Keep in mind that your project is not graded based on the feedback received about it—that feedback is meant to help you improve it for the final submission. The grade comes from your peers and how useful they found your feedback about their projects!
Provide feedback about the following topics:
Feedback should address the code organization (see Grader rubric below) and written communication (see Presentation rubric below). Help your classmates succeed.
Feedback should be specific—mention specific instances of things that could be improved and suggest specific ways to improve. For example, if a plot doesn’t convey the message well, suggest a better plot type, and explain why it would be better.
Feedback should be “meta” or “high level”—help the author think about the audience, the purpose, the conclusions—be thoughtful and give substantive help.
Feedback should be respectful and optimistic—do not criticize the author, and help them to recognize what they did well so that they can reinforce what’s working.
Feedback should be timely—don’t wait until the last minute. Give feedback soon enough that the author has time to use it.
Points | Description |
---|---|
5 | Feedback was specific – you know exactly what to improve, and what you did well |
5 | Feedback was “meta” – the feedback went beyond finding typos to helping you with higher-level improvements |
2 | Feedback was respectful and optimistic – you feel helped and encouraged after reading the feedback |
3 | Feedback was “timely” – you received the feedback in time to help you with your assignment |
Points | Description |
---|---|
5 | Code structured – code is on Github, includes a README, and a clear project structure |
5 | Code commented – code is commented and readily understood by the grader |
Points | Description |
---|---|
20 | Background – background and purpose is clearly stated |
15 | Data cited – sources of data are clearly stated |
15 | Figure Interpretation – how to read figures is clearly explained (e.g. what axes mean) |
25 | Analyses explained – purpose and interpretation of analyses are clearly described |
25 | Conclusions clear – main conclusions are unambiguous |