# Project Work This page is the one place for everything about the two projects. How they are graded, what is due and when, and the rubric I use to read them. It is built around a simple idea. Most of the work, and most of the feedback, happens in small pieces along the way, not in one big moment at the end. The six bins show that you have practiced. They do not show that you chose a question/model, defended/discussed assumptions, or decided when a model was good enough or what its limitations are. Those three judgments are what the projects are for. ## How project work is graded Project work is 21 percent of the course, and it is 21 points in Canvas, so a point is a percent. Every item is complete or incomplete. | Piece | Points | |---|---| | Five model review checkpoints, MA1 to MA5 | 1 each | | Five modeling project checkpoints, MP1 to MP5 | 1 each | | Model review final read, MA-R | 5.5 | | Modeling project final read, MP-R | 5.5 | So each project is worth 10.5 points, half from its checkpoints and half from its final read. Here is how that adds up with the 79 percent from the bins. | What you have done | Course total | |---|---| | The bins only | 79, a C | | One project's checkpoints | 84, a B | | One project complete | 89.5, a B+ | | One project complete, plus the other's checkpoints | 94.5, an A | | Both projects complete | 100 | An A takes both a model analysis (MA) and a modeling project (MP). One missed checkpoint is forgiven, in a project whose final read is complete. ## The checkpoints One short form a week, mostly due Fridays at 11:59 pm, alternating between the two projects so that no week gets heavy. | Due | Checkpoint | What it asks | |---|---|---| | Fri 9/25 | **MP1** One Question, and the First Arrow | Your question, your choice about the two projects, your first assumptions. Done. | | Wed 10/7 | **MP2** Variables and Equations | The quantities that get symbols, how they connect, and the mathematics underneath. Feedback comes back by Friday 10/9. | | Fri 10/9 | **MA1** Model Selection | Which model you will review, and why. Short, since most of you named one already. | | Fri 10/16 | **MP3** Initial Model and Test | Your first working model, and one check that it gives sensible answers. | | Fri 10/23 | **MA2** Source and Background | The original source, and what the model was first built to do. | | Fri 10/30 | | Nothing due. | | Fri 11/6 | **MA3** Assumptions, Variables, Equations, and their Contextual Meaning | The model in your own words, with what each piece means in the world. | | Fri 11/13 | **MA4** Insights and Limitations | What the model says about the world, and its limitations. | | Fri 11/20 | **MP4** Revised Model | What you revisited, and why. | | The class before your talk | **MA5** Intended Takeaways | The takeaway prompts, filled out by you for your own talk, before you give it. | | Wed 12/2 | **MP5** Poster Draft | A draft that passes the thirty second test. Feedback comes back by Friday 12/4. | %% Scott: MA5 as "the class before your talk" or a single "by 12/9". The canvasync spec asks the same question. %% Every checkpoint ends with the same question, **what changed since the last form, and why?** Read together, your answers to it are the evidence for learning and integration. Each checkpoint comes back with comments in the words of the rubric below, so you always know where each part of your project stands and whether anything is off course. By the time you present, there should be no surprises. ## The rubric Five questions, read at the checkpoints along the way and once more at the end. | Criterion | The question it asks | |---|---| | **Modeling process** | Can someone else say what problem was asked, what was assumed, what the symbols mean, and how they connect? | | **Presentation and clarity** | Does your audience always know where they are, and do your visuals help more than they distract? | | **Validity and correctness** | Is there a reason to believe the relationships, and a check that the calculations are right? | | **Application and insight** | What does the model say about the world, and what are its limitations? | | **Learning and integration** | What changed between versions, and why? | The same four levels apply to every question. | Level | Points | What it means | |---|---|---| | **Advanced** | 2 | The answer is there, plus something extra. An insight, an alternative you considered, an adjustment you wrote down. | | **Proficient** | 2 | The answer is there and holds up. | | **Developing** | 1 | The answer is partly there, or it is there with a gap. | | **Beginning** | 0 | The answer is missing or does not hold up. | As was suggested on the first day, each criterion is worth at most two points, with proficient counting as 2 and developing as 1. Advanced and proficient score the same. Advanced is how I tell you that something hit a little extra and that I noticed. ## The detailed descriptors These are the descriptors from the first day handout. The questions and levels above are the short version of this table. | Criterion | Advanced | Proficient | Developing | Beginning | |---|---|---|---|---| | **Modeling process** | All steps, plus insights, alternatives, documented adjustments. | All primary steps; assumptions and reasoning articulated. | Most steps, but gaps — missing assumptions or broken flow. | Steps hard to follow; structural gaps. | | **Presentation and clarity** | Organized and visually clear; effective labels; few errors. | Readable, well formatted; visuals mostly help. | Issues affect readability; visuals unclear or underused. | Frequent formatting problems; visuals distract. | | **Validity and correctness** | Represents the problem accurately; relationships justified, calculations verified. | Mostly accurate; minor unaddressed issues in assumptions or arithmetic. | Inaccuracies or unsupported assumptions; a rough approximation. | Fundamental errors that undermine validity. | | **Application and insight** | Addresses the problem; conclusions meaningful and possibly portable. | Adequate insight and real-world connection, not fully explored. | Partly addresses it; conclusions unaligned or unclear. | Does not address the problem; insights unclear. | | **Learning and integration** | Strong grasp; thoughtful reflection; meaningful adjustments. | Understands the concepts, takes on new ideas, some reflection. | Partial understanding; reflection thin or underdeveloped. | Limited understanding; minimal reflection. | ## The final read After your talk, and after the poster session, I read the project as a whole using the five questions. The assessment is considered **complete when no question is at beginning and at most two are at developing.** That is 8 of the 10 points. The read starts from where your checkpoints left things, so if the checkpoints have done their job, the final assessment mostly records the culmination of your progression, which you likely already know. ## What the talk is for **The talk is mostly about communication, plus a chance to show improvement.** By the time you present, the content of your project has already been seen at the checkpoints. The talk is where you find out whether what you meant to say made it into the room. - **Model review talks** happen during our last six meetings, Monday 11/23, Monday 11/30, Wednesday 12/2, Friday 12/4, Monday 12/7, and Wednesday 12/9. About three talks a day, each 12 to 15 minutes plus a few minutes of questions. - **Modeling project posters** happen during our final exam slot, Saturday 12/12 from 1pm-3pm. I will reserve two rooms in McNeil Hall so that you can use screens so we don't have to organize and pay for poster printing. A poster on a screen can move, so a short animation is welcome. The main point should land in about thirty seconds from across the room, and the poster should carry a conversation, including one you are not there for. We will have two sessions, where half of the group is audience and half presents. Each presenter is expected to take no more than six minutes presenting their poster. %% Scott: talk length is set to 12 to 15 minutes to match the department rubric. Change here if you settle on something else. %% During every talk, including mine, the audience fills out [[MATH310F26-AudienceCard.pdf|Audience Takeaways]], which asks for your question in one to two sentences, the key assumption, the main equation with its symbols named, the model's limitations, and one question for you. You get the sheets back, and comparing them with your own Intended Takeaways from MA5 is the most direct feedback on clarity you will ever get. ## Which steps each project uses The **model analysis (MA)** uses steps 1 through 4 of the modeling process from the first day handout. The **modeling project (MP)** uses all eight. 1. Problem definition. 2. Assumptions and simplifications. 3. Variables and relationships. 4. Formulation and meaning. 5. Implementation and interpretation. 6. Testing and refinement. 7. Interpretation and refinement. 8. Documentation and communication. A review stops at step 4 because you are not building anything new, but it still answers the insight question. Explaining what someone else's model says about the world, and what its limitations are, is most of what a review is. Steps 5 and 7 both say interpretation. In step 5 you interpret the tool, asking whether the code does what the mathematics says. In step 7 you interpret the output, asking what it means back in the world. The steps cover the same ground as the figure in [[MATH310F26 - The Modeling Cycle (Part 1)|The Modeling Cycle (Part 1)]], and like that figure they are not a checklist.