User talk:Troque

Week 3 Feedback

• Work was submitted on time, but with just seconds to spare. Aim to give yourself more wiggle room in case you experience unexpected delays.
• All good-habit items are fulfilled:
  • All expected links and categories were noted.
  • You were able to phase your work well, and consistently supplied a change summary to all of them.
  • You accompanied your work with electronic notes and processes.
• All exercises were performed or answered correctly.
• Thank you for your shared responses. Definitely keep on seeking problems to solve. As for computer science’s image among women, I think you are in an excellent position to help shift that in a more positive way :)

—Dondi (talk) 00:49, 26 September 2015 (PDT)

Week 2 Feedback

• Although, the Week 2 scores have not yet been posted, I want to give you feedback on the assignment that you can incorporate to your your Week 3 submission.
• First, thank you for submitting your assignment on time.
• Your translations are correct; although it would have been better for completeness to go ahead and translate the rest of the sequence after the stop codon, in this case.
• You did not include anything by the way of an electronic notebook for this assignment. Although this assignment was pretty straightforward, you still need to document the process of what you did to arrive at the answers, not just supply the answers. Please be sure to do this for your Week 3 submission.
• You wrote something in the Summary field for 33/34 contributions between the Week 1 and Week 2 deadlines, keep up the good work!
• You have completed all of the links requested via your template.
• With regards to your comments on your shared journal entry, I knew that the Nirenberg article would be difficult for folks without a biology background, it was even difficult for those who did. However, I also think it's a good exercise to go back to the original source sometimes and read about discoveries from "the horse's mouth" so to speak. With regards to the Kaji and Kaji article, it is usually the case that the shortest papers are often the hardest to understand!

— Kdahlquist (talk) 23:55, 20 September 2015 (PDT)

Week 1 Feedback

• I answered your question on my User talk page.
• The scores have not been posted yet, but I wanted to give you feedback on your Week 1 Assignment.
• Your assignment was submitted on time...by two minutes. You will want to give yourself more allowance as assignments get more involved.
• Your assignment is complete except for the items that I list below. I don’t doubt that you can do these, but as a habit you should treat these assignment instructions more like technical specifications—try to fulfill what is requested in a precise and thorough manner. You wrote something in the Summary field most of the time; keep that up!
• Missing items:
  1. You only did one level of section headings; three were requested. Again, in your case the knowledge is likely there. What we’re after is that habit of following assignment instructions the way you would follow specifications.
  2. You uploaded and linked to a media file as instructed, but that file was a copy of the Janovi article. As copyrighted material lifted from a book, that was not the best choice for a public wiki. In fact, perhaps you should take it down and upload something else. This is actually why we supplied this on Blackboard instead—Blackboard provides a secure barrier around that so the public can’t just lift it.
  3. You did create a category, but it was “User Page,” and not “Journal Entry” as requested. Again, just a compliance issue; the skill itself is well-demonstrated.
  4. Your user page (nor template) provided a link to the shared journal pages. You will want to include the requested one, again in the spirit of following specifications.
• You will have the opportunity to make up some of the points you missed by completing the tasks listed above by the Week 2 deadline, midnight on September 15.

—Dondi (talk) 00:36, 10 September 2015 (PDT)

I have also answered your question on my user talk page. — Kdahlquist (talk) 23:07, 10 September 2015 (PDT)