Difference between revisions of "User talk:Kwrigh35"

Revision as of 17:41, 10 October 2017

Talk page of Katie Wright.

Week 4 Partial Feedback

I am posting partial feedback on your Week 4 assignment, with respect to your favorite gene page because the Week 7 assignment will build on that.

• Your folder name matches the standard name of your gene, the folder name is lowercase and hyphenated, the HTML filename is lowercase and hyphenated and your title tag matches the gene standard name.
  • However, you hyphenated "Asp1" to "Asp-1". This is an actual change to the gene name. Although, as humans we can recognize that this is likely the same gene, these two strings would be different to a computer. You might have thought that you had to have a hyphen in the gene name, based on the instructions, but the hyphen is only needed if you are using two words.
• You used both of your usernames as the name for the HTML file when the instructions requested that you use the gene name instead; thus, your file should have simply been "asp1.html".
• All of the content that was requested was found on the page with the following notes:
  • I want to note that SGD does, in fact, have the protein sequence, it is found under the "protein" tab.
  • The link to Ensembl in your references list is broken.
  • There are a few typos sprinkled throughout the page
  • What you learned about the gene was found throughout the page; it would have been better to have a more definitive gene summary paragraph solely about the gene without mentioning the review of the databases themselves.
• Aesthetics of the layout were not part of this assignment, but I want to note that as you revise this page, most of the text is flush with the left side of the browser window without any buffering "white space", making it a little difficult to read.
• Typically DNA and protein sequences are given in a "monospaced" or "fixed width" font, such as Courier, so the letters line up, which is what you saw on the parent databases.
• Otherwise, a clean-looking page with nice section breaks!

— Kdahlquist (talk) 10:39, 10 October 2017 (PDT)

Week 3 Feedback

• Everything was turned in on time—good job! You fulfilled all of the “good habit/best practice” aspects of the assignment, supplying comments for all 20 of the listed journal edits.
• You supplied an electronic notebook with this assignment, separated into a Notebook section; the subheadings and datestamps (for some of the entries) are good ideas and the content is in the right direction, supportive of the openness and reproducibility values that we are after here. Keep on doing this; note that a piece of information or action that you took is worth journaling if it helps inform either of these question: can someone reading your notebook get a clear understanding of what you did for this assignment? Do they have enough information to replicate the results that you posted on your journal page?
• Your hack-a-page work certainly fulfilled the instructions…can you imagine what a coup it would be to have them as faculty? Though I suspect that there may be some friction between Watson & Crick and Rosalind Franklin. But the New Caledonian Crow is sure to get along with everyone!
• You identified a sufficient number and variety of links correctly, and also noticed that the links changed to file references when viewed from a local file. This is normal and expected; the links are known as relative links because their final value is dependent on the source from which they are loaded.
• I did not see any answers to the ID question—please let me know if we need to spend some time with this during office hours.
• For the curl/sed exercise, you noticed and used the output option that can be provided along with pre_text. This option controls how the amino acids are displayed. What is missed by the provided answer is that supplying output=Verbose to the curl command would have obviated the need for the sed commands that “space and spell out” the amino acid letters. Taking a closer look at how the live page operated via the Developer Tools may have helped here.
• Your shared journal’s chosen quote captures one of the biggest adjustments that people need to make when learning to work with computers—detail and specificity are indeed paramount in computing, beyond what we are used to in other endeavors. We all have frustrating moments when we realize that a lot of time might have been lost due to a single punctuation mark. Time is indeed one way to get a handle on this specificity. I wrote the wiki pages in a tutorial format, so just going through them with a command line window open next to it might help. If not, I am not aware of Codecademy-style tutorials for the command line off the top of my head, but wouldn’t be surprised if there were something out there.

—Dondi (talk) 18:11, 24 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 2 Feedback

• Thank you for turning in your assignment on time.
• You wrote something in the summary field for 12 of 12 saves (100%) in the period of review--keep up the excellent work!
• However, the number of total saves on your individual wiki page is quite small (only 2). We are encouraging you to save your work in smaller "chunks"; a range of 10-20 saves is what would have been expected for this assignment.
• Your complementary DNA sequence was correct.
• Your translations were correct, except that you mixed up the labels for frames +2 and +3 and again for frames -2 and -3. Also, it would have been good to keep translating beyond the stop codon in this case, since it was purely a translation exercise.
• Your determination of which frames contained ORFs was correct.
• One other note: we do not label the ends of proteins 5' and 3', instead we label them N-ter and C-ter.
• I saw your separate electronic lab notebook page, but there were no notes for this assignment. For this assignment, the lab notebook would have explained how you arrived at your answers to the questions posed in the exercise. Please be sure to keep your electronic lab notebook for future assignments. Also, as discussed in class, please keep your notes on the same page as the assignment.
• One small note about your References section: a mistake in syntax for the link means that it is not showing up properly on the page. Be sure to proofread your work after you save to ensure you didn't make any syntax errors.
• Thank you for your honest about "skimming" the Nirenberg article. The technical language in articles from the primary literature is definitely a hurdle for students (and even for faculty from a different field), but keep with it. Like with other fields of endeavor, it is good to take a look at the primary source.

— Kdahlquist (talk) 22:33, 23 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 1 Feedback

For your individual submission, I’m happy to report that all requested wiki skills and deliverables were noted and seen to be implemented correctly.

Unfortunately, your shared journal answers could not be found. Please let us know if/when they are available on the wiki. Thank you!

—Dondi (talk) 22:04, 11 September 2017 (PDT)

Week 1 Feedback Update

Your shared journal answers have been reviewed, and they fulfill all of the requested items. Thank you very much!

—Dondi (talk) 00:25, 13 September 2017 (PDT)