Editing Community Data Science Course (Spring 2016)

From CommunityData

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 132: Line 132:


In general, I prefer that students feel they can "politely interrupt" at any time to seek clarification or make a well-informed point.
In general, I prefer that students feel they can "politely interrupt" at any time to seek clarification or make a well-informed point.
=== Grading ===
TODOREVIEW
I have put together a very detailed page that describes [the grading rubric] we will be using in this course. Please read it carefully I will assign grades for each of following items on the UW 4.0 grade scale according to the weights below:
* Participation: 30%
* Final project idea: 5%
* Final project proposal 10%
* Final project presentation: 15%
* Final paper: 40%


=== Weekly Coding Challenges ===
=== Weekly Coding Challenges ===
Line 137: Line 149:
Each week I will give you all a set of weekly coding challenges before the end of class that will involve changing or adding to code that I've given you as part of the projects in the final parts of class to solve new problems. These coding challenges '''will not be turned in''' and '''will not be graded'''.
Each week I will give you all a set of weekly coding challenges before the end of class that will involve changing or adding to code that I've given you as part of the projects in the final parts of class to solve new problems. These coding challenges '''will not be turned in''' and '''will not be graded'''.


I will share my solutions answers to each of the coding challenges by Wednesday morning of class. As you will see over the course of the quarter, there are many possible solutions to many programming problems and my own approaches will often be different than yours. That's completely fine! Coding is a creative act!
I will share my solutions answers to each of the coding challenges by Monday morning of class in a Canvas discussion threads. As you will see over the course of the quarter, there are many possible solutions to many programming problems and my own approaches will often be different than yours. That's completely fine! Coding is a creative act!


Please do not share answers to challenges before midnight on Sunday so that everybody has a chance to work through answers on their own. After midnight on Sunday, you are all welcome to share your solutions and/or to discuss different approaches.  We will discuss the coding challenges for a short period of time at the beginning of each class.
Please do not share answers to challenges before midnight on Tuesday so that everybody has a chance to work through answers on their own. After midnight on Tuesday, you are all welcome to share your solutions and/or to discuss different approaches.  We will discuss the coding challenges for a short period of time at the beginning of each class.


== Schedule ==
== Schedule ==
Line 319: Line 331:
Rating-scale grades are based on the faculty member's assessment of each assignment as opposed to a calculation from earned and possible points. The broad criteria for the ratings are given below. The ratings for some assignments may be multiplied by a constant (e.g. 2 or 3) so as to count more toward the final grade. The final grade is calculated as the average of all ratings.
Rating-scale grades are based on the faculty member's assessment of each assignment as opposed to a calculation from earned and possible points. The broad criteria for the ratings are given below. The ratings for some assignments may be multiplied by a constant (e.g. 2 or 3) so as to count more toward the final grade. The final grade is calculated as the average of all ratings.
   
   
;4.0 - 3.9: Excellent and exceptional work for a graduate student. Work at this level is extraordinarily thorough, well reasoned, methodologically sophisticated, and well written. Work is of good professional quality, shows an incisive understanding of digital media-related issues and demonstrates clear recognition of appropriate analytical approaches to digital media challenges and opportunities. ''Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely develop loyalty toward the vendor to the exclusion of other vendors.''
;4.0 - 3.9: Excellent and exceptional work for a graduate student. Work at this level is extraordinarily thorough, well reasoned, methodologically sophisticated, and well written. Work is of good professional quality, shows an incisive understanding of digital media-related issues and demonstrates clear recognition of appropriate analytical approaches to digital media challenges and opportunities. Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely develop loyalty toward the vendor to the exclusion of other vendors.
   
   
;3.8 - 3.7: Strong work for a graduate student. Work at this level shows some signs of creativity, is thorough and well-reasoned, indicates strong understanding of appropriate methodological or analytical approaches, and demonstrates clear recognition and good understanding of salient digital media-related challenges and opportunities. ''Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely recommend this vendor to others and consider a longer-term engagement.''
;3.8 - 3.7: Strong work for a graduate student. Work at this level shows some signs of creativity, is thorough and well-reasoned, indicates strong understanding of appropriate methodological or analytical approaches, and demonstrates clear recognition and good understanding of salient digital media-related challenges and opportunities. Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely recommend this vendor to others and consider a longer-term engagement.
   
   
;3.6 - 3.5: Competent and sound work for a graduate student; well reasoned and thorough, methodologically sound, but not especially creative or insightful or technically sophisticated; shows adequate understanding of digital media-related challenges and opportunities, although that understanding may be somewhat incomplete. This is the graduate student grade that indicates neither unusual strength nor exceptional weakness. ''Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely agree to repeat business with this vendor.''
;3.6 - 3.5: Competent and sound work for a graduate student; well reasoned and thorough, methodologically sound, but not especially creative or insightful or technically sophisticated; shows adequate understanding of digital media-related challenges and opportunities, although that understanding may be somewhat incomplete. This is the graduate student grade that indicates neither unusual strength nor exceptional weakness. Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely agree to repeat business with this vendor.
   
   
;3.3 - 3.4: Adequate work for a graduate student even though some weaknesses are evident. Moderately thorough and well reasoned, but some indication that understanding of the important issues is less than complete and perhaps inadequate in other respects as well. Methodological or analytical approaches used are generally adequate but have one or more weaknesses or limitations. ''Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely entertain competitor vendors.''
;3.3 - 3.4: Adequate work for a graduate student even though some weaknesses are evident. Moderately thorough and well reasoned, but some indication that understanding of the important issues is less than complete and perhaps inadequate in other respects as well. Methodological or analytical approaches used are generally adequate but have one or more weaknesses or limitations. Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely entertain competitor vendors.
   
   
;3.0 - 3.2: Fair work for a graduate student; meets the minimal expectations for a graduate student in the course; understanding of salient issues is incomplete, methodological or analytical work performed in the course is minimally adequate. Overall performance, if consistent in graduate courses, would be in jeopardy of sustaining graduate status in "good standing." ''Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely pay the vendor in full but not seek further engagement.''
;3.0 - 3.2: Fair work for a graduate student; meets the minimal expectations for a graduate student in the course; understanding of salient issues is incomplete, methodological or analytical work performed in the course is minimally adequate. Overall performance, if consistent in graduate courses, would be in jeopardy of sustaining graduate status in "good standing." Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely pay the vendor in full but not seek further engagement.
   
   
;2.7 - 2.9: Borderline work for a graduate student; barely meets the minimal expectations for a graduate student in the course. Work is inadequately developed, important issues are misunderstood, and in many cases assignments are late or incomplete. This is the minimum grade needed to pass the course. ''Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely delay payment until one or more criteria were met.''
;2.7 - 2.9: Borderline work for a graduate student; barely meets the minimal expectations for a graduate student in the course. Work is inadequately developed, important issues are misunderstood, and in many cases assignments are late or incomplete. This is the minimum grade needed to pass the course. Clients who received a deliverable of this quality would likely delay payment until one or more criteria were met.


=== Academic Misconduct ===
=== Academic Misconduct ===
Line 337: Line 349:
If we cannot successfully resolve a suspected case of academic misconduct through our conversations, I will refer the situation to the Anita Crofts, Comm Lead Associate Director of Academic Affairs. The Comm Lead Associate Director of Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Comm Lead Director, can then work with the COM Chair to seek further input and if necessary, move the case up to the Dean.
If we cannot successfully resolve a suspected case of academic misconduct through our conversations, I will refer the situation to the Anita Crofts, Comm Lead Associate Director of Academic Affairs. The Comm Lead Associate Director of Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Comm Lead Director, can then work with the COM Chair to seek further input and if necessary, move the case up to the Dean.
   
   
While evidence of academic misconduct may result in a lower grade, Comm Lead faculty (indeed, all UW faculty) may '''not''' unilaterally lower a grade without taking the necessary steps outlined above.
While evidence of academic misconduct may result in a lower grade, Comm Lead faculty (indeed, all UW faculty) may not unilaterally lower a grade without taking the necessary steps outlined above.
   
   
In closing, Comm Lead  students are expected to:
In closing, Comm Lead  students are expected to:
Please note that all contributions to CommunityData are considered to be released under the Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (see CommunityData:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)