or
or
By clicking below, you agree to our terms of service.
New to HackMD? Sign up
Syntax | Example | Reference | |
---|---|---|---|
# Header | Header | 基本排版 | |
- Unordered List |
|
||
1. Ordered List |
|
||
- [ ] Todo List |
|
||
> Blockquote | Blockquote |
||
**Bold font** | Bold font | ||
*Italics font* | Italics font | ||
~~Strikethrough~~ | |||
19^th^ | 19th | ||
H~2~O | H2O | ||
++Inserted text++ | Inserted text | ||
==Marked text== | Marked text | ||
[link text](https:// "title") | Link | ||
 | Image | ||
`Code` | Code |
在筆記中貼入程式碼 | |
```javascript var i = 0; ``` |
|
||
:smile: | ![]() |
Emoji list | |
{%youtube youtube_id %} | Externals | ||
$L^aT_eX$ | LaTeX | ||
:::info This is a alert area. ::: |
This is a alert area. |
On a scale of 0-10, how likely is it that you would recommend HackMD to your friends, family or business associates?
Please give us some advice and help us improve HackMD.
Do you want to remove this version name and description?
Syncing
xxxxxxxxxx
Promoting Peer Code Review in Research Groups
There are research groups (at UA and beyond) where a large portion of scientific work is done using code, but it is extremely rare to find a research group with a culture that includes friendly code review.
Peer code review—the practice of reviewing a team member’s computer code for potential problems—is used commonly in the software industry and has been adapted as a teaching tool in computer science courses (Hundhausen et al. 2009; Song et al. 2020). However, the motivation for life sciences students to learn programming likely differs from that of CS majors. Correspondingly, peer code review should differ too.
Good overview: https://academic.oup.com/jeb/article/36/10/1347/7577476
Good example of post-publication code review. Ideally you want to catch mistakes like these before publication: https://ecoevo.social/@noamross/112679744941862891
Current barriers to code review
Overcoming barriers
Venues
How can we (CCT Data Science) help researchers do code-review (better)?
Questions
Should this be tied to teaching GitHub in some way or is it better to teach code-review with just "pen and paper" first?
What are other venues or formats?
I'm interested in doing pedagogy research on whether peer-code review improves reproducibiliy of student work, student attitudes toward programming, and sense of community with peers—should we reach out to education researchers at UA to guage interest and involve them early on?
Tools
Here's a rubric I created that could be used during peer code review in a life sciences research group.
A score of 4 is exceptional while 1 is unsatisfactory and in need of improvement.
For more inspriation, read the Tidyteam code review principles
References
Hundhausen, C., Agrawal, A., Fairbrother, D., Trevisan, M., 2009. Integrating pedagogical code reviews into a CS 1 course: an empirical study. SIGCSE Bull. 41, 291–295. https://doi.org/10.1145/1539024.1508972
Song, X., Goldstein, S.C., Sakr, M., 2020. Using Peer Code Review as an Educational Tool, in: Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. Presented at the ITiCSE ’20: Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, ACM, Trondheim Norway, pp. 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341525.3387370
Notes
Here's a possibly good resource: https://code-review.org/
also: https://dhcodereview.github.io/