To: Terry Chou, Segfault Team Member
From: Daniel Kim
Date: April 3rd, 2023
Subject: Peer Review of Terry Chou’s Formal Report Draft — Addressing the Issue of Academic Misconduct in Computer Science 110 (CPSC 110)
Thank you for submitting this proposal. Here are the feedbacks below:
First Impression:
You have written a very informative report that addresses the issue regarding academic misconduct surrounding CPSC 110. Academic misconduct has risen over the past few years, so it is essential to address this issue. As a computer science student, taking CPSC 110 has been an invaluable course that taught me how to approach more complex computer science topics. As a result, I believe prospective computer science students must take the time to grasp the concepts in 110. The report’s suggestions certainly have a place for implementation and will improve the overall experience in computer science.
Content:
- Introduction
- The introduction provides an excellent background of CPSC 110’s purpose, importance, and goals.
- The report clearly outlines the statement of purpose and provides statistical references to solidify the problem
- Data Section
- This section does a great job of going into great detail about each graph and its responses
- I think if the report could add labels to each graph would make the backtracking and reference easier for the reader.
- Conclusion
- Good job with the conclusion; it is a well-summarized conclusion that describes the overarching theme in the formal report
Organization:
- Good work on keeping all the information in the Table of Contents Section in the correct sport and correctly labeling the page numbers
- A suggestion is adding a definition section in the Introduction that describes academic misconduct. This will provide readers with a clear definition as the audience reads the report
- I think the Literature Review is a bit out of place. I believe the Literature Review is better served at the beginning of the ‘Data Section’ (perhaps right below ‘Perception and Observation of Academic Misconduct’). This way, the reader will get a better feel of the significance of the issue and will segway to the different types of misconduct smoothly
Style:
- The report’s tone is professional, concise, and very informative.
- The intended audience seems appropriate for this report. However, I would also consider Gregor Kiczales as being one of the other primary target audiences, as I assume he is the head of CPSC 110 and has an ultimate say concerning potential solutions
- It seems the reference list can be improved using a consistent style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.) and having a hanging indent
Design:
- The design choice for the formal report is appropriate, concise, thorough, labeled correctly, and logically ordered with the graphs and charts
- One suggestion is to space out the lining of the paragraphs. For example, double the spacing in-between the lines to make it easier for the reader
- I would consider lining up the paragraphs evenly so that it will make it look more even out
Concluding Comments:
Overall, this report is well organized, thoughtful, logical, and backed up with data. There are no glaring grammatical errors in the report, nor any issues with the type of language used.
There are a few suggestions, such as:
- Formatting the sections
- Adding another critical target audience
- Being consistent with citation
However, this report is very solid and well-developed.
Link to Terry Chou’s Formal Report Draft.
Leave a Reply