| Secret Name | % | |||||||||||||
| Summary 6 Distributed Systems |
Grade So Far % | Problem Definition | Approach & Originality | Assumptions & Limitations | Result, Impact, Important | Talk Criticism | RAW | % Score | Final Grade | please grade the summaries. See already graded S1 to see example comments (shee with grades for S1 t is already posted, Due date is | ||||
| Max | 8 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 09/09 | 0.94 | ||||||
| >24 | 0.70 | |||||||||||||
| Total | 91.8 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 8 | ||||||
| Acrobat | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Well done. | ||
| Andy | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Artistic Potato | 22 | 88 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 22 | 88 | 0 | 88 | Speaker critique is not informative enough. | ||
| Bamboo | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Great job. | ||
| Bellhop One | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Good | ||
| Birdseye | 21 | 84 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 21 | 84 | 0 | 84 | Speaker critique too generic (almost the same as the previous week ) hmm. | ||
| Brimstone | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | |||
| Broadside | 22 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 22 | 88 | 0 | 100 | Speaker critique is not informative enough. | ||
| Buckeye | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Buckshot | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Cactus | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Excellent ! Again! | ||
| Carbine | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Excellent! | ||
| Carpet | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | OK. | ||
| Cartwheel | 19 | 76 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 19 | 76 | 0 | 76 | Need more details & Substance. Speaker critique too generic. | ||
| Challenger | 24 | 96 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 24 | 96 | 0 | 96 | Great job. But you keep missing critiquing speaker with enough substance you are mitigiating it some with your excellent critique and reflection of the paper. | ||
| Chandelier | 20 | 80 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 80 | Need more details, especially when discussing reults. Speaker critique too generic. | ||
| Checkerboard | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Checkmate | 23 | 92 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 23 | 92 | 0 | 92 | Be more specific on what material needed improvement. | ||
| Coach House | 19 | 76 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 19 | 76 | 0 | 76 | Need more details & Substance. Speaker critique too generic. | ||
| Companion | 21 | 84 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 21 | 84 | 0 | 84 | Critique is too generic could have been written for any paper thoughtout the semester | ||
| Curbside | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | |||
| Driftwood | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | OK, speaker critique good. | ||
| Echo | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Firelord | 22 | 88 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 22 | 88 | 0 | 88 | Need to work on getting more substance into your summaries. | ||
| Hudson | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Nicely done! | ||
| Lightfoot | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Well done. | ||
| Magic | 23 | 92 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 23 | 92 | 0 | 92 | You need to critique the student in=class presenter. Not the researcy/presenetion of the paper. | ||
| Peninsula | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Well done. (can read this file) | ||
| Pincushion | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Good job!. | ||
| Playground | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Pork Chop | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Professor | 20 | 80 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 80 | No presenter technique and no material to compensate for the exclusion | ||
| Punch Bowl | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Ridgeline | 23 | 92 | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 | 5 | 23 | 92 | 0 | 92 | Lacking some insights, and speaker critique is too generic | ||
| Ringside | 17 | 68 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 17 | 68 | 0 | 68 | Need more details & substance. Speaker critique too generic. | ||
| Sandstone | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | No submission | ||
| Shotgun | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | OK. | ||
| Skymaster | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Nicely done. | ||
| Storm King | 8 | 32 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 8 | 32 | 0 | 32 | Does not seem like paper was read almost no information in the summary. No presenter critique | ||
| Sylvester | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Tower | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Nicely done. | ||
| Volcano | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | OK. | ||
| Windstone | 25 | 100 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 25 | 100 | 0 | 100 | Nicely done! |