Assignments Due
Week 7 checkpoints should be submitted by Monday, 02/19/2018 at 11:59 PM PST.
Perform
Group 2: Facebook Critique (100%, 10 points)
Is the “Facebook Experiment” lousy science? Galen Panger thinks so, and he had the gall to make some bad publicity for Facebook. Now their credibility is on the line with other principles and stakeholders who each have different views, which may be sympathetic, indifferent, or hostile to Panger’s argument. How do the interests at stake for each actor affect what they feel they know about the Facebook Experiment? How does the science relate to what people say about the science?
Whereas last week you analyzed the Facebook Experiment controversy candidly, this week you’ll comment publicly to advance your interests within the moment opened up by Panger “scandalization” of the experiment.
While crafting the position you want to take publically, you should mention one or two of the other interests groups considered in this role play. Decide who you wish to influence, both in their understanding of and response to the scandal, because you think they might help or hurt your interests. The roles again were:
- Facebook executives
- Facebook data scientists
- Facebook users
- Stakeholders*
- Advertisers
- Mental health professionals/advocates
- Competitors
* If you choose a stakeholder it should be the one actually chosen by another group.
Public statement
Prepare public remarks that
(A slide deck, submitted and presented in class)
- This is what Panger said
- This is our role with respect to the Facebook Experiment
- Panger is right/wrong
- About us
- About the science
- This is the truth, take it from us (i.e. reclaim the argument)
- This is why it matters
- This is what we’re doing about it
- This is what you (the actors we are most concerned about) should do about it, and why
Start with the slide deck template and be sure to maintain the 4:3 aspect ratio. The deck should be 5-6 slides including a title slide, and you should present it in 6-8 minutes. The content should be in a similar sequence to the bullets above, but you can choose how to distribute the elements across the slides. Do not fail to rehearse your presentation; in class should not be the first time you are delivering it as a team.
Submission Instructions
This week’s a doozy as far as submission items.
As with your first presentation, you must pre-record this presentation and submit it as an .mp4 recording. Follow the tutorial to learn how. It’s ok if your team chooses a host who didn’t do it the first time, but the members of the team who have done it should help them out.
We need files in 5 folders found here:
DOC MemoDOC Presentation(with notes)MP4 Presentation(max 25MB and 10 minutes)PDF MemoPDF Presentation(full images, no notes)In addition, the
MP4 Presentationmust also be uploaded by one member of the team as Group Submission 2 on the ISVC.
Sorry for the extra step, but this allows us to provide video comments to the team privately.
Share your preparation and presentation burdens as evenly as possible, and set reasonable boundaries for the amount of time you will take to complete the work. Help each other so nobody becomes either a freeloader or a martyr. If you feel that despite your best organizing efforts the workload is not being shared evenly on the team you may make a confidential comment to your instructor by email or direct message on Slack.
How to submit
Compose
Individual 2: Big Idea 2 (50%)
So you were in love with your first idea? Don’t be too sad to turn away, because it was just one draw from your creative urn. Move forward, don’t look back, and focus on the how of quickly creating a concept from start to finish. As did your first, your second proposal should encapsulate the fundamental elements of problem, solution, and the difference it makes. Call it a seed that you can easily plant in the minds of an audience, and if they are interested they will help you to make it grow. If they don’t like a concept, no big loss, because you can reimagine it or move on to the next big idea.
Expand the foundation you laid down last week in 02.Rmd into a 500-800 word draft.
When you expand the beginning, remember how important it is to be clear about who the client is. It is the client’s struggles that allow you to begin to clarify the problem.
Before you expand the middle, think carefully about the basics of your research design. The problem is bigger than you can solve in one go; let your design carve off a manageable chunk of the larger strategy. Include a research question at the beginning of your middle, and let the RQ make a more precise, scientific statement about the general problem you introduced at the beginning. Describe the data and methods you would use to create results or findings that would answer the question and thereby contribute to decision making.
Results are information you serve to a client without too much interpretation. Findings are when you take the extra step to interpet and explain the meaning of the results to the client. You should charge more if you are preparing findings!
In your ending, explain the difference the solution makes, that is, how the output (results or findings) would be used by clients. Trumpet the practical gains you expect for your client. Be honest about what is left to do. Mention risks and pitfalls, but always end by reinforcing the valued added by your solution.
How to submit
Figure 24: Squashing Commits from Branch to Master
Continue making incremental commits to 02.Rmd on your idea2 branch. Only when you are ready to submit your “final first draft”, merge your idea2 branch into master. There should be no merge conflicts if you only continued editing 02.Rmd on idea2.
On GitHub.com, create a pull request from idea2 into master.
Change the default “Merge pull request” button (big green button at bottom of PR) by clicking the white arrow, and select “Squash and Merge” instead.
What’s the difference? Squash and Merge will collapse all of the incremental commits on idea2 into one commit in master, leaving a much cleaner commit history for master. The laborious details will still be viewable on idea2, but most of that complexity may productively be forgotten in master. This will also allow others to provide feedback on a single commit, instead of across a collection of commits where details can be easily lost.