Final Open Project
Final Open Project Assignment
The final project is a small, self-contained research or demonstration project that applies the full open science workflow you’ve learned throughout the course. Working individually or in pairs (with instructor approval), you’ll create a public GitHub repository containing data (or simulated/open data), analysis code, a fully reproducible Quarto report or site, and comprehensive documentation. The project culminates in a 5–10 minute in-class presentation during Week 14. Key milestones include a proposal (Week 6), peer-reviewed draft (Week 11), and final submission (Week 14) worth 40% of your grade.
Final Open Project Rubric
The final open project is evaluated using the rubric below. Each criterion is scored on a 4–point scale:
- 4 = Exemplary
- 3 = Proficient
- 2 = Developing
- 1 = Beginning
Summary Table
| Criterion | Weight | 4 – Exemplary | 3 – Proficient | 2 – Developing | 1 – Beginning |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reproducibility of Workflow | 25% | Fully reproducible from clean clone with clear, automated steps | Mostly reproducible; minor manual steps or ambiguities | Partially reproducible; key steps undocumented | Not reproducible; major steps missing or unclear |
| Openness & Licensing | 20% | Appropriate licenses for code & content; clearly documented | Appropriate licenses with minor gaps in documentation | Licenses present but unclear or incomplete | No clear licensing; reuse terms ambiguous |
| Documentation & Organization | 20% | Repository is logically structured; README and docs are thorough and easy to follow | Structure is mostly clear; documentation covers main elements | Structure somewhat confusing; limited documentation | Disorganized repository; minimal or no documentation |
| Technical Quality & Rigor | 20% | Methods appropriate and clearly implemented; code and results are accurate and well explained | Methods generally appropriate; minor issues in code or explanation | Methods partially appropriate; noticeable errors or unclear reasoning | Methods inappropriate or unclear; serious errors |
| Communication & Presentation | 15% | Report/site and presentation are clear, coherent, and engaging; story of the project is easy to follow | Communication is clear overall; some minor issues with flow or emphasis | Main ideas present but organization or clarity uneven | Difficult to follow; key ideas not clearly communicated |
Criterion Details
Reproducibility of Workflow (25%)
- Clear instructions in the
README(or dedicated section) for how to set up and run the project. - All necessary files (data, code, configuration) are present or clearly sourced.
- Use of scripted or automated steps (e.g., Quarto render, Makefile, or equivalent) where appropriate.
Openness and Licensing (20%)
- Explicit licenses for:
- Code (e.g., MIT, GPL, Apache).
- Text, figures, and teaching materials (e.g., Creative Commons).
- Licensing information is easy to find and understand.
- Citations and attributions are used where materials from others are included.
Documentation and Organization (20%)
- Logical folder structure (e.g.,
data/,code/,docs/,outputs/). READMEclearly explains project purpose, data sources, main files, and how to reproduce results.- Additional documentation (e.g., data dictionary, comments in code) supports reuse.
Technical Quality and Rigor (20%)
- Methods are appropriate for the research question or demonstration goal.
- Code runs without errors under reasonable conditions.
- Results are interpreted correctly and limitations are acknowledged.
Communication and Presentation (15%)
- Written report or site is clearly structured (introduction, methods, results, discussion).
- Visuals (tables, figures) are readable, labeled, and integrated into the narrative.
- In-class presentation effectively summarizes the project and highlights open/reproducible practices.
Scoring and Feedback
- Final score is computed by applying the weights above to each criterion score.
- Written feedback will highlight:
- Strengths to carry forward into future work.
- 1–3 specific areas for improvement in openness, reproducibility, or communication.