Posted by: Jordi | April 19, 2010

Important Information for Week of 4/19-4/26

Hello all,

Here is what I got out of our “frank” conversation Friday about your projects.  There are three topics: how to evaluate your project, how the showcase will work, and how to update this blog for your and our benefit.  This post EXPECTS some feedback from you either in the comments here or in an email to me.  Read it carefully.

A)    Evaluating your hacker project.

  1. Part of grade will be from peer evaluation from the showcase.
  2. We did not discuss the weight.  I suggest 30%.
  3. We will need a peer evaluation form.  Please look at the project guidelines  handed out and that are a page on the blog.  Based on this, what criteria would you be looking for in your peers?  Please respond by Thursday on the blog.
  4. The evaluation I will do will be on a contract basis between you and me.  To do this, you will need to look over your copy of The Hacker Ethic as well as the project guidelines and your own proposal.  Your goal is to have a complete set of criteria by which you and I can assess your project.  You need to email me by Thursday afternoon a draft contract of how you expect to be evaluated.
    1. i.      This should include the following: the purpose of your project; the specific elements or components you will do; how you will share it in the showcase.  You can include anything else you think relevant in evaluating your project.
    2. ii.      These should lead to a set of criteria for evaluating your work.  Some examples might include: clarity of idea, originality of thinking, thoroughness of research, completeness of project, quality of interactivity, quality of multimedia, accuracy of writing and/or communication; degree that project enabled you to experience your hacker passion; degree that other elements of hacker work ethic are evident (solving a problem; using a community to solve; having a nethic of information sharing).  I am looking for how the idea of the hacker ethic is evident in your proposed contract.
    3. iii.      For each criteria, please specify 3 levels of quality.
  5. I will look over these Thursday night and reply by email with a proposed final version.  Friday, we will use part of class for us to meet individually to finalize these.

B)    Showcase- Sharing your Projects

  1. The basic format is that everyone will have some sort of visual/interactive aspect of their project to share.  This should take whatever form is most important for your project.  If you need any copying, especially large format, I will need to know by Thursday April 28.
  2. We agreed that the showcase would be Sunday, May 2 in the afternoon.  What time?
    1. i.      1-3?
    2. ii.      2-4?
    3. iii.      3-5?
  3. I will find a space.
  4. I’ll take care of some Sunday afternoon food and drink.
  5. Since this is when you all will be evaluating each other, I propose we divide it up so that for half the time half of you wander around and see what your classmates have done.  For the other half, the other half will wander.  When it is not your wandering time, you can be at your “station” where you will have whatever you are showcasing from your project.  This can be a poster, parts of your paper, examples of the work you have done, a laptop with relevant elements and so on.
  6. Anyone can invite other folks if they want to.  I know some of you are doing projects that I can think of people who would be interested.

C)    Updates on the blog:

  1. Some of you need to update your page with what your project is.  You do not need to add things if it is pretty clear.  Some of you are still kind of amorphous about what you are doing and its final form.  This is the time to fix that.  The idea is that this is a reference for any of us to know what you are doing.  Done with page: Heather, Alison, Linda, Ross, Mike.
  2. By this Thursday, post an update of how you are doing and what you will do next.


  1. From my classmates, in my evaluation I will look for creativity, depth of engagement in topic, thoroughness of work, accuracy of communication, quality of work, and degree of hacker ethic exploration. I would like to see the same criteria used to evaluate my project, as well. The three levels that I feel may be appropriate are: disappointing, average, and exceeds expectation.

    The purpose of my project is to understand what makes people passionate about service. As an extension of this, I hope to understand the most effective means of calling people to action. I have interviewed a number of people, and have started to compile these interviews into a newsletter. I plan to have some copies of my newsletter on hand along with a bulletin board-like display.

    My vote for showcase time is 3-5p on May 2nd.

  2. When evaluating my peers I would look for a certain level of enthusiasm about their work. I will hope to learn a great deal about the process they have gone through to learn more about their passions. I feel that my peers should be able to clearly communicate their subject matter and explain it easily to someone who is not as familiar with their work. Ultimately, I would like to see that my peers have truly embraced the hacker ethic and are excited to share with me the things they have learned and have gained passion about.

  3. 3-5pm on May 2nd sounds good

  4. I think your idea of 30% for peer evaluation seems fair. I prefer that we do the showcase from 1-3 or 2-4 because I have a BSG banquet in the late afternoon that day. I like your idea of dividing things up and having half of us walk around while the other half is at their “stations”.

    I feel the most important criteria I will be looking at are enthusiasm/ passion (as that is what the project is really all about), creativity, and what the final project is that my classmates show. Secondary to these things, I will look to see that they collaborated with others/ in some way have shared their project and their findings with others. Also the completeness of the project will be important.

  5. Criteria I would be looking for in my peers:
    1) Clearly shown that they have put in a large amount of effort, and a piece of themselves is displayed in their finished project.
    2) Overall knowledge of their subject and outside references drawn upon
    3) Good grasp of the Hacker Ethic and key themes from the book are present in their project

  6. For me the I feel that the peer review should based on the amount of effort each person has put into it. Whether it be a video, a powerpoint, a website, or a paper I want to see that the person put a large amount of effort into it and easily displayed the passion and creativity for their project. I would hope that the person doing the project can clearly show and explain the purpose of the project and why they feel it is important.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: