Project presentations and course synthesis

From a question to a defensible recommendation

Explain the question, design, estimate and next experiment.

Four groups of three; every member contributes.

Wednesday 2 December, 12:30–16:00.

Eight minutes, then questions

8-minute talk + 5-minute questions + 2-minute transition.

Feedback should identify evidence

Use the feedback sheet.

• One evidenced strength.
• One consequential question.
• One feasible revision.

A reviews B; B reviews C; C reviews D; D reviews A.

First pair of presentations

Provisional 12:40–13:10 · Groups A and B

Listen for how researchers assigned treatments to animals or pens, and which groups the presenters compare.

Record the estimate, uncertainty and one assumption that matters.

Feedback and shared issues

13:10–13:40

1. Reviewers finalise evidence and a useful revision.
2. Presenters clarify one question.
3. Compare units, uncertainty and planning assumptions.

Break 13:40–13:55.

Second pair of presentations

Provisional 13:55–14:25 · Groups C and D

Same format: 8 + 5 + 2 minutes per group.

Explain source, target and design before the fitted result.

Compare evidence across projects

14:25–14:55

• Did researchers assign treatments to individual animals or to whole pens? If no treatment was assigned, which farms or pasture groups did they select?
• What does the main interval describe?
• Which assumption changes a recommendation?
• What would the proposed experiment actually answer?

Break 14:55–15:10.

Adapt one aspect of your next study

15:10–15:40 · Design challenge cards

Write: target → constraint → revision → consequence → next check.

Weighing the same calf more often does not add more calves assigned to a diet.

State a changed question if your new design changes the target.

What can you now explain?

15:40–16:00 · Individual reflection

Connect one design choice to analysis or uncertainty.

Name one remaining question and the evidence you would seek.

Give separate feedback on the course.