User talk:ArashLari

Week 11 Team Page Feedback (to address in Week 12)

You covered some of the basics for your team page, but some specifically requested items were missing:

• You need to add a category with your team's name, i.e., "Page Desiigner".
• Please remove the category "Assignment" from your page/template.
• Arash's executive summary should provide a link to his Week 11 individual assignment page.

In addition, for Week 12, let’s focus on the stated overall purpose of these pages: “This page will be the main place from which your team project will be managed. Include all of the information/links that you think will be useful for your team to organize your work and communicate with each other and with the instructors. Hint: the kinds of things that are on your own User pages and on the course Main page can be used as a guide.”

Considering that purpose (and hint), you will also want to include the following on your team page. Imagine yourselves in deep work mode, with your team page open in a window. What information, links, and resources will you want to have available on that page at all times? Here are a few items:

• A projected schedule with due dates (both for milestones already defined in the guild pages and for internal accomplishments that your team determines) and meeting times. You can cross off these dates and times as your team makes progress using the s tag (strikeout).
• Communication resources (e.g., additional channels like Slack; GitHub issues; the discussion “side” of various wiki pages; etc.) that your team can use to coordinate when not face-to-face
• A section with links to uploaded files (including the journal club presentations), particularly for use by data analysts but really for any member of the team; this can also include a link to your GitHub branch and the project’s fork
• Additional useful links—what links would be useful to always have there so that you can just click to visit them, minimizing typing? You did include the Template:GRNsight Gene Page Project Links, but then redundantly added a separate list of guild links.
• Finally, having consistent formatting for the executive summaries and reflections will improve the look and organization of your page. Hayden and Arash should fix the formatting of their bullet points.

— Kdahlquist (talk) 13:52, 16 November 2017 (PST)

Week 11 Feedback

• A number of "good habit" items were not met in this submission:
  • No journal category entry.
  • Nominal electronic laboratory notebook—note that we have consistently used the term “laboratory notebook” this semester to represent documentation of your process for the week, distinct from the week’s deliverables. No such narrative could be found in the journal entry.
  • Only one of the 6 edits has a summary.
  • In the references section, the Flake entry is formatted inconsistently from the others.
• Design or development term notes
  • The Kissmetrics citation is missing its corresponding entry in the references section.
• Article outline notes
  • Outline was 1 page long in print preview.
  • No explicit statement on the overall importance of significance of the article's content could be found. There are some notes on the importance/significant of particular items, but not of the work as a whole.

—Dondi (talk) 18:04, 9 December 2017 (PST)

Week 9 Feedback

• The “good habit” aspects of your individual journal are on-time but have the following issues:
  • The journal entry category is missing.
  • The references section is missing.
• The electronic notebook has decent detail and is well-integrated with the GRNsight testing and API exploration results.
• GRNsight testing is complete with clear feedback on the results.
• The overall process for going from the gene symbol to the final gene data, with the necessary substitutions, is completely and correctly specified.

Shared Journal

Questions and “good habit” aspects are all fulfilled, all on-time. Favorite pages are stated alongside the reasons for these preferences.

—Dondi (talk) 19:18, 23 November 2017 (PST)

Week 7 Feedback

• The “good habit” aspects of your individual journal are mostly on point, except that the journal page category is missing and there is no wiki signature in the acknowledgments section.
• Nearly all prior web page issues were addressed except:
  • Title tag was not modified to match gene.
  • The gene page does not have its own acknowledgments section (separate from the one in your individual journal page).
  • The gene page does not have its own references section (separate from the one in your individual journal page).
• Bootstrap grid layout and flex classes were seen, though used somewhat subtly and on small subsets of the page.
• The use of collapse is noted as one of the requested “advanced Bootstrap” features.
• The use of card is noted as the other “advanced Bootstrap” feature, though its usage does not really maximize its potential.
• The XML and JSON API calls were adapted correctly.

Shared Journal

Questions and “good habit” aspects are fulfilled, all on-time. The far-from-comfort-zone observation on biology is noted; there is definitely a lot to learn on that side. On the other hand, this degree of depth is what makes for a proper interdisciplinary class. Another perspective is that the biology majors probably feel the same way about the computer science aspect.

—Dondi (talk) 22:53, 20 November 2017 (PST)

Week 5 Feedback

(work in progress)

Shared Journal

Questions and “good habit” aspects are fulfilled, except that the entry itself was submitted 4 days late.

—Dondi (talk) 19:11, 21 October 2017 (PDT)

Week 4 Feedback

Individual Journal

• Most “good habit” items are addressed and it was submitted on time.
  • The journal page is still missing a category—add it to your template.
  • There are four (4) listed edits on your individual journal page—marginally sufficient for this week. But there were no summaries entered? You really need to treat these edits like code commits.
• Your electronic notebook has moderate detail—sufficient for the scale of this week’s journal. The narrative style works, makes your process easy to follow.
• Your Acknowledgments and References are OK, except that your wiki signature should be after just your Acknowledgments, not at the very bottom after your References.

Shared Journal

• All questions and “good habit” points are fulfilled—good job here!
• However, in your answers to the questions, you used manual numbering. Don’t forget the # notation for numbered lists!

Web Page

(both homework partners get the same feedback)

Most gene page requirements were fulfilled except:

• Your folder name and title element weren’t customized to your chosen gene, and the folder name wasn't all lowercase as specified
• Your link to the .zip file used File: rather than Media:; although this was not directly stipulated in the instructions, note that Media: leads to a download immediately, making it more convenient for the reader. If you want to accommodate readers who would like to see the file metadata, provide both links.
• A separate gene summary paragraph was not seen
• The content for gene function, differences, and reason for choosing the gene all work OK, but the choice of presentation is not ideal—controlling the “slideshow” isn’t obvious and this distracts from simply reading the information that you provided
• The image choice could have been better…stopping at just bread was somewhat generic, and not distinctive to your gene
• The web page was supposed to have its own Acknowledgments and References too

—Dondi (talk) 22:39, 2 October 2017 (PDT)

Week 3 Feedback

• Everything was turned in on time—thank you! You fulfilled most of the “good habit/best practice” aspects of the assignment, supplying comments for all 4 of the listed journal edits. The misses are:
  • Four edits for an assignment of this size is still quite monolithic; find ways to work more gradually, thus saving more frequently. Build up an internal clock that makes you save your work more often.
  • Your journal entry page does not have a category.—note how this would be addressed by adding it to your template—consider doing that.
  • Your acknowledgments section is missing the statement that you did all of the work on your own (as specified in Week 1) as well as your wiki signature.
  • Your wiki signature is also missing from your shared journal entry.
• You supplied an electronic notebook with this assignment; the subheadings are a good idea and the content is in the right direction, supportive of the openness and reproducibility values that we are after here. Remember that a piece of information or action that you took is worth journaling if it helps inform either of these question: can someone reading your notebook get a clear understanding of what you did for this assignment? Do they have enough information to replicate the results that you posted on your journal page?
• Your hack-a-page work certainly fulfilled the instructions…Borat for president!
• You certainly identified some links correctly, though all but the last (cgi-bin…) were of the same kind: links to supporting files for the web page. But speaking of cgi-bin, this appears not only as an action but also in bona fide a href links, and that ties in to the ID question…
• I was hoping that the values after seqdna in the cgi-bin links would be recognized by students as IDs. You listed the action by itself, which is technically correct, but a finer grain was also present. Further, pre_text and name=code or name=output are not IDs in the same sense that they are used in the assigned reading, particularly McMurry et al. IDs closer to the spirit of that reading would have been better.
• For the curl/sed exercise, I was hoping that students would notice the output option that can be provided along with pre_text. This option controls how the amino acids are displayed. Supplying output=Verbose to the curl command would have obviated the need for the sed commands that “spell out” the amino acid letters. Looking for additional options like this can sometimes save us a lot of work.
• Regarding your chosen shared journal quote, I’d say that sometimes even a month seems slow, and something new comes up every day. That’s why it’s really important to keep up and keep doing things—that’s how you can stay on top of the field.

—Dondi (talk) 15:20, 24 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 2 Feedback

• Your assignment was substantially late. Please let us know if there are any issues we can help you with in terms of assisting you with submitting your work on time.
• You wrote something in the summary field for 0 of 3 saves (0%) in the period of review; this is not counting work that was submitted late.
• You made 9 saves to your Week 2 journal entry, which is barely in the range that would be expected for this assignment.
• Your complementary DNA sequence was correct.
• Your translations were correct.
• Your determination of which frames contained ORFs was correct.
• One correction to your nomenclature: we do not specify the ends of proteins as 5' and 3', that only refers to DNA and RNA. Instead, the ends of proteins are referred to as N-ter (or amino-terminus) and C-ter (or carboxy-terminus).
• For your References section, please provide the full APA citation style for all of your references and be careful to be using the correct link syntax.
• I did not find any electronic lab notebook for this assignment. In this case, the lab notebok would have explained how you arrived at your answers to the questions posed in the exercise. Please be sure to keep your electronic lab notebook for future assignments.
• In your Acknowledgments section, you left out the required statement and your wiki signature (see the Week 1 assignment). This will be required each week.
• You are also completely missing a References section. This section is also required each week and should, at a minimum, have a correctly formatted citation to that week's assignment (APA format).
• As of the the Week 2 deadline, you were also missing most of the required links:
  • User to Assignment
  • User to journal entry
  • Category
  • Link from User page to shared journal
  • The signature on your shared journal entry.
    • Make sure that your template is up-to-date with the required links and that you are invoking it on your pages, if you have not already done so.
• The technical language in articles from the primary literature is definitely a hurdle for students (and even for faculty from a different field). Like with other fields of endeavor, it is good to take a look at the primary source. Instead of just relying on your memory for terminology, you can always look something up online or in a text book or dictionary. I have to do that myself when I am reading something from a different field.

— Kdahlquist (talk) 23:58, 23 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 1 Feedback

Thank you for submitting your work on time. Your Week 1 work has been reviewed, and the following points of improvement have been identified. Other than these items, your wiki skills and deliverables checked out OK:

• Your user page is missing a snail mail address.
• I don’t see an email from you regarding worries/concerns or additional information.
• Your user page was written out in a single save—not a good habit. Treat wiki pages like code: type them a little at a time, saving often and with a summary.
• There is a difference between internal wiki links (double bracket) and external links (single bracket). All of your wiki links unnecessarily use the external full URL style, and no genuinely external link was noted in your user page.
• No bulleted list was seen in your submission.
• A numbered list was seen (in your shared journal response), but the numbers were written out manually. Use the # symbol to signify a numbered list item.

None of these other items were found in your submission:

• Commented-out content
• Uploaded and linked image
• Uploaded and downloadable file
• Category
• Template
• Acknowledgments
• References

For your shared journal response, the following requested items were not seen:

• Link to shared response from user page
• Link to user page from shared response
• Wiki signature

Please make sure to check off all of the requested items in future assignments more thoroughly. The instructions asked for all of these to be included in your user page and/or shared journal response. Thank you!

—Dondi (talk) 21:30, 11 September 2017 (PDT)