Same metric, same method, same place
The after-measurement must mirror the baseline exactly: the same number, collected the same way, at the same spot, at comparable times. Change the method and you have two different studies, not a before and after.
Dated photos from the same standing position are the cheapest rigor available. One photo before, one after, same angle. A reviewer, a principal or a funder understands that pair instantly.
Honest results only
Some interventions will not work. The rota collapses in week three, the drain re-blocks, the temperature barely moves. Write it down anyway. A documented failure teaches the next street more than an inflated success.
You have heard this standard twice already: we publish definitions before numbers, and we never teach a number we cannot source. Your project inherits it. No massaged results, ever.
The one-page report
Everything lands on one page: problem statement, boundary, baseline, intervention, after-measurement, what you would do differently. Plus the two photos. That format is deliberate: one page gets read, twelve pages get filed.
These one-pagers become part of Cylin's open-source toolkit, so a student in Ibadan or Kano can copy your working. Write it so a stranger could rerun your project without meeting you.
Hold on to these
- After must mirror before: same metric, method, place.
- Documented failure beats inflated success.
- One page, two photos, reproducible by a stranger.
Check yourself
No grades here. If you can answer these out loud, you own the lesson.
- 1.How will your after-measurement mirror your baseline exactly?
- 2.What result would count as failure, and will you publish it?
- 3.Could a stranger rerun your project from your one-pager alone?