、结果规则、参与者和条件。分析必须与该定义一致，即使结果是令人失望的。