From owner-cse575-fa07-list@LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU Thu Dec 13 13:38:25 2007 Received: from ares.cse.buffalo.edu (ares.cse.buffalo.edu [128.205.32.79]) by castor.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.13.6/8.12.10) with ESMTP id lBDIcPFu008530 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:38:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from front1.acsu.buffalo.edu (upfront.acsu.buffalo.edu [128.205.4.140]) by ares.cse.buffalo.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with SMTP id lBDIcHIq073766 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:38:17 -0500 (EST) Received: (qmail 1651 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2007 18:38:12 -0000 Received: from deliverance.acsu.buffalo.edu (128.205.7.57) by front1.acsu.buffalo.edu with SMTP; 13 Dec 2007 18:38:12 -0000 Received: (qmail 1653 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2007 18:38:10 -0000 Received: from listserv.buffalo.edu (128.205.7.35) by deliverance.acsu.buffalo.edu with SMTP; 13 Dec 2007 18:38:10 -0000 Received: by LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 14.5) with spool id 6335451 for CSE575-FA07-LIST@LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:38:10 -0500 Delivered-To: cse575-fa07-list@listserv.buffalo.edu Received: (qmail 19225 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2007 18:37:49 -0000 Received: from mailscan1.acsu.buffalo.edu (128.205.6.133) by listserv.buffalo.edu with SMTP; 13 Dec 2007 18:37:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 10827 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2007 18:37:48 -0000 Received: from castor.cse.buffalo.edu (128.205.32.14) by smtp6.acsu.buffalo.edu with SMTP; 13 Dec 2007 18:37:48 -0000 Received: from castor.cse.Buffalo.EDU (rapaport@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by castor.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.13.6/8.12.10) with ESMTP id lBDIbmQ2008520 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:37:48 -0500 (EST) Received: (from rapaport@localhost) by castor.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.13.6/8.12.9/Submit) id lBDIbmOf008519 for cse575-fa07-list@listserv.buffalo.edu; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:37:48 -0500 (EST) X-UB-Relay: (castor.cse.buffalo.edu) X-PM-EL-Spam-Prob: : 7% Message-ID: <200712131837.lBDIbmOf008519@castor.cse.Buffalo.EDU> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:37:48 -0500 Reply-To: "William J. Rapaport" Sender: Introduction to Cognitive Science From: "William J. Rapaport" Subject: 575 COG SCI: TERM PROJECTS GRADED; GRADES SUBMITTED To: CSE575-FA07-LIST@LISTSERV.BUFFALO.EDU Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-DCC-Buffalo.EDU-Metrics: castor.cse.Buffalo.EDU 1029; Body=0 Fuz1=0 Fuz2=0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=3.1.8 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on ares.cse.buffalo.edu X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/5057/Sun Dec 9 10:59:05 2007 on ares.cse.buffalo.edu X-Virus-Status: Clean Status: R Content-Length: 2252 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subject: 575 COG SCI: TERM PROJECTS GRADED; GRADES SUBMITTED ------------------------------------------------------------------------ I have finished reading your project reports and have submitted your grades. I graded the reports as follows: For papers, I considered 7 criteria: relevance to cognitive science how closely your paper matched your proposal how clear your thesis was how cogent your arguments or discussion was how good your writing was how original your paper was whether I think you learned anything For programming projects, I considered 7 slightly different criteria: relevance to cognitive science how closely your paper matched your proposal how clear your thesis was & how cogent your arguments or discussion was how good your writing was how well-chosen & well-annotated your demos were how well-documented your code was whether I think you learned anything Each of the 7 criteria was graded as either 3, 2, 1, or 0 points: 3 = clearly good (i.e., clearly relevant to cogsci, clear match to proposal, clear thesis, cogent arg/discussion, good writing, original, you learning something) 2 = anything that was not **clearly** good or **clearly** bad! 1 = clearly bad (i.e., clearly irrelevant, clearly different from proposal, unclear thesis, uncogent arg/discussion, bad writing, no original content at all, didn't learn anything) 0 = reserved for cases of plagiarism (!) The maximum possible number of points was, thus, 21. I converted the points to a letter grade as follows: A = 15-21 B = 8-14 C = 1- 7 F = 0 The class averages were: relevance = 2.8 match prop? = 2.8 thesis = 2.8 cogency = 2.5 writing = 2.4 demos = 2.2 code = 2.2 originality = 2.7 learn? = 2.7 The class average of the total grades was: 18.3/21 = A I put comments on all your papers. If you are in CSE, I will put your paper in your mailbox. If you are in another department and want your paper back, please either stop by my office (call first to make sure I'm here), or let me know what address to campus-mail or snail-mail your paper to.