Back to Homepage

Milestone 4: Proposal Review

Now that every team has submitted a proposal (your project spreadsheet), it's time to help each other get better by providing peer feedback. Peer review is a critical part to improving writing in both academic and industry settings. The objective of this assignment is to give you an opportunity to practice providing and receive constructive feedback from your peers. This feedback should help you and others think more thoroughly on the project proposals.

Step 1: Understand how to provide quality feedback

The objective of feedback in peer review is to improve the quality of writing/thinking. In this way, you are very much "on the same team" as the authors of the writing you are reviewing. The feedback you provide should help other teams further develop their project proposal. Common ways to provide helpful feedback:

• Identifying parts of the proposal that are ambiguous and attempting to explain why you are confused.
• Identifying parts of the porposal that are interesting and what you would like to be seen done with it.
• Providing links or references to related work and explaining how they may be helpful.
• Raising specific questions about the proposal to stimulate new ideas.
• Addressing concerns relating to proposal's feasibility, rigor, or novelty.

Your guiding principle as you provide peer-feedback is this: How can the authors use this feedback to improve their writing/thinking?

Step 2: Provide feedback to your peers' project proposals

For each of your peers' projects, your team must provide quality feedback (as defined in Step 1) in the form of an issue on their GitHub. The issue must have the following properties:

• The title of the issue is "Proposal feedback: [Team Name]", where [Team Name] is replaced by your team's name.
• The issue must include feedback which is specific enough to be understood and helpful and feasible enough for the writers to act upon.

You do not need to provide feedback on your own project. Your team may provide feedback in the form of multiple issues if you want.

The proposals can be found in the wikis of each project team's GitHub repository. For peer review, look at each team's current data science diagram (should be linked on their “Project Scope and Framing” wiki page) then look at their spreadsheet (also linked on their "Project Scope and Framing” wiki page). Do not go back to earlier spreadsheets or wiki pages - only look at their latest spreadsheet. Read first the rows on the domain and the decision/choices (these are below the 1.1-1.4 and 2.1-2.3 questions). then go to the overall questions on feasibility and impact (1.1-1.4 and 2.1-2.3 questions), then looking at the tabs.

Grading Criteria

You will submit this assignment by writing issues on other teams' GitHub repositories. This assignment is worth 2 points, distributed evenly across the number of project teams there are minus 1 (because you don't have to give yourself feedback). So that's $2/(N-1)$ points for each project team you provide feedback to (where N = number of project teams).

Your feedback will be graded according to the following criteria::

• Feedback is specific and clear enough to be understood.
• Feedback helps writers/other team improve their proposal's feasibility, rigor, and/or novelty.
• Feedback is constructive and not adversarial.

Further reading

Kreiman, J. (2016). On Peer Review. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 59(3), 480-483. https://doi.org/10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-16-0043

Cosley, D. (2014). How I review papers. http://blogs.cornell.edu/danco/2014/06/12/how-i-review-papers/

CHI 2018 Guide to Reviewing Papers. https://chi2018.acm.org/guide-to-reviewing-papers/