Group Self-Evaluation

This individual reflection and peer mark assessment (10%) due Wednesday, 20 December 2023 (@18:00) asks you to reflect on the process of ‘doing data science’ as part of a team, since this format is typical of real-world projects. Many companies (e.g. Apple, Google, etc.) employ an Agile project format in which teams undertake a ‘Retrospective’ at the end of a project in order to identify ways to improve how they work in the future. We are not asking you to do this as a group (indeed, it’s an individual reflection), but we hope that this will help you to develop as a budding analyst or data scientist.

Format

You must answer these 3 questions for formative purposes as part of the submission process and prior to submitting the peer marks:

  1. What factors do you think help to explain what went well/not well in the project?
  2. How do you think the other students in your group would evaluate your contribution to each of these outcomes?
  3. Briefly describe one event or experience from the group assessment that gave you new insight into ‘doing’ data science, and explain how and why this will be useful to you in the future.

You will then be asked to score the rest of the group on their contribution to the project. You should be doing this with an eye both to contributions that may be more or less visible (e.g. someone who wrote the code may be more visible than the person who ensured that the code was answering the set question) as well as to the fact that you’re much more likely to be aware of your own contributions than you are of the contributions of others.

The guidance for this is:

Thinking about the many ways — visible and less visible — that a student can contribute to the success of a group project, how would you rate Student B’s contribution on a Scale of 1–6, where 1 means that they did not contribute to the group’s submission, and 6 means that their contribution was critical to the group’s submission.

Justify this score with reference to the guidance provided in class (and linked to here, here, and here).

Restrictions

There is no word limit for the formative parts of the assessment, but as an indication ca. 125 words should be enough for a brief, thoughtful engagement. Together with the GitHub repo history, the formative component is the principal source of evidence we will take into account in the event of discrepancies in the group self-evaluation (aka. peer mark).