User talk:Bklein7

Week 6 Feedback

I’ve chosen to issue partial feedback sooner than complete feedback later, in case it will help you address issues with Week 8.

Best Practices

• Individual and shared work were both submitted on time.
• Requisite links to and from the user page as well as page categories are all present.
• Electronic notebook was maintained.
• Work was submitted in appropriate frequencies with corresponding summaries.
• This amounts to a “best practices” perfect score. Good work, keep it up!

Database Exercises

Work in progress.

—Dondi (talk) 16:35, 25 October 2015 (PDT)

Week 4 Feedback

• Work was submitted on time.
• All good-habit items are fulfilled:
  • All expected links and categories were noted.
  • Electronic notebook content was seen.
  • Summaries were consistently provided over a good number of edits.
• For the exercises, the following issues were seen; all others were correct:
  • You were off by one nucleotide on the transcription start site.
  • Ideally, the tagging exercise added spaces before and after the markers, for greater readability. This is more of a formatting issue though; the content remains correct.
  • Because the transcription start site was off by one nucleotide, then the mRNA sequence was off by that single base as well.
  • There is a typo in your final translation command: near the end of the second-to-last line, a required space is missing—the command that starts with sed"s/<\/start_codon>//g ... should have a space between sed and the double-quote.
• Shared responses were provided and they came in on time.

—Dondi (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2015 (PDT)

Week 3 Feedback

• Work was submitted on time—keep it up!
• All good-habit items are fulfilled:
  • All expected links and categories were noted.
  • You were able to phase your work well, and consistently supplied a change summary to all of them.
  • You accompanied your work with electronic notes and processes.
• All exercises were performed or answered correctly. One small note: on occasion “complement” was misspelled as “compliment.” An understandable slip, but all the more reason to keep an eye out for it.
• I found your responses to be eloquent and thoughtful—thank you for devoting some quality time to them!

—Dondi (talk) 00:03, 25 September 2015 (PDT)

Week 2 Feedback

• Although, the Week 2 scores have not yet been posted, I want to give you feedback on the assignment that you can incorporate to your your Week 3 submission.
• First, thank you for submitting your assignment on time (by a day!).
• Your translations are correct; although it would have been better for completeness to go ahead and translate the rest of the sequence after the stop codon, in this case.
• I see that you have moved your electronic notebook from your user page to your individual journal page and that is cleared up for assignments going forward. Your notes are very thorough, I only have a suggestion in terms of style. This is essentially a "Methods" section. It is customary in Methods sections to use the past tense because this is what you did. I is OK and preferable to say "I did this...I did that" instead of trying to be impersonal about it.
• You wrote something in the Summary field for 6/6 contributions between the Week 1 and Week 2 deadlines, keep up the good work! However, you completed the full assignment in only 3 edits to the wiki. This suggests that you are doing the work outside the wiki and then pasting it in. Ideally, you should do the work natively in the wiki environment. Even if this is not the case, you will want to consider saving your changes more frequently so that the granularity of the changes is smaller.
• You completed all of the links requested via your template.
• With regards to your comments on your shared journal entry, I knew that the Nirenberg article would be difficult for folks without a biology background, and even for those who do have a biology background. However, I also think it's a good exercise to go back to the original source sometimes and read about discoveries from "the horse's mouth" so to speak.

— Kdahlquist (talk) 23:45, 20 September 2015 (PDT);;

I forgot to add one more note to the Week 2 feedback...

• Do not pair the two mRNAs that you created as intermediates to your translation. Listing them on top of one another like that makes them look paired and they would never appear that way in the cell (most of the time only one strand of the DNA is even transcribed.).

— Kdahlquist (talk) 11:25, 22 September 2015 (PDT)

---

This is a test edit for the talk page. The signature was accessed by typed four tildas following 3 dashes.

--- Bklein7 (talk) 15:05, 3 September 2015 (PDT)

Week 1 Feedback

• I answered your question on my User talk page.
• The scores have not been posted yet, but I wanted to give you feedback on your Week 1 Assignment.
• You did everything on time—though you did cut it a little close :) Monitor the timing as the assignments advance.
• Your assignment is complete in terms of content. Out of 27 individual wiki contributions, you supplied a change summary to all but 3 of them. See if you can train yourself into a 100% habit.
• Overall, great job! I particularly found your answer on Coordination to be particularly resonant and well-applied to a “non-computer-science-y” context.

—Dondi (talk) 00:38, 10 September 2015 (PDT

I have also answered your question on my user talk page. — Kdahlquist (talk) 23:16, 10 September 2015 (PDT)