GNUsocial/gnusocial.rocks
4
0
Fork 1
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Activity

Fix Academics broken link

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Diogo Peralta Cordeiro 2021-06-23 16:03:45 +01:00
parent 3997afe4ff
commit cf1e0e9328
Signed by: diogo
GPG Key ID: 18D2D35001FBFAB0
7 changed files with 307 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
soc/academics.html → soc/2020/academics.html
View File

@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
<html lang="en"> <html lang="en">
<head> <head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title>Assessment | GNU social SoC</title> <title>Assessment | GNU social Summer of Code 2020</title>
<link rel="icon" href="../../favicon.png"> <link rel="icon" href="../../favicon.png">
<meta charset="utf-8"> <meta charset="utf-8">
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
@ -14,13 +14,13 @@
<label for="show-menu" id="menu-button">Menu</label> <label for="show-menu" id="menu-button">Menu</label>
<input id="show-menu" role="button" type="checkbox"> <input id="show-menu" role="button" type="checkbox">
<ul id="menu"> <ul id="menu">
<li><a href="./"><strong>&larr; GS GSoC</strong></a></li> <li><a href="./"><strong>&larr; GS SoC 2020</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="#Grading_System_employed_0">Grading</a></li> <li><a href="#Grading_System_employed_0">Grading</a></li>
<li><a href="#Web_Technologies_69">Proposal</a></li> <li><a href="#Web_Technologies_69">Proposal</a></li>
<li><a href="#Internship__Training_91">Summer</a></li> <li><a href="#Internship__Training_91">Summer</a></li>
</ul> </ul>
</nav> </nav>
<h1>GNU social Summer of Code</h1> <h1>GNU social Summer of Code 2020</h1>
<p>Organized by <strong><a href="https://www.diogo.site/">Diogo Cordeiro</a></strong></p> <p>Organized by <strong><a href="https://www.diogo.site/">Diogo Cordeiro</a></strong></p>
<p>Mentors: <a href="https://www.diogo.site/">Diogo Cordeiro</a>, <a href="https://loadaverage.org/XRevan86">Alexei Sorokin</a>, <a href="https://dansup.com">Daniel Supernault</a>, <a href="https://www.hackerposse.com/~rozzin/">Joshua Judson Rosen</a> and <a href="https://github.com/phablulo">Phablulo Joel</a></p> <p>Mentors: <a href="https://www.diogo.site/">Diogo Cordeiro</a>, <a href="https://loadaverage.org/XRevan86">Alexei Sorokin</a>, <a href="https://dansup.com">Daniel Supernault</a>, <a href="https://www.hackerposse.com/~rozzin/">Joshua Judson Rosen</a> and <a href="https://github.com/phablulo">Phablulo Joel</a></p>
</header> </header>

1
soc/2020/index.html
View File

@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
<li><a href="#about">How was it?</a></li> <li><a href="#about">How was it?</a></li>
<li><a href="ideas.php">Ideas of 2020</a></li> <li><a href="ideas.php">Ideas of 2020</a></li>
<li><a href="announcements.php">Programme 2020</a></li> <li><a href="announcements.php">Programme 2020</a></li>
<li><a href="academics.html">Academics</a></li>
<li id="menu-title">Tech Reports</li> <li id="menu-title">Tech Reports</li>
<li><a href="#v3_frontend">V3 Frontend</a></li> <li><a href="#v3_frontend">V3 Frontend</a></li>
<li><a href="#v3_backend">V3 Backend</a></li> <li><a href="#v3_backend">V3 Backend</a></li>

0
soc/proposal_rating_guidelines.txt → soc/2020/proposal_rating_guidelines.txt
View File

220
soc/2021/academics.html Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,220 @@
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html lang="en">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title>Assessment | GNU social Summer of Code 2021</title>
<link rel="icon" href="../../favicon.png">
<meta charset="utf-8">
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
<link rel="stylesheet" href="https://hackersatporto.com/assets/css/main.css">
</head>
<body>
<header id="header">
<nav id="side-menu">
<label for="show-menu" id="menu-button">Menu</label>
<input id="show-menu" role="button" type="checkbox">
<ul id="menu">
<li><a href="./"><strong>&larr; GS SoC 2021</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="#Grading_System_employed_0">Grading</a></li>
<li><a href="#Web_Technologies_69">Proposal</a></li>
<li><a href="#Internship__Training_91">Summer</a></li>
</ul>
</nav>
<h1>GNU social Summer of Code 2021</h1>
</header>
<article id="about">
<h1 class="code-line" data-line-start=0 data-line-end=1 ><a id="Grading_System_employed_0"></a>Grading System employed</h1>
<h2 class="code-line" data-line-start=2 data-line-end=3 ><a id="Effective_Grading_2"></a>Effective Grading</h2>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="3" data-line-end="4">Either <em>pass</em> or <em>fail</em>.</p>
<h2 class="code-line" data-line-start=5 data-line-end=6 ><a id="Qualitative_Grading_5"></a>Qualitative Grading</h2>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Grade</th>
<th>Definition</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>31337</td>
<td>Outstanding</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>1337</td>
<td>Very Good</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>42</td>
<td>Competent</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>0</td>
<td>Failed</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h2 class="code-line" data-line-start=13 data-line-end=14 ><a id="Method_13"></a>Method</h2>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="14" data-line-end="15">Graded every month, the ceiled average is the final.</p>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="16" data-line-end="17">No Quantitative Grading system will be used.</p>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="18" data-line-end="19">The contributions will be evaluated according to the following directives:</p>
<blockquote>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="20" data-line-end="21">Autonomy with which the work was done</p>
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="21" data-line-end="22">Low (was unable to progress autonomously);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="22" data-line-end="24">Competent (some autonomy but with blocking situations that required the<br>
intervention of the mentor);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="24" data-line-end="26">Very Good (very good ability to solve problems independently in useful time<br>
with the mentor mostly focused on defining the next steps of the work);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="26" data-line-end="28">Outstanding (is sometimes able to suggest surprising and valid alternatives to what was originally planned by the mentor).</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="28" data-line-end="29">Objectives satisfaction</p>
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="29" data-line-end="30">Low (haven't reached to the minimum objectives admissible for the proposed work);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="30" data-line-end="31">Competent (the objectives were reached though not entirely);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="31" data-line-end="32">Very Good (reached up fully);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="32" data-line-end="34">Outstanding (exceeded up the objectives set).</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="34" data-line-end="35">Intrinsic difficulty level of their work</p>
</blockquote>
<ul>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="35" data-line-end="37">Low (relatively easy work, both from a scientific or technical point of view,<br>
based on widespread knowledge);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="37" data-line-end="39">Competent (work with some high complexity of details requiring more advanced<br>
knowledge/expertise, either technical or scientific);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="39" data-line-end="41">Very Good (relatively complex work, requiring a substantial knowledge and<br>
technical skills, or resulting in some innovative contribution);</li>
<li class="has-line-data" data-line-start="41" data-line-end="43">Outstanding (InSaNe).</li>
</ul>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=46 data-line-end=47 ><a id="Grade_formula_per_month_46"></a>Grade formula per month</h3>
<pre>
Autonomy level
Satisfaction of objectives | Low Competent Very Good Outstanding
-----------+-------------------------------------------------------
Low | 0 0 0 0
Competent | 42 42 42 1337
Very Good | 42 1337 1337 31337
Outstanding| 42 1337 1337 31337
Grade from matrix above
Difficulty level | 0 42 1337 31337
-----------+-----------------------------------------
Low | 0 0 42 1337
Competent | 0 42 1337 1337
Very Good | 0 1337 1337 1337
Outstanding| 0 1337 1337 31337
</pre>
<hr>
<h1 class="code-line" data-line-start=67 data-line-end=68 ><a id="Modules_67"></a>Modules</h1>
<p>N.B.: The following are the minimum averages in GNU social's Summer of Code, we will come up with a custom
"transcript" for any interested student.</p>
<h2 class="code-line" data-line-start=69 data-line-end=70 ><a id="Web_Technologies_69"></a>Web Technologies</h2>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=71 data-line-end=72 ><a id="Amount_of_time_allocated_to_each_module_unit_71"></a>Amount of time allocated to each module unit</h3>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Designation</th>
<th>Time (hours)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Autonomous study</td>
<td>80</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Mentorship</td>
<td>20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Project work</td>
<td>46</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Total</td>
<td>146</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=79 data-line-end=80 ><a id="Assessment_Components_79"></a>Assessment Components</h3>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Designation</th>
<th>Weight (%)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Proposal</td>
<td>80</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Proof of Competence</td>
<td>20</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=85 data-line-end=86 ><a id="Proposed_Credits_85"></a>Proposed Credits</h3>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="86" data-line-end="88">1 Carnegie Unit<br>
5 ECTS</p>
<p><strong><a href="proposal_rating_guidelines.txt">Proposal Rating Guidelines</a></strong><p>
<hr>
<h2 class="code-line" data-line-start=91 data-line-end=92 ><a id="Internship__Training_91"></a>Internship | Training</h2>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=93 data-line-end=94 ><a id="Amount_of_time_allocated_to_each_module_unit_93"></a>Amount of time allocated to each module unit</h3>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Designation</th>
<th>Time (hours)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Internship</td>
<td>276.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Autonomous Study</td>
<td>93.5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Final Report</td>
<td>24</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Mentorship</td>
<td>44</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Total</td>
<td>438</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=102 data-line-end=103 ><a id="Assessment_Components_102"></a>Assessment Components</h3>
<table class="table table-striped table-bordered">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Designation</th>
<th>Weight (%)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Practical or project work</td>
<td>100</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<h3 class="code-line" data-line-start=107 data-line-end=108 ><a id="Proposed_Credits_107"></a>Proposed Credits</h3>
<p class="has-line-data" data-line-start="108" data-line-end="112">4 Carnegie Unit<br>
18 Austria, Italy, and Spain ECTS<br>
16 Finland, The Netherlands, Portugal, and Russia ECTS<br>
15 Germany, Belgium, Romania, and Hungary ECTS</p>
</article>
</body>
</html>

1
soc/2021/index.php
View File

@ -28,6 +28,7 @@
<li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="#ideas" class="pure-menu-link">Ideas</a></li> <li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="#ideas" class="pure-menu-link">Ideas</a></li>
<li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="/soc/#apply" class="pure-menu-link">Apply</a></li> <li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="/soc/#apply" class="pure-menu-link">Apply</a></li>
<li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="../study_resources.html" class="pure-menu-link">Study Resources</a></li> <li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="../study_resources.html" class="pure-menu-link">Study Resources</a></li>
<li class="pure-menu-item"><a href="academics.html" class="pure-menu-link">Academics</a></li>
</ul> </ul>
</div> </div>
</header> </header>

81
soc/2021/proposal_rating_guidelines.txt Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
# Proposal Rating Guidelines
## Scores
- 31337: Outstanding. Ex.: Went above and beyond (user stories split into small tasks, small tasks estimated,
defined MVP, planned any additional work, defined time off or limited time, well defined in case of emergency
(NOT "I will complete tasks earlier so I will have more time"))
- 1337: Very Good. Ex.: Included more than requirements (added mocks, diagrams, etc).
- 42: Competent. Ex.: Completed the minimum requirements (proposal's required questions).
- 0: Failed. Ex.: Either Below Average or Poor. Ex: Missed a few requirements (missed 1 or 2 required questions) or Didn't complete
requirements (incomplete, didn't follow template, etc).
## Key Aspects
- Idea - Does the idea solve real problems? Was the audience defined? Is it realistic, does it bring potential security
issues? As a potential user, would you use the proposed? Can problems be easier solved by existing technologies?
- Understood Project? - Did the student research other projects doing similar things? Did the student show the full
scope of the project (backend, frontend, defined APIs, database, structure models, ML models, mockups, user journey,
user stories, etc.)?
- Project Planning - Did the student understand the whole complexity of the project, show smaller tasks and estimated?
Does the student have a version when things go wrong, as planned, and better than expected? Did the student balance
whole parts of the project (frontend and backend developing simultaneously) to have a better chance to achieve working
functionality?
- Engagement - Engaged on IRC, engaged on NotABug, listened to proposal feedback and updated their proposal,
helped others, closed issues, etc.
## Criteria
Once proposals have been finalised, student proposals will be graded based on the following criteria:
### Project
- Does it solve the problem we need solving? Does applicant clearly identify the problem?
- Does it offer a sensible solution?
- Does it offer supporting evidence for technologies chosen, e.g. bootstrap. Sometimes a compare/contrast of different
technologies considered can be helpful.
- Nice bonus features in addition to the main project = good, ONLY unrelated 'bonus' features = bad.
### Plan
- Does the proposal have a realistic timeline?
- Are deliverables correct and timely?
- Does the student have enough time in the week to carry their plan?
- Bonus for "what if things go wrong planning", e.g. bonus features towards the end of the plan that can be removed
if/when the bugs strike.
### Team working skills
- Can the student carry out tasks on their own over a three month period?
- Clear evidence of communication skills
- Lower points for gross over-communication ("what should I name this variable?"), better if they quietly and
competently get the job done but interact at appropriate times, e.g. GNU social bugs, sensible progress reports.
- Is the student capable of following existing guidelines and instructions where appropriate?
## Extras
### Experience
The experience criterion isn't specifically part of the grading rubric, but it's important for us to see some of the
following in the application:
- Does the student have reasonable evidence they've competently done something relevant to this before? e.g.: one or more of
- a {NotABug, CodeBerg, GitGud, GitLab, GitHub,...} profile,
- merge requests on GNU social's repo,
- published software,
- code from a higher education institution assignment?
- Note: we don't require MRs to GNU social's repository. It's handy as a source of evidence, but any of the others
should do just fine.
- Absolutely no work available - not even a published app, some work experience, or code from a class assignment, is a
red flag.
### How the ranking process works
All students with a finalised proposal will have their proposals reviewed by one or more mentors in the organisation,
and ranked out of 4 based on the criteria above. This score will also be averaged to provide a mean result. These
scores are not the final acceptance criteria - so a 1337 won't automatically win over an 42 - but they do help provide
general guidelines for the mentors who are choosing from a large body of qualified students.
### Accepted students
Students will be notified of their acceptance by Google when all accepted students are announced, and will _not_ be
notified of their internal grades. Please note that we usually have more highly qualified applicants than slots
available for the organisation, so sometimes proposals that are genuinely very good have to be rejected. We genuinely
wish we could take you all!
Students who successfully finish the summer of code and are interested in a "GNU social Summer of Code transcript" may
request one and that will come with a score and include an adapted proposal assessing.
---
These guidelines were adapted from [InterMine](http://intermine.org/internships/guidance/grading-criteria-2019/) and AnitaB.

2
soc/index.html
View File

@ -47,7 +47,7 @@
<p>We suggest you to do a four-day work week with 6h of work/day + 3h to document, review/test and report the progress you've done (you usually won't need that much for this and we won't complain as long as you're doing well/being highly productive). As breaks are important, we recommend a 1h lunch break, 15min break after 4h of continuous work and a further 15mins break after 6h of work. These breaks won't be considered as part of your work time.</p> <p>We suggest you to do a four-day work week with 6h of work/day + 3h to document, review/test and report the progress you've done (you usually won't need that much for this and we won't complain as long as you're doing well/being highly productive). As breaks are important, we recommend a 1h lunch break, 15min break after 4h of continuous work and a further 15mins break after 6h of work. These breaks won't be considered as part of your work time.</p>
<p>Note that 6h*4 = 24h, if you only do the 24h/week, you'll have to prove your worth. Otherwise, we might require that you either do a 5-day week or that you scale it up to 7.5h in your 4-day week.</p> <p>Note that 6h*4 = 24h, if you only do the 24h/week, you'll have to prove your worth. Otherwise, we might require that you either do a 5-day week or that you scale it up to 7.5h in your 4-day week.</p>
<p>In general, you will always have to work at least 120h/month, ideally 146h/month (or the productively equivalent). We do not accept that you transfer expected work time from a month to another. Nonetheless, an under-performing week will make us request more hours from you in the week after (up to the limit of 40h).</p> <p>In general, you will always have to work at least 120h/month, ideally 146h/month (or the productively equivalent). We do not accept that you transfer expected work time from a month to another. Nonetheless, an under-performing week will make us request more hours from you in the week after (up to the limit of 40h).</p>
<p>Click <a href="academics.html">here</a> to better understand how we distribute the load. Also note that every summer of code ends with a final tech report, <a href="http://www.gnusocial.rocks/soc/2020/tech_report/v3_fe/technical_report.pdf">here's an example</a> of a frontend rework.</p> <p>Click <a href="2021/academics.html">here</a> to better understand how we distribute the load. Also note that every summer of code ends with a final tech report, <a href="http://www.gnusocial.rocks/soc/2020/tech_report/v3_fe/technical_report.pdf">here's an example</a> of a frontend rework.</p>
</article> </article>
<article id="apply"> <article id="apply">