| Course | D650 Communications Applied Learning Capstone |
|---|---|
| Task | Task 2 |
| Paper type | Capstone presentation with speaker notes |
| Length | About 1,300 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 |
| School | Western Governors University (WGU) |
| Program | BS Communications |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for D650 Task 2
Seen, Then Chosen: Presenting and Defending the Results of a Listing and Day-Out Pilot in the Long-Stay Kennels of a Composite County Shelter
Student Name
School of Business, Western Governors University
D650: Communications Applied Learning Capstone, Task 2
Course Instructor
Month Day, Year
Slide 1: 190 Dogs, 40% of Kennel Days
Long-stay dogs: more than 30 days at Riverbend County Animal Services
190 dogs last year used about 40% of dog kennel days
Their listings drew 14 views a week; new dogs drew 96
Speaker notes: Thank you for having me. This project began with one number from the shelter's records: 190 dogs stayed longer than 30 days last year, and those dogs used about 40% of our dog kennel days. When I looked at their listings, I found the other half of the problem. A dog in its first week got about 96 listing views a week. A long-stay dog got 14. Adopters were not rejecting these dogs. Most of them never saw these dogs at all. So the question for this capstone was a communication question: can we change how these dogs are presented, and does it change what happens to them?
Slide 2: Three Questions
Do rewritten listings bring more views and inquiries?
Does a day-out story add more?
Are dogs in either group adopted sooner?
Speaker notes: The proposal set three research questions, and I have kept them exactly as approved so you can hold the results against them. The first asks about attention: views and inquiries. The second asks whether a story from a volunteer outing adds anything beyond a better listing. The third asks about the outcome that matters most to the dogs and to the budget, which is time to adoption.
Slide 3: What We Changed and How We Compared
Eight weeks; every dog reaching day 30 assigned by coin flip
Comparison: standard listing (12 dogs)
Rewritten listing: outdoor photos, personality-first description (11 dogs)
Rewritten listing plus a day-out outing and story (11 dogs)
Speaker notes: Thirty-four dogs reached 30 days during the eight weeks. A coin flip put each dog in one of three groups, so staff could not steer the most adoptable dogs toward the new listings. Each rewritten listing carried three or more volunteer photos shot outdoors and a 100-to-150-word description opening with a scene from the dog's day. The outing group also went out with a volunteer for two to three hours, and a short post with photos was added to the listing. The design follows published research. Lampe and Witte (2015) found that photo quality, eye contact and outdoor settings were linked to faster adoption. Overnight fostering is known to lower shelter dogs' stress (Gunter et al., 2019), and Gunter et al. (2021) suggested that shorter outings might help adoptions by making dogs more visible, a question no one had yet tested.
Slide 4: Attention Rose With Each Change
Average weekly listing views: 15 standard, 41 rewritten, 58 rewritten plus outing
Inquiries per dog: 1.1 standard, 2.6 rewritten, 3.9 rewritten plus outing
Speaker notes: Here is the first answer. Rewritten listings nearly tripled weekly views, from 15 to 41, and the outing group reached 58. Inquiries followed the same pattern, rising from about one per dog to almost four. What does this mean for the shelter? The long-stay dogs were never unwanted in the way we assumed. Once adopters could see a dog outside a kennel, lying in the grass or riding in a car, they asked about that dog. The outing story added attention on top of the new listing, which answers the second question with a cautious yes.
Slide 5: Dogs Went Home Sooner
Median days from day 30 to adoption: 31 standard, 20 rewritten, 16 rewritten plus outing
Same period last year, all long-stay dogs: 33 days
Returns within 30 days: 1 standard, 1 rewritten, 0 outing
Speaker notes: The third question is the one the director asked me to answer most carefully. Dogs with standard listings waited a median of 31 more days after reaching day 30, close to last year's 33. Dogs with rewritten listings waited 20, and dogs with outings waited 16. At about $22 per kennel day, the 22 dogs in the two new groups used roughly 280 fewer kennel days than they would have at the comparison group's pace, about $6,200 in care over eight weeks. We also checked for a hidden cost. If better listings had oversold dogs, we would expect more returns. There was one return in each listing group and none among outing dogs, so we saw no sign of poorer matches.
Slide 6: What These Results Can and Cannot Claim
34 dogs: a pilot, not proof
Coin-flip groups make the comparison fair, not large
One season; staff knew which dogs were in which group
Speaker notes: I want to defend these results by being clear about their limits. Thirty-four dogs is a small sample. The coin flip means the groups are comparable, but with 11 or 12 dogs per group, one unusual adoption can move a median by several days. The pilot ran in early fall, and adoption seasons differ. And because staff knew which dogs had new listings, some may have talked those dogs up at the front desk. For those reasons, I describe this as strong pilot evidence that the approach works here, not as a proven effect. The direction was consistent across all three measures, which is what gives me confidence to recommend continuing.
Slide 7: Feedback That Changed the Project
Second week: needs moved from the last line to a clear Good Match For section
Fourth week: outing posts shortened to three photos and two sentences
Volunteer survey: outings are the favorite task; photo sessions need a schedule
Speaker notes: The shelter's feedback shaped the project as it ran. Early on, the adoption supervisor pointed out that putting a dog's needs at the very end made some adopters feel misled when they reached the front desk. We added a short Good Match For section, which kept descriptions honest and may explain the low return rate. Halfway through, volunteers told me outing posts were taking them up to an hour to write, so we cut them to three photos and two sentences. The end-of-project survey showed that volunteers enjoyed outings more than any other task, but that photo sessions only happened reliably when they had a fixed weekly time.
Slide 8: Recommendations
Rewrite every listing at day 21, before a dog becomes long-stay
Make outings a standing weekly volunteer role
Keep the coin-flip comparison for one more season
Track views, inquiries, days to adoption and returns monthly
Speaker notes: Based on these results, I recommend four steps. First, rewrite listings at day 21 rather than day 30, so dogs never slide to the bottom of the sites. Second, make outings a standing weekly role with a sign-up sheet, since volunteers want to do it. Third, keep the comparison for one more season with a larger group, so the shelter can confirm the effect in winter. Fourth, report the four measures monthly on one page. The listing guide, photo checklist and outing post template are already in the shared drive. The cost is mostly volunteer time, and the pilot suggests each rewritten listing saves about a week and a half of kennel days.
Slide 9: Questions
Thank you
Listing guide, templates and data file are in the shelter's shared drive
Speaker notes: That is the project. I would welcome your questions about the design, the results or how the shelter could run this without a capstone student. One question I expect is whether the outing effect could simply be the extra photos. That is possible, and the next season's comparison could separate the two by adding outdoor photos without an outing for some dogs.
References
Gunter, L. M., Feuerbacher, E. N., Gilchrist, R. J., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2019). Evaluating the effects of a temporary fostering program on shelter dog welfare. PeerJ, 7, Article e6620. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6620
Gunter, L. M., Gilchrist, R. J., Blade, E. M., Barber, R. T., Feuerbacher, E. N., Platzer, J. M., & Wynne, C. D. L. (2021). Investigating the impact of brief outings on the welfare of dogs living in US shelters. Animals, 11(2), Article 548. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020548
Lampe, R., & Witte, T. H. (2015). Speed of dog adoption: Impact of online photo traits. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 18(4), 343-354. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2014.982796
What the D650 Task 2 instructions ask
The second D650 task asks you to present your completed capstone and defend its results, usually as a recorded or slide presentation with notes. Your instructions typically want the problem and research questions restated, the approach you actually used, results for each question, interpretation of what those results mean for the organization, limitations, stakeholder feedback and how it shaped the work, and recommendations. The word defend matters. You are expected to explain why your conclusions follow from your evidence and to anticipate reasonable doubts. A presentation that walks through activities week by week and then lists figures on a final slide shows effort but not analysis, and it tends to be sent back for the interpretation aspects even when the project itself went well.
How this D650 Task 2 example is built
The deck opens with the problem in one number and a gap in listing views, then restates the three research questions exactly as approved. A method slide explains the coin-flip groups and the research that shaped them. Two results slides each state figures and then interpret them in the notes, with the second converting shorter stays into roughly 280 kennel days and about $6,200. A limits slide addresses sample size, season and staff awareness before the recommendations, which makes the defense credible. The feedback slide shows three changes the shelter or volunteers caused, including a Good Match For section. Recommendations are four concrete steps with the templates already delivered, and the closing slide anticipates the likeliest question from the audience.
Where the D650 Task 2 rubric puts the marks
The D650 Task 2 rubric aspects are marked competent, approaching competence or not evident, and several focus on reasoning rather than delivery. One aspect confirms that every research question has a reported finding and that the figures are right. Others judge whether you have explained the significance of those findings for the host organization. The defense or justification aspect looks for conclusions supported by evidence and honest handling of limitations. Stakeholder feedback aspects want to see how input changed the project, not only that meetings occurred. Recommendation aspects reward specific next steps the organization can take. Presentation aspects cover clear, readable slides and complete speaker notes or narration, and sources must be credited in APA style on a references slide or page.
D650 Task 2 help: what sends it back
The capstone presentation comes back most often when results are shown without the so-what. After every figure, say what it means for the organization in its own terms, such as days, dollars or people served. A second problem is hiding the limits; evaluators trust a defense more when you name the weaknesses in your design and explain why the conclusions still hold. Third, students describe feedback as a list of meetings. Show a specific change that feedback produced. Fourth, slides crowded with paragraphs are hard to follow, so keep bullets short and put the explanation in the notes. Finally, make sure the questions you answer are the ones you proposed in Task 1. Changing them without explanation makes the project look unplanned.
Get a D650 Task 2 example written to your instructions
Send the task instructions and rubric aspects from your D650 course of study. We write a custom capstone presentation and defense to those exact aspects, returned in 24-48h. The first custom sample is free.
More D650 papers
Other Business (BS) sample papers
- D078 Task 2 Entity and Legal Analysis
- D643 Task 1 Problem Analysis and Plan
- QHT1 Task 3 Innovation Essay
- D358 Task 1 Global HR Process Plan
D650 Task 2 questions, answered
How many slides should a D650 Task 2 presentation have?
Your instructions and any time limit decide the length. This sample uses nine slides with detailed notes, enough to cover the problem, method, results, limits, feedback and recommendations without rushing any of them.
Does D650 Task 2 need speaker notes?
If you submit slides rather than a recording, notes carry your explanation and are where most interpretation happens. This sample keeps bullets short on screen and puts the reasoning in full sentences underneath each slide.
What if my D650 results were weak or mixed?
Report them honestly and interpret them. A defense is judged on reasoning, so explaining why a result was small, what limited the design and what you would change can still meet the rubric.
Should D650 Task 2 include references?
Yes, credit any research you rely on in APA style, usually on a final references slide or page. This sample cites the listing photo and shelter outing studies that shaped the project design.
Where can I find a free D650 Task 2 sample paper?
Every slide and every speaker note is reproduced above, along with margin comments. If your capstone results differ, send them with your D650 task and the desk prepares a first custom presentation at no charge.