Present and defend a final research proposal · 展示并答辩最终研究提案
A proposal presentation must not pretend the study is finished
- The materials team is ready to present its revised plan. A tempting opening is “Our better labels improved sorting.” That would be false: the main task has not run. The team can defend the question and method without announcing invented findings.
- This original GAC033-aligned lesson completes the proposal sequence. Defend means explain and justify choices with evidence and acknowledge limitations. It does not mean reject every question or turn a small plan into a universal claim.
提案展示不得假装研究已经结束
- 材料团队准备好展示其修订后的计划。一个诱人的开场白是“更好的标签改进了分类”。但这将是虚假的：主要任务尚未执行。团队可以在不宣布虚构发现的情况下捍卫提问和方法。
- 这个符合GAC033标准的原始课程完成了提案序列。捍卫意味着用证据解释并证明选择的合理性，同时承认局限性。它并不意味着拒绝所有问题或将小计划变成普遍主张。
A proposal presentation may describe an expected improvement as an observed finding to sound confident. · 提案展示可能将预期的改进描述为观察到的发现以显得自信。
Expected outcomes are not findings. A proposal must state that the main data have not been collected. · 预期结果不是发现。提案必须说明主要数据尚未收集。
Build one argument across the slides
- Use six moves: problem and purpose, verified background, research question, method and ethics, planned analysis and limits, next approval/action. Keep the proposal's version label visible so the audience knows which draft it is discussing.
- For a four-minute rehearsal, allow 30 seconds for purpose, 45 for background and question, 90 for method and ethics, 45 for analysis and limits, and 30 for next steps. Rehearse with a clock; a crowded slide should be simplified rather than read at double speed.
在幻灯片间构建一个连贯论点
- 使用六个环节：问题与目的、经过验证的背景、研究问题、方法与伦理、计划分析及其限制、下一步审批/行动。保持提案版本号可见，让观众知道正在讨论哪个草稿。
- 对于四分钟排练，允许30秒用于目的介绍，45秒用于背景和提问，90秒用于方法和伦理，45秒用于分析和限制，30秒用于下一步。使用计时器排练；幻灯片拥挤时应简化内容，而不是加速朗读。
How many seconds does the example rehearsal allocate in total? · 示例排练总共分配了多少秒？
30 + 45 + 90 + 45 + 30 = 240 seconds, or four minutes. · 30 + 45 + 90 + 45 + 30 = 240 秒，即四分钟。
Show the outcome rule without fabricating results
- Present the blank analysis structure: group A successes/participants and group B successes/participants. Explain that completely correct means all four placements match the fixed key within two minutes. Leave result cells blank or label any teaching numbers as illustrative, not collected.
- Keep sources attached to claims, using actual verified references in a real presentation. The invented cards from unit 5.5 are reasoning exercises only. If the literature section remains incomplete, say so and identify it as work needed before approval.
“We propose 12 volunteers per layout, assigned by shuffled slips. Our primary measure is a completely correct four-item sheet. We have not collected the main data. The teacher will review the information script and final materials before participant work begins.”
展示结果规则而不编造数据
- 展示空白的分析结构：A组成功数/参与者和B组成功数/参与者。解释完全正确意味着在两分钟内所有四个位置都与固定标准答案一致。留空结果单元格或将任何教学数字标记为示例而非实际收集的数据。
- 在真实展示中，将来源附在声明后，使用实际经过验证的参考文献。第5.5单元中的虚构卡片仅用于推理练习。如果文献部分仍不完整，请如实说明，并将其标识为获批前需要完成的工作。
“我们提议每套布局安排12名志愿者，通过洗牌纸条分配。我们的主要测量指标是完全正确的四项表格。我们尚未收集主要数据。教师将在参与者工作开始前审核信息脚本和最终材料。”
How should a demonstration results table be presented before collection? · 收集前应如何展示演示结果表？
The audience must be able to distinguish the analysis plan from actual evidence. · 观众必须能够区分分析计划和实际证据。
Answer why this method, not just what it is
- Asked “Why not use a preference survey?”, the team replies: “Our question concerns accuracy, so we need a task outcome. Preference could be interesting, but it would not answer the primary question.” Asked “Why not test both layouts on everyone?”, it explains the possible practice effect from repeated exposure.
- Asked whether 24 volunteers represent every student, the team says no. The study is a small local comparison, and assignment does not make the sample representative. A clear limit improves the answer; it does not invalidate every possible use of the study.
Do not answer “we will prove B is best” or imply that a positive audience response grants permission. The study remains conditional on the required approval and final procedure checks.
回答为何采用此方法，而不仅仅是它是什么
- 当被问及“为什么不用偏好调查？”时，团队回答：“我们的问题关注准确性，因此我们需要任务结果。偏好可能有趣，但不能回答主要问题。”当被问及“为什么不把两套布局都测试给所有人？”时，团队解释了重复接触可能带来的练习效应。
- 当被问及24名志愿者是否代表所有学生时，团队表示不能。这是一项小型本地比较研究，分配并不能使样本具有代表性。明确的局限性有助于改进回答，但并不会否定该研究的所有可能用途。
不要回答“我们将证明B最好”或暗示积极的观众反应即获准。该研究仍取决于所需的正式批准和最终程序核查。
Why does the proposed primary method use a sorting task rather than only a preference survey? · 为什么拟议的主要方法使用分类任务而不仅仅是偏好调查？
A method must measure the chosen outcome. A preference survey answers a different question. · 方法必须测量选定的结果。偏好调查回答的是不同的问题。
Share speaking work and listen to questions
- Each speaker owns a section and understands how it links with the others. A handover can say, “Now that the outcome is defined, Arun will explain how we keep instructions the same.” Do not allocate work only by who speaks most confidently; provide rehearsal and cue support.
- During questions, one person records the issue while another answers. If you do not know, state what must be checked and who will check it. Do not let two teammates offer contradictory confident answers to a requirement that remains unresolved.
分享发言工作并倾听问题
- 每位演讲者负责一个部分，并理解其如何与其他部分衔接。交接可以说：“既然结果已定义，阿伦将解释我们如何保持一致的指令。”不要仅根据谁最自信来分配工作；应提供排练和提示支持。
- 回答问题时，一人记录问题，另一人作答。如果你不知道，请说明必须核查什么以及由谁核查。不要让两名队友对一个仍未解决的问题给出相互矛盾的自信回答。
Submit a coherent final package
- Keep the labelled proposal, verified source record, task versions and fixed key, information script, action plan and peer-response log. Identify approval status separately from document completion. A polished package may still be awaiting approval.
- Rehearse the presentation and three questions. Self-check: no invented data, question-method alignment, truthful sources, voluntary participation, clear analysis and limits, realistic next steps. After feedback, log the revision and recheck all linked sections before submitting the final candidate.
Present the rationale for planned research, defend choices with evidence, state what remains untested and keep document readiness separate from permission to collect data.
提交连贯的最终成果包
- 保留带标签的提案、验证过的来源记录、任务版本和固定标准答案、信息脚本、行动计划及同伴回应日志。将批准状态与文档完整性分开识别。一份精致的文件包可能仍在等待批准。
- 排练展示及三个问题。自我检查：无编造数据、提问与方法一致、来源真实、自愿参与、分析清晰且有局限、下一步切实可行。收到反馈后，记录修订并在提交最终候选版本前重新检查所有关联章节。
陈述计划研究的理由，用证据捍卫选择，说明哪些尚未经过测试，并保持文档准备就绪与收集数据的许可分开。
Which TWO items should be separately visible in a final package? · 最终包中哪两项内容应单独可见？
Document completion and permission are separate states. Neither implies universal findings. · 文件完成和许可是独立的状态。两者都不暗示普遍的研究结果。