The class has been a mix of interesting as well as frustrating.
A lot of the time, the grading scale seems arbitrary. Well, I guess it is arbitrary. Probably by design. There are some consistent deliverables, like blog posts, but even these do not have very specific guidelines for length or content. Much of the work of the class has a very vague set of evaluations associated with it. This seems kind of realistic, given my small work experience in a professional software environment (Sandia), but for the class it's rather frustrating. You never really know where you stand. Do I have an A? B? Are there things I could be doing better? On a related note it sometimes feels like you're getting graded badly for things that you can't really fix; I know a few people have said they felt they were getting an unfair shake because their project idea "wasn't original enough", or something to that effect. On the one hand, it seems cool to give winning projects credit for their 'impact', but what about if you don't have a winning project? Is that entirely a product of the quality of your pitch and proposal? I think not. It's largely a function of the value or appeal of your idea, which is true in life as well, but makes the class feel like you signed up for "Invention 460" or something.
No comments:
Post a Comment