---
# System prepended metadata

title: Review guideline IoT submissions

---

# Review guideline IoT submissions
Some notes on making a review. Bit first, how is your own submission? Make sure that you have made it public.

## Getting to the point of making assigned documents to review
First, go to Canvas. Fastest way is most likely via the links section in Discord. 
![](https://i.imgur.com/nhS8zkl.png)
*Figure1, starting point in Canvas.*

**Click on Final report/tutorial**

To the very right, below the submission text you find the documents to review.
![](https://i.imgur.com/qqzHJmE.png)
*Figure2, list of documents to review*

## Peer review
A peer review is a very powerful tool to have something reviewed. It is used in research when PhD students want to get an article published but also in industry to capture defects in an early stage when it is easy (lest costly) to correct them.
:::info
The main purpose of a Peer review is to help the author/responsible to get a better end result.
:::

In this course we have a checklist (another powerful tool when used wisely) that used to verify that the content reflects the requirements of the course.

### Doing the review
After opening (clicking) on an assigned document the following is important.

1. Open the submitted link in a separate window.
 ![](https://i.imgur.com/4k8g07T.png)
 *Figure 3, link section with link masked away.*

 The reason for opening in a separate window is that HackMD scale very well in X and Y direction while Canvas is not that good on optimize the usage of limited computer screen.
 
 It can be argued that in this way it is not 100% clear what is being reviewed. The document could have been updated after the deadline.
 This is correct but...
 * it is a Peer Review.
 * modifications can both improve or reduce the quality of content.
 * it is not sure that what has been updated after deadline will be considered. It simply depends on when the reviewer did the review which could have been directly after the deadline or days after..

To the right we see two important items.
![](https://i.imgur.com/wNNvTrG.png)
*Figure 4, key items to the right.*

The add comment is a field for the complete document. A good place to summarize highlights beyond expectations.

:::info
**Words of experience:** Write positive things on public locations like Canvas and negative things in a direct Discord text message to the author
:::
As example, if a text submission failed. Contact the author. If no response, inform a teacher. 
*"Humans do fail, and with computers failures are visible faster."*

To have good use of the checklist press "Show Rubric".

Now the checklist is shown but with options to use it in a digital way.
![](https://i.imgur.com/QcXKguV.png)
*Figure 5, Checklist in use*

If the reviewed content meets the expectations simply click the field in the left blue area.

I partially OK set a number in the right blue square. And, remember to write what is missing using the "comment button" in the red area.

If the document have no trace of requested content in the checklist (after reading the complete document) click the "No marks" section between the blue squares. And, write what is missing using the comment button.

:::warning
In the bottom of the checklist there is a Save button. Remember to save but only **when the peer review is complete**.

Saving means that review is complete and lock the checklist.
:::

General note on reviews:
1. It is not a lesson in English. If text can be understood, the language is OK.
2. If you don't understand, contact the author.
3. If something or a lot of things are absent, not possible to find. Contact the author and then it is up to you if you can wait and allow corrections. Personally, I will give the author a chance to correct even if it means that I will have to wait with saving my review.
