GitHub Site Review

Oct-17 : In this lesson, we will peer review GitHub site portfolios.

We will take this meeting time to review one another’s work in the course thus far. Individual feedback will be provided in the course Google Drive Folder

Overall Site

• Is there a good main page, raising interest in both the person (as a potential employee…) and the content (evidence of an intellectual GIS maverick?)
• Is the site functional with working links and easy navigation?
• Is the site following an honor code of sharing, reproducibility, and attribution of work?

Blog Posts

• There are three discussion blog posts so far:
  • Week 1: Science / GIS discourse
  • Week 2: Open Source GIS / Reproducibility
  • Week 5: Error / Uncertainty

There are two blog posts advertising your reproduction studies so far:

• Chakraborty

• Malcomb et al (due this week)

• Do posts cite appropriate readings?
• Is any proofreading / revision necessary?
• Does the post misinterpret anything from the reading, or miss something important for the argument being made?
• Are posts related to a workshop activity using data for that workshop and linking to relevant repositories?

Reproduction/Replication Studies

• There are two studies thus far:
  • Chakraborty
  • Malcomb et al (due this week)
• Do each of the studies have a post highlighting interesting findings from the report?
• Have each of the studies been published with a Git repository?
• Does each study’s post link to full report and research compendium/repository?
• For each study, is there clear and legible:
  • purpose
  • methodology
  • data availability and metadata / data citations
  • code
  • visualization of results
  • interpretation of results in relation to relevant course readings?
• Can any steps be taken to improve reproducibility of the study?

Main Page