Is this list reserved for mentors, or are students on it, too? In other words, is this an appropriate place to discuss various cases?
I wonder if our scoring will have any impact on how many students will be supported to work on Squeak projects? If it looks like we have a lot of good candidates, is is possible that we might get one more line of support than if we give most of them average scores?
-Ralph Johnson
2007/3/29, Ralph Johnson johnson@cs.uiuc.edu:
Is this list reserved for mentors, or are students on it, too? In other words, is this an appropriate place to discuss various cases?
Everybody can register and some students are here.
On 29 mars 07, at 04:43, Ralph Johnson wrote:
Is this list reserved for mentors, or are students on it, too? In other words, is this an appropriate place to discuss various cases?
Indeed good questions.
I wonder if our scoring will have any impact on how many students will be supported to work on Squeak projects?
I do not know.
If it looks like we have a lot of good candidates, is is possible that we might get one more line of support than if we give most of them average scores?
I do not believe so. I do not believe that if we all give 4 it will make sense. I suggest that we play it real. Especially since we also have the Summertalk just after and that we could funds extra projects.
My criteria for evaluation are: - do they know smalltalk and not just copy and paste their projects? - did they do something in the past for the community? - do they are close to a mentor (because learning Smalltalk via email or ichat does not work) - is the topic really relevant for the community? - is the schedule/tasks possible within the time frame?
Stef
-Ralph Johnson _______________________________________________ Soc mailing list Soc@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/soc
On 3/29/07, stephane ducasse stephane.ducasse@free.fr wrote:
I do not believe so. I do not believe that if we all give 4 it will make sense.
I was not thinking that. The score we can give is (from memory, and so probably not quite right) +4, +2, +1, -1, -2 and I was wondering whether, if I thought a proposal was reasonable but was only average, whether I should give a +1 or a -1.
I suggest that +1 should be "if we had all the money in the world then we should fund this guy". If that is the case, we wouldn't give many negative scores.
To me, +4 is "this is an important project and this candidate is obviously capable of doing it"
I am going to give EVERYBODY a score. Not giving a score is like giving them a score of 0. So, it is important to decide whether my median is +1 or -1
My criteria for evaluation are: - do they know smalltalk and not just copy and paste their projects? - did they do something in the past for the community? - do they are close to a mentor (because learning Smalltalk via email or ichat does not work) - is the topic really relevant for the community? - is the schedule/tasks possible within the time frame?
This is a good list, except that I think that the most important is whether the topic is relevant and whether it is possible. To me, how well they know Smalltalk is part of whether the schedule is reasonable. Also, I don't think we should use this as a reward for things done in the past, but people who have been working with Squeak for awhile are more likely to succeed than people who have not. "Past performance is a predictor of future behavior". A person who has already done an open source project in Squeak will have an edge over someone who has not, and someone who has taken a class that used Squeak and done a small class project will have an edge over someone who is just starting to lear it. But that can be counterbalanced by the topic.
If someone knows Smalltalk well then it is not as important to be close to a mentor. But if they are neither close to a mentor nor know Smalltalk then that will make it hard for their project to be successful..
-Ralph
I was not thinking that. The score we can give is (from memory, and so probably not quite right) +4, +2, +1, -1, -2 and I was wondering whether, if I thought a proposal was reasonable but was only average, whether I should give a +1 or a -1.
Ok it would make sense
I suggest that +1 should be "if we had all the money in the world then we should fund this guy". If that is the case, we wouldn't give many negative scores.
To me, +4 is "this is an important project and this candidate is obviously capable of doing it"
Ok
I am going to give EVERYBODY a score. Not giving a score is like giving them a score of 0. So, it is important to decide whether my median is +1 or -1
I do not know. May be putting +1 as meadian
My criteria for evaluation are: - do they know smalltalk and not just copy and paste their projects? - did they do something in the past for the community? - do they are close to a mentor (because learning Smalltalk via email or ichat does not work) - is the topic really relevant for the community? - is the schedule/tasks possible within the time frame?
This is a good list, except that I think that the most important is whether the topic is relevant and whether it is possible.
Yes.
To me, how well they know Smalltalk is part of whether the schedule is reasonable. Also, I don't think we should use this as a reward for things done in the past, but people who have been working with Squeak for awhile are more likely to succeed than people who have not.
Yes. This is my point. For example, for working on the new compiler it is better to have the guy that already and is working on it.
"Past performance is a predictor of future behavior". A person who has already done an open source project in Squeak will have an edge over someone who has not, and someone who has taken a class that used Squeak and done a small class project will have an edge over someone who is just starting to lear it. But that can be counterbalanced by the topic.
If someone knows Smalltalk well then it is not as important to be close to a mentor. But if they are neither close to a mentor nor know Smalltalk then that will make it hard for their project to be successful..
Yes this is an important point.
-Ralph _______________________________________________ Soc mailing list Soc@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/soc
Il giorno mer, 28/03/2007 alle 21.43 -0500, Ralph Johnson ha scritto:
Is this list reserved for mentors, or are students on it, too? In other words, is this an appropriate place to discuss various cases?
As I said, we can keep the general discussions here, and talk about the specific applications in the mentors app.
I wonder if our scoring will have any impact on how many students will be supported to work on Squeak projects? If it looks like we have a lot of good candidates, is is possible that we might get one more line of support than if we give most of them average scores?
I think that the number of student who'll be supported to work on Squeak project will be influenced more by the number of projects that have a mentor available than the actual score for each proposal.
Giovanni
On 30 mars 07, at 14:44, Giovanni Corriga wrote:
Il giorno mer, 28/03/2007 alle 21.43 -0500, Ralph Johnson ha scritto:
Is this list reserved for mentors, or are students on it, too? In other words, is this an appropriate place to discuss various cases?
As I said, we can keep the general discussions here, and talk about the specific applications in the mentors app.
I wonder if our scoring will have any impact on how many students will be supported to work on Squeak projects? If it looks like we have a lot of good candidates, is is possible that we might get one more line of support than if we give most of them average scores?
I think that the number of student who'll be supported to work on Squeak project will be influenced more by the number of projects that have a mentor available than the actual score for each proposal.
which could be good. So we should then ask mentors to apply for mentoring the projects
Il giorno ven, 30/03/2007 alle 21.25 +0200, stephane ducasse ha scritto:
On 30 mars 07, at 14:44, Giovanni Corriga wrote:
I think that the number of student who'll be supported to work on Squeak project will be influenced more by the number of projects that have a mentor available than the actual score for each proposal.
which could be good. So we should then ask mentors to apply for mentoring the projects
And that's what I did in the guidelines. I'll send a more specific message tomorrow.
Giovanni
soc@lists.squeakfoundation.org