Introduction¶
Throughout this course, you have progressively developed the skills required to conduct and share reproducible research.
The purpose of this final laboratory is to reflect on these experiences and discuss how they contribute to reproducible and sustainable scientific research.
Presentation¶
The presentation must be prepared using Google Slides.
The presentation duration must be between 8 and 10 minutes.
Both team members must actively participate in the presentation.
A question period will follow each presentation. Questions may be asked by classmates and the teaching staff.
Structure¶
Introduction (1 min)¶
Introduce your team and your research project.
Topics to address:
What was the goal of your research project?
What artifacts were produced (data, code, documentation, etc.)?
How did your understanding of reproducible research evolve throughout the course?
Project Experience (2-3 min)¶
Critically analyze the project developed by your team.
Topics to address:
Challenges encountered during development
Repository organization and management
What would you do differently if repeating the project?
Collaboration in Open Science (3-4 min)¶
Reflect on how the activities performed throughout the course relate to real-world scientific collaboration and reproducible research.
Topics to address:
External Review and Feedback
Cost of reproductibility
Benefits and Limitations
Selected thematic focus (1-2 min)¶
Each presentation must integrate one of the following themes:
Dissemination of Research Artifacts with Borealis
Collaboration workflow and branching strategy (challenges and benefits)
Sustainability of a reproducible project
Scientific collaboration in Open Science
Conclusion (1 min)¶
Summarize your main takeaways from the course.
Topics to address:
Recommandations for futur students
Which activity had the greatest impact on your understanding?
Evaluation¶
The presentation will be evaluated through a Google Form completed by both peers and the teaching staff.
The final grade is composed equally of peer evaluation and instructor evaluation (50% each).
Evaluation criteria¶
Evaluation criteria¶
| Criterion | Weight | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Time management and structure | 10% | Respect of the allocated duration (8–10 minutes) and adherence to the required presentation structure. |
| Introduction | 10% | Clear presentation of the team and research project and a brief reflection on the evolution of your understanding of reproducible research throughout the course. |
| Project experience | 20% | Evidence of critical reflection on design choices, challenges encountered, and what would be done differently. |
| Collaboration in Open Science | 30% | Clear identification and explanation of the cost of reproducibility, as well as the benefits and limitations of reproducible research. Critical reflection on external review, feedback processes, and the role of communication in Open Science practices. |
| Selected thematic | 10% | Integration of one required thematic focus with a clear connection to the team’s own project experience. |
| Conclusion | 10% | Synthesis of the main takeaways from the course, including at least one recommendation for future students and a reflection on which activity had the greatest impact on the team’s understanding of reproducible research. |
| Oral communication and structure clarity | 10% | Logical sequencing of ideas across the presentation, clarity of explanations, and adequate visual support |