Difference between revisions of "CS382:Reviewers Notes"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Third Pass Notes) |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | == Third Pass Notes == | ||
| + | For Reviewers: | ||
| + | * Protected namespace for reviewers called "Grading" | ||
| + | * Grading page will be a matrix with the left column being the unit template outline, followed by an integer value from 0-3 for each unit for each item on the template | ||
| + | ** 0: Nothing? | ||
| + | ** 1: Minimal effort | ||
| + | ** 2: It's coming along... | ||
| + | ** 3: Good stuff | ||
| + | * If the value is less than 3 for any part of a unit, comments will be written below for that section/subsection for that unit | ||
| + | * Calendar test: Ian | ||
| + | * Syllabus: Charlie | ||
| + | ** Copy-editing: Kay and Ian | ||
| + | * TA tasks: pending labs' completion | ||
| + | * (Realistic deadline: end of May) | ||
| + | * Lab requirements should (theoretically) be in each unit. | ||
| + | * Catalog description: [https://wiki.cs.earlham.edu/index.php/CS382:Structure-deliverables already written]? | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Second Pass Notes == | ||
| + | * Each of the reviewers (Ian, Kay, Charlie) will review 6 units; Kay starts with What's a Model, Ian with Visualization, and Charlie Agent Based. | ||
| + | * All of our comments should go in-line in the unit's wiki page using the appropriate color. Let's not also send them an email with additional comments. | ||
| + | * We should be finished reviewing the second drafts by Friday March 13th. | ||
| + | * Use the unit template as a guideline - 0, 1, 2 points for each top-level heading (not home, somewhat viable, seems reasonable) | ||
| + | * Have they addressed all comments? (Class wiki, unit wiki, emailed notes) | ||
| + | * Review the lab section closely, this will be the focus of the next draft. Are the process and the outcomes specified clearly? Materials? | ||
| + | * Do all the questions have answers? CRS and quiz questions? | ||
| + | * Completeness check WRT the assignment page | ||
| + | * Is the reading section broken-down? Are the particular sections to be read identified? | ||
| + | * Lecture notes: is what needs to be taught adequately outlined? At least so the teacher knows what needs to be covered? | ||
| + | |||
| + | == First Pass Notes == | ||
| + | For everyone (mostly): | ||
| + | * Make sure you have an abstract, and overview of the unit's intent and purpose | ||
| + | * Draw up estimates of the cost of your unit for the worst case scenario (80 students) | ||
| + | * Questions? Silly? Too hard? | ||
| + | |||
General process for the first draft review: | General process for the first draft review: | ||
* Use copy and paste to insert comments into each unit. | * Use copy and paste to insert comments into each unit. | ||
* Whenever we make a review comment on a page, add the "Reviewer" tag so that the wiki can track comments for us. | * Whenever we make a review comment on a page, add the "Reviewer" tag so that the wiki can track comments for us. | ||
* Charlie will take care of tracking when things are turned-in and deducting points as need be. | * Charlie will take care of tracking when things are turned-in and deducting points as need be. | ||
| − | * Reviewer colors - Ian = | + | * Reviewer colors - <font color=darkmagenta>Ian = darkmagenta</font>, <font color=red>Charlie = red</font>, <font color=blue>Kay = blue</font>, Dylan = green |
Review checklist for the first draft review: | Review checklist for the first draft review: | ||
| Line 13: | Line 48: | ||
**is there enough, too much | **is there enough, too much | ||
**is it at the right level | **is it at the right level | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 09:51, 21 April 2009
Third Pass Notes
For Reviewers:
- Protected namespace for reviewers called "Grading"
- Grading page will be a matrix with the left column being the unit template outline, followed by an integer value from 0-3 for each unit for each item on the template
- 0: Nothing?
- 1: Minimal effort
- 2: It's coming along...
- 3: Good stuff
- If the value is less than 3 for any part of a unit, comments will be written below for that section/subsection for that unit
- Calendar test: Ian
- Syllabus: Charlie
- Copy-editing: Kay and Ian
- TA tasks: pending labs' completion
- (Realistic deadline: end of May)
- Lab requirements should (theoretically) be in each unit.
- Catalog description: already written?
Second Pass Notes
- Each of the reviewers (Ian, Kay, Charlie) will review 6 units; Kay starts with What's a Model, Ian with Visualization, and Charlie Agent Based.
- All of our comments should go in-line in the unit's wiki page using the appropriate color. Let's not also send them an email with additional comments.
- We should be finished reviewing the second drafts by Friday March 13th.
- Use the unit template as a guideline - 0, 1, 2 points for each top-level heading (not home, somewhat viable, seems reasonable)
- Have they addressed all comments? (Class wiki, unit wiki, emailed notes)
- Review the lab section closely, this will be the focus of the next draft. Are the process and the outcomes specified clearly? Materials?
- Do all the questions have answers? CRS and quiz questions?
- Completeness check WRT the assignment page
- Is the reading section broken-down? Are the particular sections to be read identified?
- Lecture notes: is what needs to be taught adequately outlined? At least so the teacher knows what needs to be covered?
First Pass Notes
For everyone (mostly):
- Make sure you have an abstract, and overview of the unit's intent and purpose
- Draw up estimates of the cost of your unit for the worst case scenario (80 students)
- Questions? Silly? Too hard?
General process for the first draft review:
- Use copy and paste to insert comments into each unit.
- Whenever we make a review comment on a page, add the "Reviewer" tag so that the wiki can track comments for us.
- Charlie will take care of tracking when things are turned-in and deducting points as need be.
- Reviewer colors - Ian = darkmagenta, Charlie = red, Kay = blue, Dylan = green
Review checklist for the first draft review:
- completeness check WRT the assignment page
- is each item addressed with more than a header?
- layout, does this show clear thinking about the presentation? will this develop
- read background reading, make sure they make sense and are relevant
- is it reasonable
- is there enough, too much
- is it at the right level
