Project proposal and pilot

These two checkpoints earn 5 points each and reduce the risk of building an oversized or uninterpretable project.

Proposal: before Meeting 4 (5 points)

Submit 300-500 words using the paper-to-prototype worksheet. A paper is optional. State a research question, a testable descriptive prediction, the manipulation/conditions, response, planned design, minimum item set, and data fields. Include a trial sequence sketch, a realistic classroom-sized scope, and one main limitation. If adapting a paper, identify the experiment/figure and clearly list what your version changes.

Scoring: question and manipulation 2; feasible implementation and timeline 2; source/limitations 1. Approval means “feasible as a course prototype,” not ethical approval or approval to recruit participants. Feedback should identify the smallest complete version to build next.

Pilot: before Meeting 5 (5 points)

Submit a runnable partial or complete experiment and one exported synthetic/self-test dataset, plus a pilot log. Exercise at least a normal response, a wrong response or invalid input, a missing response, and a loading/saving failure where relevant. Ask a classmate to read the instructions and voluntarily try a non-sensitive task; if that is impractical, use a second browser yourself and state that limitation. Do not record names or retain a classmate’s personal data.

Scoring: runnable path and usable export 2; documented tests including one edge case 2; prioritized fix list and next step 1. A discovered bug can strengthen the pilot report if you diagnose it honestly; an unexplained “everything worked” is weak evidence.

The final project should incorporate the feedback. If the server is unavailable, a local pilot remains valid for this checkpoint; record the deployment check still outstanding.