Re: [GSoC] Mentor summit attendees
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 10:19:40PM +0200, Noirin Shirley wrote: > I'm interested, and haven't been before, for whatever that's worth :-) Same here! Stefan
Re: [GSoC] Mentor summit attendees
On 02/09/2010 21:19, Noirin Shirley wrote: I'm interested, and haven't been before, for whatever that's worth :-) And as this years lead admin I believe you should get priority for one of the places. There is still a place left for another mentor. At last years summit I did a session on how I wanted to create an ongoing mentoring programme, it would be great if someone could do a session this year that says "we've just launched our ongoing programme in the ASF" (which we will have done by the time the summit starts, I have three EU unis wanting to send students our way - more when I get a little time to write the mail). Ross Noirin On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: No we've not decided yet. Who else is interested? I am, but I've been before and happy to make room for others. Sent from my mobile device. On 2 Sep 2010, at 17:25, Rahul Akolkar wrote: Have we decided who the two attendees are from the ASF? As it happens, I will be in Sunnyvale that week (and FWIW, I mentored two students this year). -Rahul
Re: Reviewing the evaluation process
On 02/09/2010 17:53, Rahul Akolkar wrote: On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Kathey Marsden wrote: On 9/2/2010 9:21 AM, Rahul Akolkar wrote: Original Ideas are good === Past experience has shown that if a student proposes their own idea and it is accepted the student is going to be strong. PROPOSAL Add the following to the mentor ranking: Is the project definition and idea originally the mentee's, the mentor's or a collaborative effort? (0-2 points, 2 if mentee's idea, 1 if collaborative, 0 if mentor's) I am still not such a big fan of the "original idea" points in a standards base product OK, the idea is same as before (my comment on standards elsewhere in the thread): http://markmail.org/message/j6qkbipevrnphe6v and marking down for collaboration where we want to encourage interaction with the community. Yes, I can see how the wording can be perceived that way so it does need tweaking. I'm with Kathey on this one. I think we need a wording that emphases the students contributions to the idea as a whole. That is whether the idea comes from the community or the student is not relevant, what is relevant is whether the student shows originality in expanding the idea into a complete proposal. I'm sure you can come up with some suitable wording. Ross
Re: Reviewing the evaluation process
On 02/09/2010 17:21, Rahul Akolkar wrote: Now that this year's program is done and there seemed to be consensus on the items below when discussed, can we get the proposals below reflected on the mentee ranking page [1] and other places as appropriate? Yes - thanks for picking it up. I don't have a cwiki account, but that can be fixed if needed :-) You are a committer right? As long as you are then please go ahead and create a CWiki account and I'll give you the necessary rights. The reason we need you to be a committer is that since we auto-publish the wiki to the website we need to ensure we have a CLA on file for you. Ross -Rahul [1] http://community.apache.org/mentee-ranking-process.html On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: I'd like to make a few comments about issues that have arisen during the evaluation process for GSoC. I'm going to give my opinion on each, please treat this as lazy consensus - do speak up if you wish to disagree or add more items: Not enough visibility of the process There will always be someone who doesn't read the stuff we send out. Where this is the case I don't think we should worry ourselves. Sending to PMCs (including the incubator PMC) is sufficient to reach people. We don't want to send out to committers@ as the project as a whole needs to be behind taking on a GSoC student. Reaching PPMCs is more problematic, I think we should continue to rely on incubator mentors taking the message to their projects if they feel it is appropriate. PROPOSAL Make it explicit that incubator mentors should pass the message on to PPMCs if appropriate. Marking experience mentors up = I really don't like the idea up to 2 points for having been a successful mentor before, firstly it is error prone (e.g. both Bertrand and Luciano have been mentors *and* admins, yet the admin this year was unaware of that). Secondly, just because someone has mentored a student in the past doesn't mean they will be better than another mentor. Finally, mentoring a failing student is, in many ways, more educational than mentoring a successful one. We already have "Does the mentor show an understanding of how to mentor a student? (0-4 points)" - I'm more interested in whether the mentor knows what is expected. However, applying this score is difficult. PROPOSAL Remove "Has the mentor had a successful student in the past (0-2 points)" from the admin rankings Add some docs to the ranking process about what admins are looking for with respect to "oes the mentor show an understanding of how to mentor a student? (0-4 points)" (Noirins mail with the subject Admin coordination to alexei.fedotov on code-awards wouild be a good starting point) Original Ideas are good === Past experience has shown that if a student proposes their own idea and it is accepted the student is going to be strong. PROPOSAL Add the following to the mentor ranking: Is the project definition and idea originally the mentee's, the mentor's or a collaborative effort? (0-2 points, 2 if mentee's idea, 1 if collaborative, 0 if mentor's)
Re: [GSoC] Mentor summit attendees
I'm interested, and haven't been before, for whatever that's worth :-) Noirin On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > No we've not decided yet. Who else is interested? > > I am, but I've been before and happy to make room for others. > > Sent from my mobile device. > > On 2 Sep 2010, at 17:25, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > >> Have we decided who the two attendees are from the ASF? As it happens, >> I will be in Sunnyvale that week (and FWIW, I mentored two students >> this year). >> >> -Rahul >
Re: [GSoC] Mentor summit attendees
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > No we've not decided yet. Who else is interested? > > I am, but I've been before and happy to make room for others. > I'm interested, and I'm local so it shouldn't be a big overhead, having said that, I've been there before and happy to make room for others -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: [GSoC] Mentor summit attendees
No we've not decided yet. Who else is interested? I am, but I've been before and happy to make room for others. Sent from my mobile device. On 2 Sep 2010, at 17:25, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > Have we decided who the two attendees are from the ASF? As it happens, > I will be in Sunnyvale that week (and FWIW, I mentored two students > this year). > > -Rahul
Re: Reviewing the evaluation process
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Kathey Marsden wrote: > On 9/2/2010 9:21 AM, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > > Original Ideas are good > > === > > Past experience has shown that if a student proposes their own idea and it > is accepted the student is going to be strong. > > PROPOSAL > > > Add the following to the mentor ranking: > > Is the project definition and idea originally the mentee's, the > mentor's or a collaborative effort? (0-2 points, 2 if mentee's idea, 1 > if collaborative, 0 if mentor's) > > I am still not such a big fan of the "original idea" points in a standards > base product OK, the idea is same as before (my comment on standards elsewhere in the thread): http://markmail.org/message/j6qkbipevrnphe6v > and marking down for collaboration where we want to encourage > interaction with the community. > Yes, I can see how the wording can be perceived that way so it does need tweaking. > One minor clarification I would like to see made is in this item: > > How does the mentor rate the student's chances of success, based on an > in-person (face-to-face, video, audio, email) interview? (0-3 points, or 0-1 > if email interview only) > > To add an IRC interview as one of the 0-3 options. Our students the last > two summers have mostly been from Sri Lanka and China and so other options > hard to coordinate. Even the IRC interview will require someone getting up > in the middle of the night. > I had a VoIP conversation with one of my eventual mentees from China. Even with the time difference and a slight language problem, I found it to be the most useful and expeditious thing I did in that particular evaluation. I say this to recount my experience, not to preclude the use of IRC with respect to the question above. -Rahul
Re: Reviewing the evaluation process
On 9/2/2010 9:21 AM, Rahul Akolkar wrote: Original Ideas are good === Past experience has shown that if a student proposes their own idea and it is accepted the student is going to be strong. PROPOSAL Add the following to the mentor ranking: Is the project definition and idea originally the mentee's, the mentor's or a collaborative effort? (0-2 points, 2 if mentee's idea, 1 if collaborative, 0 if mentor's) I am still not such a big fan of the "original idea" points in a standards base product and marking down for collaboration where we want to encourage interaction with the community. One minor clarification I would like to see made is in this item: * How does the mentor rate the student's chances of success, based on an in-person (face-to-face, video, audio, email) interview? (0-3 points, or 0-1 if email interview only) To add an IRC interview as one of the 0-3 options. Our students the last two summers have mostly been from Sri Lanka and China and so other options hard to coordinate. Even the IRC interview will require someone getting up in the middle of the night.
[GSoC] Mentor summit attendees
Have we decided who the two attendees are from the ASF? As it happens, I will be in Sunnyvale that week (and FWIW, I mentored two students this year). -Rahul
Re: Reviewing the evaluation process
Now that this year's program is done and there seemed to be consensus on the items below when discussed, can we get the proposals below reflected on the mentee ranking page [1] and other places as appropriate? I don't have a cwiki account, but that can be fixed if needed :-) -Rahul [1] http://community.apache.org/mentee-ranking-process.html On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > I'd like to make a few comments about issues that have arisen during the > evaluation process for GSoC. I'm going to give my opinion on each, please > treat this as lazy consensus - do speak up if you wish to disagree or add > more items: > > Not enough visibility of the process > > > There will always be someone who doesn't read the stuff we send out. Where > this is the case I don't think we should worry ourselves. > > Sending to PMCs (including the incubator PMC) is sufficient to reach people. > We don't want to send out to committers@ as the project as a whole needs to > be behind taking on a GSoC student. > > Reaching PPMCs is more problematic, I think we should continue to rely on > incubator mentors taking the message to their projects if they feel it is > appropriate. > > PROPOSAL > > Make it explicit that incubator mentors should pass the message on to PPMCs > if appropriate. > > Marking experience mentors up > = > > I really don't like the idea up to 2 points for having been a successful > mentor before, firstly it is error prone (e.g. both Bertrand and Luciano > have been mentors *and* admins, yet the admin this year was unaware of > that). Secondly, just because someone has mentored a student in the past > doesn't mean they will be better than another mentor. Finally, mentoring a > failing student is, in many ways, more educational than mentoring a > successful one. > > We already have "Does the mentor show an understanding of how to mentor a > student? (0-4 points)" - I'm more interested in whether the mentor knows > what is expected. However, applying this score is difficult. > > PROPOSAL > > Remove "Has the mentor had a successful student in the past (0-2 points)" > from the admin rankings > > Add some docs to the ranking process about what admins are looking for with > respect to "oes the mentor show an understanding of how to mentor a student? > (0-4 points)" (Noirins mail with the subject Admin coordination to > alexei.fedotov on code-awards wouild be a good starting point) > > Original Ideas are good > === > > Past experience has shown that if a student proposes their own idea and it > is accepted the student is going to be strong. > > PROPOSAL > > > Add the following to the mentor ranking: > > Is the project definition and idea originally the mentee's, the > mentor's or a collaborative effort? (0-2 points, 2 if mentee's idea, 1 > if collaborative, 0 if mentor's) >
