Lab - Project draft peer review


The project peer review is due Friday, November 17 at 11:59pm.

No submission on Gradescope needed, just post issues on GitHub by this time.

In this lab, you will…

Project peer review

Each team will review two other teams’ project. As a team you should spend ~25 minutes on each team’s project.

  • Find the names of the teams whose projects you’re reviewing below. You should already have access to this team's repo.

  • Each team member should go to the repo of the team you’re reviewing.

  • Then,

    • 1-2 team members clone the team’s project and renders it to check for reproducibility. This includes both the project website as well as any additional materials (e.g. R scripts, Shiny apps). Hopefully the team provides documentation so you know what to look for.

    • 1-2 team members open the team’s project in their browser and assess the draft deliverable(s). Teams should provide instructions on how to access them on their report.html page.

    • 1 team member opens an issue on the team’s repo using the peer review template.

    • All team members discuss the project based on the prompts on the issue template and one team member records the feedback and submits the issue.

  • To open an issue in the repo you’re reviewing, click on New issue, and click on Get started for the Peer review issue. Fill out this issue, answering the following questions:

    • Peer review by: [NAME OF TEAM DOING THE REVIEW]

    • Names of team members that participated in this review: [FULL NAMES OF TEAM MEMBERS DOING THE REVIEW]

    • Describe the goal of the project.

    • Describe the data used or collected.

    • Describe the approaches, tools, and methods that will be used.

    • Provide constructive feedback on how the team might be able to improve their project. Aim for at least three constructive comments.

    • What aspect of this project are you most interested in and would like to see highlighted in the presentation.

    • Were you able to reproduce the project by clicking on Render Website once you cloned it? Could you reproduce other materials? Were there any issues with reproducibility?

    • Provide constructive feedback on any issues with file and/or code organization.

    • What have you learned from this team’s project that you are considering implementing in your own project?

    • (Optional) Any further comments or feedback?

Review pairings

Your team name To review 1 To review 2
Elegant Buneary Elegant Zapdos (repo, site) Elegant Togepi (repo, site)
Elegant Butterfree Elegant Buneary (repo, site) Elegant Zapdos (repo, site)
Elegant Charmander Elegant Butterfree (repo, site) Elegant Buneary (repo, site)
Elegant Evee Elegant Charmander (repo, site) Elegant Butterfree (repo, site)
Elegant Hitmontop Elegant Evee (repo, site) Elegant Charmander (repo, site)
Elegant Pikachu Elegant Hitmontop (repo, site) Elegant Evee (repo, site)
Elegant Raichu Elegant Pikachu (repo, site) Elegant Hitmontop (repo, site)
Elegant Rapidash Elegant Raichu (repo, site) Elegant Pikachu (repo, site)
Elegant Squirtle Elegant Rapidash (repo, site) Elegant Raichu (repo, site)
Elegant Starmie Elegant Squirtle (repo, site) Elegant Rapidash (repo, site)
Elegant Togepi Elegant Starmie (repo, site) Elegant Squirtle (repo, site)
Elegant Zapdos Elegant Togepi (repo, site) Elegant Starmie (repo, site)


Peer reviews will be graded on the extent to which it comprehensively and constructively addresses the components of the reviewee’s team’s report.

Only the team members participating in the review during the lab session are eligible for points for the peer review. If you’re unable to make it to lab in person, you should arrange to virtually connect with your team during your lab session.

  • 0 points: No peer review

  • 1 point: Only one peer review issue open, feedback provided is not constructive or actionable

  • 2 points: Both peer review issues open, feedback provided is not constructive or actionable

  • 3 points: Both peer review issues open, feedback provided is not sufficiently thorough

  • 4 points: Both peer review issues open, one of the reviews is not sufficiently thorough

  • 5 points: Both peer review issues open, both reviews are constructive, actionable, and sufficiently thorough


The feedback issue will come from one team member on GitHub since you can’t collectively edit an issue. However it must represent the opinions of the entire team. It is not a single team member’s responsibility to provide feedback, they’re just the record keeper for the team.