COMP 3000 Distribution Report Specifications 2011 - Revision history

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-27T02:29:59Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:29, 27 November 2011
Line 65:		Line 65:

	* '''Background:''' To get a full point, the background should give a coherent overview of how this distribution fits into the larger software ecosystem. A half point will be given for background sections that cover most of the relevant details but do so in a way that is not easily understandable by the rest of the class, e.g., using non-obvious acronyms without fully explaining them.		* '''Background:''' To get a full point, the background should give a coherent overview of how this distribution fits into the larger software ecosystem. A half point will be given for background sections that cover most of the relevant details but do so in a way that is not easily understandable by the rest of the class, e.g., using non-obvious acronyms without fully explaining them.
	* '''Installation/Startup:''' One ~~mark~~ will be given for giving a full installation and startup walkthrough as detailed in the instructions. Half a point will be given for mostly complete instructions that, however, would be hard to replicate.		* '''Installation/Startup:''' One point will be given for giving a full installation and startup walkthrough as detailed in the instructions. Half a point will be given for mostly complete instructions that, however, would be hard to replicate.
	* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least ~~2 tutorial-type~~ use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.		* '''Basic Operation:''' Two points will be give here for properly discussing at least two use cases. One point will be give if you only have one use case or if you have two that are incompletely presented.
	* '''Usage Evaluation:''' A coherent paragraph presenting and defending your view of the distribution gets full ~~marks~~. ~~Otherwise, 0~~.		* '''Usage Evaluation:''' A coherent paragraph presenting and defending your view of the distribution gets the full point here. Anything less than this will receive zero points.
	* '''References:''' You have to give at least one reference in proper bibliographic style to get this point. A simple listing of URLs gets 0 points.		* '''References:''' You have to give at least one reference in proper bibliographic style to get this point. A simple listing of URLs gets zero points.
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
	* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.		* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-27T02:20:44Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:20, 27 November 2011
Line 65:		Line 65:

	* '''Background:''' To get a full point, the background should give a coherent overview of how this distribution fits into the larger software ecosystem. A half point will be given for background sections that cover most of the relevant details but do so in a way that is not easily understandable by the rest of the class, e.g., using non-obvious acronyms without fully explaining them.		* '''Background:''' To get a full point, the background should give a coherent overview of how this distribution fits into the larger software ecosystem. A half point will be given for background sections that cover most of the relevant details but do so in a way that is not easily understandable by the rest of the class, e.g., using non-obvious acronyms without fully explaining them.
	* '''Installation/Startup:''' 1 mark for full ~~install~~ walkthrough ~~with screenshots; 0~~.5 for hard-to-replicate ~~but otherwise mostly complete instructions; 0 otherwise~~.		* '''Installation/Startup:''' One mark will be given for giving a full installation and startup walkthrough as detailed in the instructions. Half a point will be given for mostly complete instructions that, however, would be hard to replicate.
	* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.		* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.
	* '''Usage Evaluation:''' A coherent paragraph presenting and defending your view of the distribution gets full marks. Otherwise, 0.		* '''Usage Evaluation:''' A coherent paragraph presenting and defending your view of the distribution gets full marks. Otherwise, 0.
	* '''References:''' ~~Must~~ have at least one reference in proper bibliographic style to get a point. ~~Simply~~ listing URLs ~~gives~~ 0.		* '''References:''' You have to give at least one reference in proper bibliographic style to get this point. A simple listing of URLs gets 0 points.
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
	* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.		* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-27T02:15:14Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:15, 27 November 2011
Line 64:		Line 64:
	Here is the criteria for each of these categories:		Here is the criteria for each of these categories:

	* '''Background:''' ~~Half~~ point for background that is ~~correct but~~ not understandable by class, i.e., non-obvious acronyms ~~not~~ fully ~~explained~~.		* '''Background:''' To get a full point, the background should give a coherent overview of how this distribution fits into the larger software ecosystem. A half point will be given for background sections that cover most of the relevant details but do so in a way that is not easily understandable by the rest of the class, e.g., using non-obvious acronyms without fully explaining them.
	* '''Installation/Startup:''' 1 mark for full install walkthrough with screenshots; 0.5 for hard-to-replicate but otherwise mostly complete instructions; 0 otherwise.		* '''Installation/Startup:''' 1 mark for full install walkthrough with screenshots; 0.5 for hard-to-replicate but otherwise mostly complete instructions; 0 otherwise.
	* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.		* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-27T01:42:18Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:42, 27 November 2011
Line 67:		Line 67:
	* '''Installation/Startup:''' 1 mark for full install walkthrough with screenshots; 0.5 for hard-to-replicate but otherwise mostly complete instructions; 0 otherwise.		* '''Installation/Startup:''' 1 mark for full install walkthrough with screenshots; 0.5 for hard-to-replicate but otherwise mostly complete instructions; 0 otherwise.
	* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.		* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.
	* '''Usage Evaluation:'''		* '''Usage Evaluation:''' A coherent paragraph presenting and defending your view of the distribution gets full marks. Otherwise, 0.
	* '''References:'''		* '''References:''' Must have at least one reference in proper bibliographic style to get a point. Simply listing URLs gives 0.
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
	* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.		* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-27T01:38:37Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:38, 27 November 2011
Line 64:		Line 64:
	Here is the criteria for each of these categories:		Here is the criteria for each of these categories:

	* '''Background:'''		* '''Background:''' Half point for background that is correct but not understandable by class, i.e., non-obvious acronyms not fully explained.
	* '''Installation/Startup:'''		* '''Installation/Startup:''' 1 mark for full install walkthrough with screenshots; 0.5 for hard-to-replicate but otherwise mostly complete instructions; 0 otherwise.
	* '''Basic Operation:'''		* '''Basic Operation:''' 2 points for at least 2 tutorial-type use cases. 1 point if you only have one or two that are incompletely presented.
	* '''Usage Evaluation:'''		* '''Usage Evaluation:'''
	* '''References:'''		* '''References:'''
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-27T01:20:04Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:20, 27 November 2011
Line 55:		Line 55:
	* 6 points for content, with:		* 6 points for content, with:
	** 1 for background,		** 1 for background,
	** 1 for ~~initialization~~/startup		** 1 for installation/startup
	** 2 for basic operation		** 2 for basic operation
	** 1 for usage evaluation		** 1 for usage evaluation
Line 64:		Line 64:
	Here is the criteria for each of these categories:		Here is the criteria for each of these categories:

			* '''Background:'''
			* '''Installation/Startup:'''
			* '''Basic Operation:'''
			* '''Usage Evaluation:'''
			* '''References:'''
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
	* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.		* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.

Soma: /* Part I */

2011-11-23T20:50:43Z

Part I

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:50, 23 November 2011
Line 49:		Line 49:

	List all references used in proper bibliographic form, if any. Be sure to cite these sources in the main text as appropriate.		List all references used in proper bibliographic form, if any. Be sure to cite these sources in the main text as appropriate.

			===Grading Criteria===

			The grade for this part of the report will be out of 10 points, with:
			* 6 points for content, with:
			** 1 for background,
			** 1 for initialization/startup
			** 2 for basic operation
			** 1 for usage evaluation
			** 1 for references
			* 2 point for grammar, spelling, and sentence structure
			* 2 points for style

			Here is the criteria for each of these categories:

			* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
			* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.

	==Part II==		==Part II==

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-23T20:46:04Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:46, 23 November 2011
Line 103:		Line 103:

	* '''Software packaging:''' To get full marks, this section should give a short, concise, but clear statement about how software is packaged for the system. Most reports will probably get the full one point for this section.		* '''Software packaging:''' To get full marks, this section should give a short, concise, but clear statement about how software is packaged for the system. Most reports will probably get the full one point for this section.
	* '''Package versions:''' 2 points are for an accurate discussion of at least 10 software packages, 1 is for documenting how you obtained this information (the full process). Discussing fewer than 10 packages automatically loses you one point unless there are special circumstances related to your distribution. Note that in order to get all 2 points for the software packages, you need to explain why this particular version of each package was used. For example, it is not enough to say why Firefox was included; say why Firefox 4.0 was included.		* '''Package versions:''' 1.5 points are for an accurate discussion of at least 10 software packages, 0.5 is for documenting how you obtained this information (the full process). Discussing fewer than 10 packages automatically loses you one point unless there are special circumstances related to your distribution. Note that in order to get all 1.5 points for the software packages, you need to explain why this particular version of each package was used. For example, it is not enough to say why Firefox was included; say why Firefox 4.0 was included.
			* '''Initialization:''' This is the most important part of the report. Here, you should document what processes are running on your distribution when it is fully initialized (1 point), explain what they do (1 point), and explain how each is started (1 point). ''Please'' do not discuss each process in a separate bullet point; instead, organize and categorize them. Omit redundant or irrelevant details. Your goal should be to teach the reader a bit about how the distribution is put together!
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
	* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.		* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.

Soma: /* Grading Criteria */

2011-11-23T20:37:54Z

Grading Criteria

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:37, 23 November 2011
Line 102:		Line 102:
	Here is the criteria for each of these categories:		Here is the criteria for each of these categories:

			* '''Software packaging:''' To get full marks, this section should give a short, concise, but clear statement about how software is packaged for the system. Most reports will probably get the full one point for this section.
			* '''Package versions:''' 2 points are for an accurate discussion of at least 10 software packages, 1 is for documenting how you obtained this information (the full process). Discussing fewer than 10 packages automatically loses you one point unless there are special circumstances related to your distribution. Note that in order to get all 2 points for the software packages, you need to explain why this particular version of each package was used. For example, it is not enough to say why Firefox was included; say why Firefox 4.0 was included.
	* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.		* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
	* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.		* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. (This is a significant issue with the software packages - those can be much better discussed in a consolidated fashion rather than one package at a time.) Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.



	==Part III==		==Part III==

Soma at 20:17, 23 November 2011

2011-11-23T20:17:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:17, 23 November 2011
Line 89:		Line 89:

	Note that you should provide an explanation for how all of the major processes end up running on a fully initialized system.		Note that you should provide an explanation for how all of the major processes end up running on a fully initialized system.

			===Grading Criteria===

			The grade for this report will be out of 10 points, with:
			* 6 points for content, with:
			** 1 for software packaging,
			** 2 for package versions, and
			** 3 for initialization
			* 2 point for grammar, spelling, and sentence structure
			* 2 points for style

			Here is the criteria for each of these categories:

			* '''Grammar, spelling, and sentence structure:''' To get the full two points, the report should be written with well-structured, grammatically correct sentences with all words correctly spelled and capitalized. A report with a significant numbers of grammar or spelling errors that, overall, do not detract from an understanding of the paper will get only one point. Zero points will be awarded if the errors present make it hard to read the document.
			* '''Style:''' To get full marks, your paper should be organized to present the information in an easy-to-understand fashion that is engaging to read yet still technically informative. Reports that present information in disconnected lists with minimal unifying text will get 1 point. Incoherent papers will get 0 for style.



	==Part III==		==Part III==