your final project will be to analyze some quantitative literature on a complex
topic in
detail culminating in a report (10-25 pages) and a oral presentation
(8-10 minutes). the oral presentations will take place during the last 2 weeks
of classes as well as the final exam period. the written reports will
be due during the final exam period.
the material you analyze should be decided in consultation with me, and
you should give me a proposal for your project by october 31.
the material could be something like a book, a major research paper together
with a newspaper/magazine report summarizing it (including an analysis of
how faithful the media article is to the researcher's claims), or multiple
articles on a single topic taking different points of view. (even if you just
want to analyze one article, you will need to compare it with external
material, similar to how we've sometimes compared silver's claims to other
references.) however, i do ask that your project be on material you have
not read before.
here are some suggestions for possible topics, broadly:
- climate change
- effect of tax laws/cuts
- gender pay gap
- gun control laws and safety
- immigration vs crime rate or unemployment
- is organic food healthier/GMO unsafe?
- is most research false?
- racial/sexual/religious prejudice
grading guidelines/instructions
all of the following will factored in to your final project grade.
if you have questions or concerns, please ask me sooner rather than later.
proposals and summaries:
- turn in your initial proposal (< 1 page) by oct 31. if it's just a book,
just
say what book you plan to analyze, and let me know what it's about if it's
not a book on the list. otherwise, explain your topic and what sources
you plan to use.
- turn in your draft summary (1-3 pages not counting any graphics, typed)
by nov 28.
this should introduce your topic, give a brief summary of the material
you analyze, and summarize your assessment of it. a polished version of this
will make up the first couple pages of your report.
oral presentation:
presentations will be graded primarily on preparedness and clarity.
- presentations will occur during the final 2 weeks of class and the
scheduled final exam period (mon dec 12).
- presentations should start by explaining your project summary and
then going into more detail on one or two aspects of your critique.
- presentations should be 8-10 minutes in length. afterwards there
will be about 2 minutes to take 1 or 2 questions (from me or other students).
due to time constraints, you cannot go over this time, so do a couple of
practice runs beforehand to figure out what exactly to say and get the timing
down.
- prepare slides (e.g., powerpoint). the first slide should have
your name and the title of your talk. preferably include some graphs or
tables to illustrate the data you talk about. rules of thumb:
try not to put too much on
one slide, and aim for around 5-10 slides, so you spend 1-2 minutes/slide.
you can either print these off and use the document camera or use the
vga or hdmi connector with a laptop.
written report:
this will be graded on clarity, how well thought out it is, and following
instructions.
- your report should roughly be 10-25 pages (single-spaced, 1-in margins,
standard font not more than 12pt). you can make a separate title page
or just put your title at the top of the 1st page, but a title page will
not count to the page limit. graphics/figures are allowed (encouraged)
but if you have a lot of graphics, i'll expect more than the minimum 10 pages.
- you can be more informal than a proper scientific report (e.g., you
can use the first person, and make jokes) but write in complete and coherent
sentences.
- one point of the minimum length requirement is to get you to do a
thorough analysis. however, you should express your own thoughts concisely
and not ramble. organize your thoughts. revision is your friend.
- the report should begin with a summary (about 1-3 pages),
discussed above.
- the main body should be an account of the material you are analyzing
together with its analysis. you may organize this how you like, e.g.,
explain your book/article first and then do analysis, or interweave them.
- the report should end with a conclusions section, then a references
section. (you can also put appendices/graphs/tables at somewhere at the end
or include this information in the regular text.)
- the conclusions section should contain your final overall assessment of
the material you analyze, including uncertainties/concerns/limitations,
as well as further thoughts you have on the topic.
this should contain more than just what you say in the project summary
at the beginning.
-
there should be at least 3 references (books or articles---wikipedia
and the like do not count towards these 3), including the primary material
you are analyzing. this can include for instance checking a couple of your
book/article's references to see that they contain what is claimed and seem
reasonable, as well as critiques or counterpoints to your book/article by
other authors.
- if you are doing a book, it is unlikely you can analyze every chapter
in detail in the space alloted. you should summarize the main
themes of the book, pick out some of the author's crucial arguments
and explain and analyze those in detail.
- suggestion: keep in mind the points in my tips
on analyses.
possible topics
here are some suggestions for possible books:
- a disgrace to the profession, by mark steyn (climate change)
- bad science or bad pharma by ben goldacre (medicine)
- black stats or pushout by monique morris (race)
- climate shock or climate casino
- closing the opportunity gap: what america must do to give every
child an even chance
- freakonomics, by levitt and dubner, or a follow-up (economics)
- limits to growth: the 30-year update, by meadows, randers and meadows
(population growth)
- outliers or the tipping point by malcolm gladwell
- predictably irrational, by dan ariely
- superforecasting, by tetlock and gardner (forecasting)
- the black swan or another book by nassim taleb (improbable events)
- the death and life of the great american school system, by diane ravitch
- the end of poverty or the age of sustainable development by jeffrey sachs (economics)
- the greatest hoax, by james inhofe (climate change)
- the half life of facts, by samuel arbesman (science)
- the invisible gorilla, by chabris and simons (perception)
- the long thaw, by david archer (climate change)
- the sixth extinction: an unnatural history, by elizabeth kolbert
- thinking, fast and slow, by daniel kahneman (psychology)
- weapons of math destruction, by cathy o'neil (big data/economics)
- will college pay off?, by peter cappelli (education/economics)
and research articles:
- assessing the unreliablity of the medical literature: a response to
"why most published research findings are false", by goodman and greenland
- estimating the reproduciblity of psychological science, by nosek et al
- the nature and origin of misperceptions, by flynn, nyhan and reifler
(politics/perception)
- why most published research findings are false, by ioannidis
|